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

Re: [802SEC] Arnie's concern regarding submittals to ITU WP8F

Dear EC members,

I support Arnie's request that this be the subject of an EC discussion
(during one of the EC meetings, NOT during the week when WG Chairs have WG
meetings to run).  I think that this is important enough that it deserves to
be allocated more than a cursory 5-10 minutes of discussion time, too.

I believe that submissions to ITU need to be reviewed by .18, be approved
(or reviewed under the 5 day rule) by the EC, and be submitted by Mike Lynch
(the designated liaison to ITU-R for the IEEE's sector membership) for a
review by Terry deCourcelle at SA HQ before being submitted to ITU-R as an
IEEE contribution.

The IEEE is the Sector Member ... neither .16 nor any other WG has, or
should have, any standing to submit contributions to ITU-R ... that right
is, as it should be, reserved for Sector Members and Member States per ITU
rules (if this rule has been ignored or skirted in the past that should not
constitute an excuse to continue the practice).

IEEE needs to maintain control over the use of its sector membership in
ITU-R, not only to maintain a level playing field amongst potentially
competing internal interest groups, but also in order to maintain its image
and the privilege of sector membership.

> -------------- Forwarded Message: -------------- 
> To: greenspana@BELLSOUTH.NET 
> Subject: Rejected posting to STDS-802-SEC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG 
> Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2007 20:51:43 +0000 
> All:
> Paul has requested that I bring a concern that I have to the attention
> of the EC and that this subject be added as an agenda item for
> discussion by the EC in Atlanta. This message is in the way of a heads
> up to the members of the EC so that we can exchange views on the Ec
> reflector.
> Briefly;
> My concern is that the chair of 802.16 has announced his intention of
> making a separate submittal to WP8F other than the joint submittal
> administered by 802.18 at the direction of the EC. I think that a
> separate submittal by 802.16 is inappropriate and contrary to the
> express direction of the EC. I request that the EC clarify their
> direction so that all working groups will be playing on a 
> level playing field. 
> Arnie Greenspan 
> ----------
> 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.