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

Re: [802SEC] Sponsor ballot authorization for P802.1Qaz



I notice that I didn't formulate the early close condition quite right...

"Early close: As required in subclause 4.1.2.2 'Electronic Balloting' of the
IEEE project 802 LAN/MAN Standards Committee (LMSC) Operations Manual, this
is notice that, to ensure the Sponsor ballot is started in a timely manner,
this ballot may close early once sufficient responses are received to
clearly decide the matter."

So, the ballot opens 21st September and will close on the 3rd October, or
once sufficient responses are received to show a majority for or against,
whichever is sooner.

Regards,
Tony


On 21 September 2010 15:35, Tony Jeffree <tony@jeffree.co.uk> wrote:

> All -
>
> Paul has authorized me to run an email ballot on the following motion:
>
> "EC approves forwarding of P802.1Qaz to Sponsor ballot.
>
> Moved:Jeffree
> Second: Thaler"
>
> Closing date for the ballot will be Sunday 3rd October, or the date that
> all voting members of the EC have responded, whichever is earlier.
>
> I approve the motion.
>
> Regards,
> Tony
>
>
>
> On 21 September 2010 13:33, Tony Jeffree <tony@jeffree.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> Hi Paul -
>>
>> We have a pretty clean result for the latest P802.1Qaz recirculation and I
>> would like to run an EC email ballot on a motion to allow it to be forwarded
>> to Sponsor ballot. Pat will second. The recirc results are:
>>
>> We had no new disapprove votes and no changes to the document from the
>> recirculation.
>>
>>
>>
>> Approve:             27
>>
>> Disapprove:        1
>>
>> Approve %:        96%
>>
>>
>>
>> Abstain:               32
>>
>>
>>
>> Responding:       60
>>
>> Voters:                 96
>>
>> Response %:      62%
>>
>>
>>
>> The disapprove voter is Anoop Ghanwani who has indicated that he is
>> satisfied with the resolution of all but one of his comments.  The comment
>> on which he is maintaining his disapprove vote is:
>>
>>
>>
>> *Cl **38        **SC **38.5.4                **P **64         **L
>>              # *99
>>
>> *Comment Type **TR*
>>
>> This clause needs to have an associated PFC Defense mechanism. The need
>> for this is
>>
>> covered in: az-ghanwani-pfc-defense-0909-v02.pdf.
>>
>> *SuggestedRemedy*
>>
>> Add a defense mechanism for PFC. The mechanism would be similar to that
>> specified for
>>
>> CN.
>>
>> REJECT. Group consensus has been that this is not a solution that DCB
>> wishes to persue.
>>
>> This has not changed from pervious ballots.
>>
>>
>>
>> The file mentioned in the comment is available at:
>>
>>
>> http://www.ieee802.org/1/files/public/docs2009/az-ghanwani-pfc-defense-0909-v02.pdf
>>
>>
>> The motion would be:
>>
>> "EC approves forwarding of P802.1Qaz to Sponsor ballot.
>>
>> Moved:Jeffree
>>
>> Second: Thaler"
>>
>> Regards,
>> Tony
>>
>
>

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