RE: [802SEC] 802.11g draft to RevCom
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Howard Frazier [mailto:email@example.com]
> Sent: Sunday, June 01, 2003 11:07 PM
> To: firstname.lastname@example.org
> Subject: [802SEC] 802.11g draft to RevCom
> Dear Members of the IEEE 802 LMSC SEC,
> It doesn't matter who the balloters are.
> Their identities, affiliations,
> personalities, past histories, and
> level of interest are all irrelevant.
> Likewise, it does not matter if there is
> pressure from industry to approve this project.
> Any project that truly meets the 5 Criteria will
> be subject to intense pressure. Our most important
> projects deserve our most careful scrutiny.
I agree. However, from the explainations I've
seen, I believe that the process HAS been followed
in a fair and appropriate manner.
> We should confine our deliberations to the
> question of whether this project has conducted
> its work in accordance with the IEEE 802 LMSC
> and IEEE-SA Policies and Procedures. If it has, then
> it should go forward without delay. If it has not, then
> it is in the best interests of the the industry, the
> IEEE-SA, IEEE 802, and the public at large to correct
> the deficiencies.
Frankly, I don't see any deficiencies that I believe
should block this standard from going forward.
The longer the standard is delayed unnecessarily,
the more non-standard product based on earlier
drafts is shipped, causing interoperability issues
and raising questions as to the value of the final
I think that further delays are not in the interest
of IEEE or the standard, based on what I've seen.