|Thread Links||Date Links|
|Thread Prev||Thread Next||Thread Index||Date Prev||Date Next||Date Index|
Since I am relatively certain that I will not be in Genève on that date presenting IEEE 802’s current contribution for ITU-R WP5A I can say yes, I will be able to attend the call regardless of the time of day.
Please pardon my use of your meeting announcement but my response to it seemed a good way to get this message out to all of those concerned with this particular contribution to WP5A.
The current contribution for the May meeting of ITU-R WP5A is 18-13-0038-03 and titled “INFORMATION REGARDING IEEE 802-BASED RLAN SYSTEMS” and deals with 5 GHz issues and the “Technical and Operational Characteristics/ Revision of Recommendation ITU-R M.1450-4”.
This contribution, which has been approved by IEEE 802.18 and the EC, will be “cleaned up” by the IEEE SA liaison to ITU-R and submitted NLT 16:00 UTC on May 13th. The contribution presents a view of the new FCC proposed rules for portions of the 5 GHz frequency band. Additionally it explains why the use of those proposed portions of the 5 GHz frequency band could be easily implemented.
In this contribution the proposal to WP5A says “IEEE 802 provides this information on IEEE 802 based RLAN systems for consideration by ITU-R Working Party 5A during the development of any response to JTG 4-5-6-7 regarding further decides 4 of the CPM15-1 decision on the establishment and terms of reference of Joint Task Group 4-5-6-7.”
Note that my non-participation at the meeting is purely lack of funding for that meeting and topic. If some participants in the development of that document feel that there is a need for representation at WP5A they should contact me. As the IEEE SA Designated Focal Point I will be happy to register a qualified person (meaning someone experienced in ITU-R) to attend this meeting and present the contribution.
Dear EC Members,
As of 7AM ET 26APR2013, enough votes have been cast to decide on the motion. It failed.
The motion required a 2/3 approval majority (10) of voting EC members (15). The ballot has received 5 approves (Das, Rosdahl, Mody, Heile, Lynch), 7 disapproves (Marks, Thaler, Jeffree, D'Ambrosia, Law, Gilb, Kraemer) and 3 did not vote (Chaplin, Shellhammer, Nikolich).
I note that all the those disapproving did not object to holding the EC teleconference less than the 30 day notice defined in our P&P. That means we had at least 13 EC members (I'm including myself) that would have liked to have the teleconference. This is a strong indicator we need to figure out a way to implement a policy which allows us to conduct EC meetings at short notice. James will be working on that for July.
Lastly, since the motion failed we will have an EC teleconference 30 days from when I notified the EC of the intent to hold an executive session teleconference (in my 22APR2013 email to the EC reflector). This would put the call on Wednesday 22MAY2013. My suggestion is to hold the call 1PM-2PM ET. Please confirm you can make it.
------ Original Message ------
From: "Paul Nikolich" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Sent: 4/23/2013 4:17:58 PM
Subject: [802SEC] +++EC Email Ballot: Motion to Suspend the Rules regarding advance notice for an EC meeting+++