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

Re: [802SEC] Final venue choices for our March 8-13, 2009 Plenary Session for your review


I understand and appreciate your effort on this. It is hard to come  
up with a venue that will satisfy everyone. I will check my WG for  
input during our interim.

I have a comment and then a couple of questions.


I'm personally not enthusiastic about the Rome idea. The reason is  
the same one I have mentioned as long as we've had these nNA  
discussions. Namely, I don't think that a nNA venue, in a vacuum,  
plays a role in establishing our international credibility. We don't  
become "international" because we drop into Rome and then pick up and  
leave at the end of the week. Other than the visa requirements, we  
could have been anywhere.

Sorry this is sounding like a broken record, but I want to repeat  
what I've said before. I see this from an 802.16 perspective. IEEE  
802.16 has established an broad global following, and our choices of  
meetings does have a role in that. We rarely hold a US-based interim  
session. But we don't pick a site at random. We do site selection  
based on proposals from prospective hosts. This means that we are  
going to places because the locals want us there. That is a huge  
difference. A host has to develop a proposal and convince someone - a  
host company, and often a local government - that it would be a great  
idea to bring 802.16 to their community. They spend months planning  
the activity, and they often sends locals to advance meetings to  
learn the system. They make special efforts to get us introduced into  
the community. We make friends. When it's all done, the local  
industry community has learned something about 802.16, and we've  
learned about something about them. And some of the locals find that  
this is an interesting organization, and they keep coming to  
meetings. They become members. That builds our global participation.

I understand that an IEEE 802 plenary is more complex than an  
interim. But, still, I think that there are local organizations with  
the capability and interest in hosting a plenary. I think it makes  
sense for IEEE 802 to build a more global following by engaging in  
meeting planning with a global community.

I recognize that, when you have heard me say this before, you have  
encouraged me to pursue such local hosts. I also accept the fact that  
I have not been able to deliver any yet. On the other hand, without a  
detailed package to bid on, it's pretty hard for a host to make an  
offer. We don't even have a clear idea how the finances would work in  
such a case. Maybe we need to spend more time deciding if we want to  
go this way and, if we do, putting together a request for bids.


Is there any possibility that you would consider another alternative  
venue if an offer was available? If so, when you would need the  
offer? I'm asking because I have a specific potential host in mind,  
with a potential venue. When the EC discussed prospective cities in  
July, I didn't realize that you were going to be making the decision  
this soon.


On Sep 7, 2007, at 10:02 AM, Rigsbee, Everett O wrote:

> Colleagues,    Please see the attached summary of our final venue
> choices for March 2009.  Please share the information with your
> respective Working Groups during your interim sessions and give us  
> your
> and/or your WG response on preferences.  We need to close on this  
> choice
> very shortly now or we will lose the options.  We still have an option
> for Geneva for March 2011 that we can pursue.
> Thanx again for your cooperation and support.      :-)
> Thanx,  Buzz
> Dr. Everett O. (Buzz) Rigsbee
> Boeing IT
> PO Box 3707, M/S: 7M-FM
> Seattle, WA  98124-2207
> Ph: (425) 373-8960    Fx: (425) 865-7960
> Cell: (425) 417-1022

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