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

Re: [802SEC] Motion to approve the attached EC position statement regarding the SC6 review of 8802-1



At 16:37 08/09/2006, Paul Nikolich wrote:
>Dear EC Members,
>Per the below email I sent you last Friday 
>( , a revised version of the 
>IEEE 802 position statement on the review of the 8802-1 and related 
>documents by SC6 is attached for EC approval.
>To that end I need two EC members to move and second the below 
>resolution.  Please respond immediately, as I want to kick off this ballot 
>as early as possible today, Friday 8 September.
>Motion: The 802 LMSC EC resolves to adopt the attached position statement 
>(appropriately edited to remove the "DRAFT" and "Change History" text)
>As soon as I get a mover and seconder on record, I will initiate the email 
>ballot.  The ballot will close 17 Sept 2006.
>--Paul Nikolich
>   a.. To:
>   b.. Subject: [802SEC] request for input from 802 EC members regarding 
> 8802-1 review
>   c.. From: Paul Nikolich <paul.nikolich@ATT.NET>
>   d.. Date: Fri, 1 Sep 2006 11:40:57 -0400
>Dear EC Members,
>In an e-mail sent to this reflector two weeks ago a process was outlined 
>to develop an IEEE 802 LMSC position on potential revisions to ISO/IEC TR 
>8802-1:2001, which documents a cooperation process between IEEE 802 LMSC 
>and ISO/IEC JTC1/SC6/WG1.
>Since that time a small group has contributed to a draft position IEEE 802 
>LMSC statement for submission to Robin Tasker (editor of 8802-1) by 27 
>Sept 06. Andrew Myles coordinated the activity and developed the draft 
>position statement in the attached powerpoint document. Contributions were 
>received from Geoff Thompson, Steve Mills, Pat Thaler, David Law, Andrew 
>Myles, Gary Robinson, Bob Pritchard and Paul Nikolich. The draft position 
>does not necessarily represent the views of all contributors.
>The original plan was to have a teleconference next week to discuss the 
>position statement. However, the lack of response from the EC (and, 
>presumably, their WG/TAG membership) suggests this is probably not a 
>useful exercise. The lack of response is not surprising because, although 
>the the relationship with ISO/IEC is important, it is "esoteric standards 
>work", orthogonal to the interests of most Working Group members.
>A slightly modified process to approve this document will now be followed:
>   a.. The draft position statement is attached to this e-mail for 
> comments by the 802 EC. Comments should be sent to the 802 EC reflector 
> and cc'ed to Andrew Myles ( The closing date for 
> comments is 5pm ET on Thursday, 7 Sept 06.
>   b.. Andrew Myles will generate an updated version of the draft position 
> statement based on these comments by 7am ET on Friday, 8 Sept 06.
>   c.. The 8 Sept 06 version will be sent out for EC approval via an 802 
> EC e-mail ballot on 8 Sept 06. The ballot will close on 17 Sept 06.
>   d.. If the EC ballot fails, Andrew Myles will make further changes 
> early in the week during the IEEE 802.11 WG interim session in Melbourne 
> and a second 802 EC e-mail ballot will be issued with a closing date of 
> 26 Sept 06.
>   e.. I want to avoid a second EC e-mail ballot--hence the 1-7 Sept 
> comment period--please, please, please provide your input prior to 5 pm 
> ET 7 Sept 06.
>   f.. Assuming a position statement is approved, it will be sent to Robin 
> Tasker on 26 Sept 06.
>Andrew Myles is available to discuss the draft position statement at any 
>time after 5am (3pm ET) any day next week on +61 2 84461010 (W) or +61 418 
>656587 (M).
>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.

This email is sent from the 802 Executive Committee email reflector.  This list is maintained by Listserv.