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

Re: [802SEC] Proposed process to choose March 2011 802 Plenary

Hi Pat,  Yes, you are right; we are looking for nNA venues for March
2011 and 2012.  
I just had an email from Glenn Parsons who is acting as coordinator for
ITU Geneva proposals indicating he is in favor of the Roger Marks
proposal and timetable and will be working to include the Geneva
proposal into that schedule.  So I think we are OK.  If they are serious
about offering us a hosted deal, I'm sure they will block the space for
the time they want to propose to us and give us a 1st option position on
that space.  They had previously indicated to us that March 2011 and
March 2012 were their best options for a hosted proposal for us.  I'm
sure Glenn will keep us posted on developments and let us know if we
should need to expedite a decision.  The best outcome is if we can stick
with Roger's timetable so we get to look at several options before we
are forced to decide and commit.  Considering deals in isolation is
always a risk.  

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

-----Original Message-----
From: Pat Thaler [mailto:pthaler@BROADCOM.COM] 
Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2007 9:47 AM
Subject: Re: [802SEC] Proposed process to choose March 2011 802 Plenary


Our website says March 2010 is Orlando. I thought March 2011 was the
window we were looking at for Geneva. Which brings up a question for

How are we doing on Geneva? Would it fit into that schedule? If we would
be able to lock down Geneva as a March 2011 choice at our March 2008
plenary, I wouldn't want to delay that decision to July if it would risk
losing Geneva - a bird in the hand vs two in the bush situation. 


-----Original Message-----
From: ***** IEEE 802 Executive Committee List *****
[mailto:STDS-802-SEC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG] On Behalf Of Carl R. Stevenson
Sent: Tuesday, November 27, 2007 8:38 PM
Subject: Re: [802SEC] Proposed process to choose March 2011 802 Plenary

What about the 2010 nNA slot???  If I recall correctly, we were thinking
Geneva, but that's certainly not tied down as far as I know.


> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-stds-802-sec@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG 
> [mailto:owner-stds-802-sec@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG] On Behalf Of 
> Roger B. Marks
> Sent: Tuesday, November 27, 2007 11:22 PM
> To: SEC
> Subject: [802SEC] Proposed process to choose March 2011 802 Plenary
> Folks,
> I think it's time to plan the process for choosing the site of the  
> March 2011 802 Plenary. I recommend we try a new approach.
> In my view, the best path to success is to work with a local 
> host who  
> wants our session and will be willing to put its name and 
> credibility  
> on the line to make sure it goes right. I have some experience in  
> this area. I served as the Meetings and Symposia Chair of an IEEE  
> Society that threw an annual Symposium for around 8,000 to 10,000  
> people. The event is big enough that the site is chosen annually  
> eight years in advance. Still, the competition to host is 
> strong, and  
> it is not unusual to have three proposals from which to choose. The  
> process involves a request for proposals, a site visit 
> committee, and  
> a formal site selection process. Proposals are selected based on  
> location, facilities, costs, the interest of the local 
> community, and  
> the commitment of the local organizing committee. The results are  
> great. The locals want the Symposium, and they work hard to deliver  
> one that people will remember. [Since I served as Vice Chair of one  
> of those local committees, I know how hard people work to pull off a  
> successful event to which their name is attached.]
> Long ago, I used to organize 802.16 interim sessions myself when I  
> had no other option. I always chose a site near my home. Sometimes  
> people would say something like, "Hey, let's meet in Rio; that would  
> be a great spot." I would say, "Sorry; I know Denver; I don't know  
> Rio." Eventually, I developed a simple site selection process based  
> on host proposals. Now, when someone asks for Rio, I say "Great, why  
> don't you make a proposal?" Every four months, when we choose 
> a site,  
> we have at least one proposal to consider, and we have had as 
> many as  
> four at once. We get, for the most part, committed local members who  
> convince their company to join in and, in the best cases, 
> bring along  
> the local industry, academic, and government communities.
> I think that 802 is in a similar situation now. Buzz knows North  
> America like I know Denver. We can tell Buzz to go make a meeting in  
> Rio, but we may not be happy with the results, and we may not build  
> any lasting relationships.
> I suggest that we seek proposals to host the March 2011 Plenary and  
> make a choice at the July session. Here is a specific 
> timeline to get  
> there:
> (1) by 31 January: IEEE 802 Executive Secretary issues a 
> draft set of  
> facility requirements and issues a Request for Interest (RfI) 
> seeking  
> a letter of intent from any prospective hosts.
> (2) 7 March: Deadline for letter of intent that would name  
> prospective host and venue but without a firm commitment to host.
> (3) 21 March: 802 EC approves a request for proposals (RfP),  
> including facility requirements and hosting specifications, with a  
> specific submittal template to allow ready intercomparison. 802 EC  
> also authorizes travel expenses for site visits to prospective hosts  
> identified by letter of intent.
> (4) 20 June: Deadline for host proposals issued in response 
> to the RfP.
> (5) 1 July: Executive Secretary submits report summarizing proposals  
> and results of site visits.
> (6) 14 July: During a tutorial slot, host candidates overview their  
> proposals.
> (7) 18 July: 802 EC votes to accept a proposal.
> Note that this would not require any EC action before the March 802  
> Plenary. We just need Step (1) to kick it off.
> The RfP could specify that we are particularly seeking venues 
> outside  
> North America and would expect to give them preference. We 
> could also  
> be rigid about this, but my personal opinion is that we should be  
> flexible, retaining the option to choose a North American site if  
> that was the only reasonable option. Anyway, the RfP would be 
> subject  
> to EC discussion.
> If we take an approach like this, I have a lot of confidence that we  
> will get a good response. I am committed to working with prospective  
> hosts to get us at least one solid hosting offer outside 
> North America.
> I welcome your thoughts on this proposal.
> Roger
> ----------
> 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.

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