|Thread Links||Date Links|
|Thread Prev||Thread Next||Thread Index||Date Prev||Date Next||Date Index|
---------- This email is sent from the 802 Executive Committee email reflector. This list is maintained by Listserv.
It took a long time to get Wi-Fi Alliance to recognize that regulatory and standards development are two very different things, and need different rules to operate efficiently.
Standards development starts with the interested parties agreeing on a schedule, usually a long-term schedule, and maintaining control of that schedule. Hence, meeting times can also be agreed upon by the interested parties.
Regulatory work is totally reactionary. Our schedules are imposed on us, usually with very little warning and no flexibility.
It is like applying the same rules to your daily schedule and avoiding an incoming comet.
I don’t expect the EC to change these rules quickly, but if this work is to be done properly, it must have the flexibility to react as necessary.
Wi-Fi Alliance Spectrum & Regulatory TG Chair
Wi-Fi Alliance White Spaces MTG Vice-chair
IEEE802.11 TGaf (WLAN in White Spaces) Chair
IEEE802.11/15 Regulatory SC Chair
IEEE 802.11/18 Liaison
Respectfully, all WG chairs are voting members of 802.18, along with those with earned voting rights in 802.18, and many are on the EC.
When the response time is 15 days, as it is with the Google trial, and other regulatory bodies often have short reply comments, less than the rules allow,
is it possible for the Sponsor to allow a vote this time by 10 day email ballot, while a response is worked on, and then address the rules
in general to adapt the 30 day rule for this type of exception. Even if it is just a positive reinforcement, 802’s voice should be heard.
My personal opinion only. Sincerely, Nancy
On Jul 30, 2014, at 5:35 AM, Jon Rosdahl <email@example.com> wrote: