Re: [802SEC] Straw Poll on: LMSC Operations Manual
As a percentage, how much of our current P&P would remain in a document that
must be reviewed/approved by AudCom and how much would go into the new
What sort of material would, at least hypothetically, move out of AudCom's
I wonder if AudCom and SASB would feel that such a partitioning was an
attempt to avoid their scrutiny/control?
Finally, I wonder if AudCom and the SASB fully understood that this action
would make it more difficult for sponsors such as 802 to update, improve,
and correct flaws in their P&Ps in a timely fashion (in other words,
unintendedly impeding presumably desirable actions)?
I don't recall this being voted on at the BoG ... If the EC feels that this
change to the SA Ops Manual is undesirable/problematic, I need to know so I
can take it up with the rest of the BoG and represent 802's interest.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ***** IEEE 802 Executive Committee List *****
> [mailto:STDS-802-SEC@ieee.org] On Behalf Of Sherman, Matthew
> J. (US SSA)
> Sent: Monday, July 17, 2006 2:00 AM
> To: STDS-802-SEC@listserv.ieee.org
> Subject: [802SEC] Straw Poll on: LMSC Operations Manual
> Please respond to the following straw poll:
> Should we partition our current P&P into a P&P and subsidiary
> Operations Manual?
> The changes below were approved by the standards board. It
> has been suggested on several occasion that we should split
> our rules into a more rigorous 'bylaws' type document that
> would be our actual P&P, and a lesser subsidiary document
> which still be binding governance, but be lower in the order
> of precedence and easier to change. Most of the material
> based on the Model P&P would remain in the current P&P, and
> sections that aren't required for the P&P would wind up in
> the operations manual.
> Given the current changes in SA I believe it is even more
> imperative to more towards this format because changing the
> P&P will be that much more difficult under the new rules.
> One of the push backs I received at the P&P review tonight
> was that it would be more cumbersome for our members to
> utilize than if all the 'rules' are in a singe document.
> Some people seemed to support creation of the new document
> and some seemed to be against it. There was only a small
> cross section of the EC present, so accordingly I'm running
> this straw poll to see how people feel.
> Please respond at your first reasonable opportunity.
> Matthew Sherman, Ph.D.
> Senior Member Technical Staff
> BAE SYSTEMS, NES
> Office: +1 973.633.6344
> email: firstname.lastname@example.org
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Grow, Bob [mailto:email@example.com]
> Sent: Sunday, July 16, 2006 5:12 PM
> To: Sherman, Matthew J. (US SSA)
> Subject: P&P motions
> From AudCom minutes:
> AI - Bring this to the SASB as a motion to make
> this a part of the rules Move that the IEEE-SA Standards
> Board include in its procedures (IEEE-SA Standards Board Operations
> Manual) that any Sponsor policy and procedure document
> accepted by AudCom shall reside in one approved location on
> the IEEE Standards website.
> From Stds Board minutes:
> A motion was made by Daleep Mohla and seconded by Gary
> Robinson that was amended by Robby Robson and Bill Hopf as follows:
> Motion - Move that the IEEE-SA Standards Board include
> the following in the IEEE-SA Standards Board Operations Manual:
> The IEEE Standards Sponsor policy and procedure
> document accepted by AudCom shall be the official policies of
> that Sponsor and shall reside online on the IEEE-SA Standards
> Board AudCom website. No other copy shall be designated as
> the official copy. Links to the IEEE-SA Standards Board
> AudCom website are encouraged.
> Result - 22 approve
> This email is sent from the 802 Executive Committee email
> reflector. This list is maintained by Listserv.
This email is sent from the 802 Executive Committee email reflector. This list is maintained by Listserv.