Re: [802SEC] Informing other bodies of our proposed PARs
Pat and John
I absolutely agree with Roger. If we want this to be done on a regular
basis, then the correct place to put it is in the Chair's Guidelines in
the section regarding the duties of the officers. We could add a line
like "Send out an email 21 days prior to the plenary announcing the PARs
under consideration to the IETF new-work reflector, ITU-?? Chair and
other bodies identified by the Sponsor Chair." to the Recording
BTW: I think it is a good idea to do this.
On 10/12/2012 02:31 PM, Roger Marks wrote:
OM Clause 8 ("Position Statements for Standards") says that
"Communications from the IEEE 802 LMSC to external standards bodies
shall not be released without prior approval by the Sponsor."
However, it also allows for "informal communications" that "shall not
imply that they are a formal position of the IEEE 802 LMSC or of the
I think that your proposed email template is an excellent one. I also
think that it would be an informal communication that would not imply
that it is a formal position of the IEEE 802 LMSC.
If sending someone a link to that page is a violation of Clause 8,
then I plead guilty, because I've done it. I do not think that
pointing someone to an IEEE 802 web page is an activity requiring EC
Roger B. Marks <email@example.com> Consensii LLC
<http://consensii.com> Chair, IEEE 802.16 Working Group on Broadband
Wireless Access <http://WirelessMAN.org>
On 2012/10/12, at 03:13 PM, Pat Thaler wrote:
We discussed during the EC teleconference whether posting a pointer
to PARs on the IETF new-work reflector is a liaison statement which
requires a motion or not. Some felt strongly that it does and
others equally strongly that it doesn’t. We have a similar request
from another standards body (was it ITU?).
The form of email would be something like:
The following Project Authorization Requests are under
consideration for the <month> <year> IEEE 802 Plenary: A list of
The PARs can be found at http://ieee802.org/PARs.shtml.
Any comments on a proposed PAR should be sent to the Working Group
chair identified in the PAR to be received by <date of Tuesday of
the plenary> 1700 <time zone of meeting>.
At this point, I can see two courses of action – A motion to give
blanket approval to a regular liaison mailing of the information
above to IETF (and possibly include the other body)
Or A motion to acknowledge that the above communication is not a
formal liaison and doesn’t require approval.
I’d like input on which would be preferred.
Pat ---------- 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.