|Thread Links||Date Links|
|Thread Prev||Thread Next||Thread Index||Date Prev||Date Next||Date Index|
I vote disapprove.
1) As I mentioned in my comments in the closing EC meeting, I believe that this contribution in some sense may well be interpreted as a "declaration of war" by 3GPP and 3GPP2 ... perhaps promoting a conflict between SDOs that could/should be avoided.
2) I also object to the addition of the sentence "Additionally, the IEEE 802.20 Working Group is developing mobile broadband wireless standards that, upon their completion, may be submitted to Working Party 8A. " at the EC review/approval level at the request of a single member of 802.20 (who holds no official office in the WG). The sentence implies that 802.20 had an opportunity to review the proposed contribution and in some way approved it - neither of which is the case.
3) I note that Mr. Lynch has agreed to removing references to "regulatory experts" that could be construed as implying that 802.18 had reviewed and approved the comments, since that seems not to be the case.
I also agree with Jerry's comment "I also object to sending this letter that puts forward a recommendation for a standard that is not finished and formally approved. Additionally, the specification is not freely available to all the member states of the ITU yet. Therefore, the letter should not be sent until the above steps are complete."
While I would hope that the remedies of 2) and 3) above will be implemented as a minimal condition of EC approval of the proposed contribution to ITU-R, those remedies, either singly or in combination, are not sufficient to overcome my other concerns and objections about sending this document as an IEEE contribution to the ITU-R.
---------- This email is sent from the 802 Executive Committee email reflector. This list is maintained by Listserv.