RE: [802SEC] Efficient Organization of SEC Business
The one missing rules change ballot is my action item as I recall. There were so many others going on, and other SEC issues, I put it off intentionally. I plan to send it out soon.
From: Roger B. Marks [mailto:email@example.com]
Sent: Friday, June 27, 2003 4:35 PM
To: Paul Nikolich
Subject: [802SEC] Efficient Organization of SEC Business
At 7:34 AM -0400 03/06/23, Paul Nikolich wrote:
>Attached is the initial draft of the July plenary session opening
>SEC meeting agenda, please review and send requests for revisions to
I'd like the agenda to include a DT on "Efficient Organization of SEC
The general issue is that I am very disappointed at the organization
of the work in front of the SEC. Over the last year or so, I have
been constantly confused about what is going on and where we stand.
I've doing a little thinking about why. Maybe I'm just growing old,
but I've also identified some other causes. I think they need to be
Here are some specific issues I'd like us to address:
(1) We are currently in the middle of many (don't ask me how many)
rules change ballots. It is very difficult or impossible to change
the rules without knowing the rules. How current are the currently
posted rules? I don't know. On the cover, they say "Revised effective
July 12, 2002." The PDF Title is "802 Operating Rules, Revised
effective July 14, 2000." The PDF creation/mod dates are 15/16
October 2002. In any case, I would presume that no changes from the
November and March meetings are incorporated. I've just done some
research. To my knowledge, we approved one change in November ("SEC
TAG rule change") and two in March ("SEC Electronic Ballots") and
("Rules Title Change"). There may be even more changes that we made
to the rules but have not been incorporated in the rules. Where do we
turn to find the facts?
(1a) As an aside: we changed the balloting rules in March. Are we
(1b) As another aside: during my research, I discovered at least one
rules change ballot that we voted in March to initiate but which, to
my recollection, has not been initiated ("rules change on Sponsor
Ballot periods for SEC ballot"). Maybe we've already balloted this
and I've forgotten. Or maybe there are more that fell through the
cracks. How should I find out?
(2) There is essentially no web support for the SEC's work. This is
causing serious problems. We don't need a lot, but we need, at a
minimum, a catalog of on-going and completed ballots, as Tony and I
discussed in April:
We need this to help the SEC members do their work, and we need it so
we have an archive of past decisions.
We also need a catalog of materials for upcoming meetings. I have,
for example, been cataloging PAR proposals:
but this is not the complete story.
In my Working Group, we wouldn't think of carrying on our activity
without this kind of web-based organization.
Last summer, when we discussed adding a 2nd Vice Chair, I suggested
that we follow 802.11's example by assigning specific duties to the
two. I mentioned, for example, the need to have a particular person
in charge of the rules, so that things wouldn't fall through the
cracks. I also said that, with two Vice Chairs, we ought to have
enough labor to support functions like web site support (I also
mentioned publicity). I didn't get my way; instead, the rules say "A
Vice Chair will be responsible for such duties as may be assigned by
the LMSC Chair." And things are falling through the cracks.
So, can we add this issue to the agenda?