Re: [STDS-802-11-TGBT] Proposed TGbt procedure for comment resolution
Hi Mark,
Comments made in a letter ballot are on the draft in question. Since TGbt’s draft 1.0 does not have a PAKE in it, it doesn’t have any fragmentation text, and it doesn’t deal with PASN then how could we get technical comments from a letter ballot on these
topics?
I know in the comment collection period (which is quite unofficial) we entertained comments like “the draft should have a PAKE” and then the commenter would produce a submission addressing his comment with a resolution of “agree in principle with the commenter”
(natch) and have text proposing a PAKE as resolution. But we’re not gonna allow stuff like that in a letter ballot, right? Right?
If I am mistaken then please let me know because the ballot is still open and I have not voted yet. If I’m not then maybe remove the topics that are not currently in the draft from your “Incoming CIDs” section.
Also, in your TTT process you mention, "If the Straw Poll result shows consensus on the text, the CIDs are marked as
Ready for Motion, Revised, to incorporate the text.” This does not mean that we will be following the 11bn and 11bi convention of requiring a straw poll before being allowed to make a motion. Correct? We’re not going to have straw polls that “pass”,
right? We have been operating under the correct 802.11 procedure of anyone who has the floor can make a motion on any topic and straw polls are merely to gauge the opinion of those currently in the room at the time of the straw poll. And that isn’t changing.
Right?
By the way, what does TTT stand for?
Regards,
Dan.
--
“the object of life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to
escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane.” – Marcus Aurelius
On 8/21/26, 7:17 PM, "Mark Hamilton" <mark.hamilton2152@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
All,
I have uploaded a proposal for a written procedure for our (TGbt) comment resolution, going forward. I believe this is the topic of discussion on the teleconference on Monday. You can find my
proposal here: https://mentor.ieee.org/802.11/dcn/26/11-26-1556-00-00bt-proposed-tgbt-procedure-for-comment-resolution.docx
I took both TGbn’s and REVmf’s process, and sort of merged them (applied one or the other, depending on the type of comment/work to resolve). I also simplified the TGbn process a bit, since we
are not nearly as large a group nor working on as large a draft, so I think we can forgo a bit of the process.
Anyway, I welcome comments, and look forward to discussing on Monday’s call.
Mark
To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-11-TGBT list, click the following link:
https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-11-TGBT&A=1
To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-11-TGBT list, click the following link: https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-11-TGBT&A=1