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

Re: [802SEC] Views on 'suspicion of dominance'


	Given that you are recommending that we notify the Standards
Board, what is process for doing that?  Is it sufficient for Paul to
send an email to Bob Grow or is there some other procedure?


-----Original Message-----
From: ***** IEEE 802 Executive Committee List *****
[mailto:STDS-802-SEC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG] On Behalf Of Sherman, Matthew J.
Sent: Friday, March 21, 2008 12:12 PM
Subject: [802SEC] Views on 'suspicion of dominance'



I understand that due to limited time you had to cut off debate on this
topic.  However, given that it has been discussed within 802.11 and at
the EC meeting to day, I want to summarize what I feel are the relevant
rules and facts as well as my opinion on them.


The LMSC P&P states (


[WG Chair's Responsibilities...] Determine if the WG is dominated by an
organization and, if so, treat that organizations' vote as one (with the
approval of the EC). 


The SA Standards Board Operations Manual states (5.1.2):


[Duties of the Sponsor...] Monitor standards developing committees for
signs of dominance by any single interest category, individual, or
organization. If dominance is suspected, the Sponsor shall promptly
notify the IEEE-SA Standards Board and shall immediately address the
concern with the standards developing committee leadership.


Other relevant facts:


A member of a WG (and the EC I should note) has stated that he believes
he has observed dominance within that WG.  The Chair of that WG
announced that he would be investigating the allegations of dominance.
The Chair of the WG is a member of the Sponsor (LMSC EC).


My Analysis:


Given that a member of our Sponsor (the Chair of 802.11) is
investigating accusations of dominance I believe that this fact can be
construed as suspicion (otherwise why investigate).  I believe it would
be prudent to inform the SA Standards Board of the on-going
investigation and that would fulfill our obligation as a sponsor to
'notify' the Standards Board.  Some may argue that the investigation
does not constitute 'suspicion'.  But I would say if we inform the
Standards Board for sure we have met our obligation as a sponsor.  (I
don't believe any further action would be required by the Standards
Board.  They would simply be aware of the situation.)  If we do not
inform the Standards Board, I think it is open to debate as to whether
or not we fulfilled our duties as a sponsor.  Aside from informing the
Standards Board (given that we are investigating the allegation) I don't
believe any other actions are required on this matter at this time.  At
least that is my opinion.











Matthew Sherman, Ph.D. 
Engineering Fellow 
BAE Systems -  Network Systems (NS) 
Office: +1 973.633.6344 
Cell: +1 973.229.9520 


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.