Thread Links Date Links
Thread Prev Thread Next Thread Index Date Prev Date Next Date Index

Re: [802SEC] Straw Poll on: LMSC Operations Manual



See responses inline below.

Matthew Sherman, Ph.D. 
Senior Member Technical Staff 
BAE SYSTEMS, NES 
Office: +1 973.633.6344 
email: matthew.sherman@baesystems.com 


-----Original Message-----
From: Carl R. Stevenson [mailto:wk3c@wk3c.com] 
Sent: Monday, July 17, 2006 9:45 AM
To: Sherman, Matthew J. (US SSA); STDS-802-SEC@listserv.ieee.org
Subject: RE: [802SEC] Straw Poll on: LMSC Operations Manual

Mat,

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
document?

*Response: Not sure.  General thoughts are that anything not required by
the model P&P gets moved to OM unless we feel it should be more tightly
controlled.

What sort of material would, at least hypothetically, move out of
AudCom's
"jurisdiction/scrutiny?"

*Response:  Process for approving of PAR, financial details, details for
WG/TAG operations etc.

I wonder if AudCom and SASB would feel that such a partitioning was an
attempt to avoid their scrutiny/control?

*Response:  My understanding is they would encourage that approach and
use that approach themselves.  The SASB has an Operation Manual and
Bylaws (our equivalent of a P&P).  My understanding is that Bylaws
changes much be approved by the Board of Governors and OM changes do not
require approval.

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)?

*Response:  My understanding is that they view this level of control as
necessary to properly implement existing SA rules.

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.

*Response:  This is exactly the point.  I don't believe changes to the
Ops Manual get approved by the BoG ;^).  But double check  I could be
wrong.

Regards,
Carl


> -----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
> 
> Folks,
> 
> Please respond to the following straw poll:
> 
> Should we partition our current P&P into a P&P and subsidiary 
> Operations Manual?
> 
> Background: 
> 
> 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.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Mat 
> 
> Matthew Sherman, Ph.D. 
> Senior Member Technical Staff
> BAE SYSTEMS, NES
> Office: +1 973.633.6344
> email: matthew.sherman@baesystems.com 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Grow, Bob [mailto:bob.grow@intel.com]
> Sent: Sunday, July 16, 2006 5:12 PM
> To: Sherman, Matthew J. (US SSA)
> Subject: P&P motions
> 
> Mat:
> 
> 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.