802.16 LetterBallot #1: Final Results

Motion: "To accept Document IEEE 802.16-99/05 as the Development Plan for the 802.16.1 Air Interface Standard."

Open: 17 September 1999
Close: 27 October 1999

Motion carries: 60 Approve, 1 Do Not Approve, 1 Abstain
Approval ratio: 60/61 = 98.4%
Voting ratio: 62 voters/106 voting members= 58.5%

Y Approve
N Do Not Approve
A Abstain
Name Company Y N A Comments
Sherman Ackley WinStar Network Services x      
Arnold Alagar IDRIS Communications x      
Tariq Ali Harris Communications x      
Reza Arefi WFI        
Donald Arnstein Hughes Network Systems        
Jori Arrakoski Nokia Research Center   x   Do Not Approve, but will if the following issues are clarified:

  • The relationship between uninvited proposals and suggested improvements & mergers must be defined in detail. Especially if suggested improvements & mergers have an easier track to be handled in the meeting.
  • To previous comment. Does "friendly amendment" mean that the proposal automatically gets a free slot? If so, then strict rules to what a "friendly amendment" is must be defined.
  • What is the due date for withdrawal of a proposal?

Obviously these items are not a problem if the number of proposals is modest. But with a high number of proposals, we'll certainly run out of time in the meetings (it is not fair if the chair don't allocate equal opportunities like time for all proposals).

My opinion is, that improvements & mergers shall be highly encouraged especially if they smoothen the process or helps in finding a compromise. Nevertheless, attempts to slow down the convergence through additional proposals (consuming time to process as well as probably postponing decisions) should be somehow discouraged or restricted. The schedule is anyhow tight, and should be to meet the objectives of a standard in a foreseen future ...

Arun V. Arunachalam Nortel Networks x      
Paolo Baldo ITALTEL S.P.A. x      
William A. Biagini GTE Laboratories Incorporated        
Zev Bogan AMP, Inc. x      
Ted Boone Integrity Communications, Inc.        
Michael L. Bouchard Spike Technologies, Inc.        
Luc Boucher Industry Canada x      
Chris Cant Telegen Ltd. (Floware Ltd.) x     The timeline is challenging but not absurd, and nothing is to be gained by any relaxation at this stage. As with all plans it may need to be adapted to meet constraints encountered during the development process and timescales should not be held sacrosanct if the quality of the standard is at risk. On the other hand no delays to planned dates should be accepted without very good reason.
Rebecca S.M. Chan Industry Canada        
Chih-Yuan Chang Lucent Technologies        
Naftali Chayat BreezeCOM        
Rémi Chayer Harris Corporation        
Skyler W. Child Mitsubishi Electronics America, Inc.        
Fred Chitayat SR Telecom Inc. x      
Mary Condie Newbridge Networks Corporation x      
Greg Copeland Integrated Device Technology, Inc.        
James C. Cornelius Hardin & Associates, Inc.        
José M. Costa Nortel Networks x      
Bruce Currivan Broadcom Corp.     x I have not yet formed an educated opinion, mostly due to other commitments on my time. I now plan to devote more time to reviewing the 802.16 documents beginning this week.
Lisa V. Denney Broadcom Corp.        
Keith Doucet Newbridge Networks Corporation x      
Robert Duhamel Telcordia Technologies x      
Carl Eklund Nokia Research Center x      
David D. Falconer Carleton University x      
George R. Fishel Communications Consulting Services x      
Jeffrey R. Foerster Stanford Wireless Broadband Inc. x      
Imed Frigui Nortel Networks        
Thomas B. Fulton HighSpeed.Com x      
Martin Gagnon Spacebridge Networks Corp. x      
G. Jack Garrison DRJ & Associates/Wavtrace        
Richard Germon Philips Broadband Networks        
Marianna Goldhammer BreezeCOM        
Douglas A. Gray Lucent Technologies        
Phil Guillemette Spacebridge Networks Corp. x      
Dan Gulliford Triton Network Systems x      
Rami Hadar Ensemble Communications Inc. x      
Baya Hatim WFI x      
Hossein Izadpanah HRL Laboratories x      
David Jarrett Lucent Technologies        
Vladan Jevremovic U S WEST Advanced Technologies        
Amarpal Khanna Hewlett-Packard Company        
Brian G. Kiernan InterDigital Communications Corp. x      
Jay Klein Ensemble Communications Inc. x      
Allan Klein SR Telecom Inc. x      
Thomas J. Kolze ComStar Communications, Inc.        
Philip Kwan Lucent Technologies        
Ignatius Lam Nortel Networks x      
J. Leland Langston Raytheon Telecommunications Company        
Peter LaRocca Broadcom Corp.        
Tho Le-Ngoc Concordia University        
Allan Lee SpaceBridge Networks Corp. x      
Gregg Levin Broadwave Communications, Inc. x      
Barry Lewis Radiocommunications Agency        
John Liebetreu SiCOM, Inc.        
Willie Lu Infineon Technologies Corp. x      
Fred Lucas 3Com Corp.        
Mohan Maghera Infineon Technologies Corp. x      
J. Scott Marin SpectraPoint Wireless LLC x      
Roger B. Marks NIST x      
Antonio Mascioli Spacebridge Networks Corp. x     Must stay on time with schedule.
Marc Mertsching ComTier x      
Sanjay Moghe ADC Telecommunications        
James F. Mollenauer Technical Strategy Associates x      
Keishi Murakami Mitsubishi Electric Corp.        
William K. Myers SpectraPoint Wireless LLC x      
Randi E. Norris Harris Corporation        
Louis Olsen Teligent, Inc. x      
David Palmer Fujitsu Telecommunications Europe Limited x      
Guarang S. Parikh NEC America, Inc.        
Brian Petry 3Com Corp. x     Just a few minor comments on the schedule...
The turn-around time from comment resolution at a meeting to starting a letter ballot (e.g., session #8) may be too fast (same day) because the editor will need a couple days to fully integrate the comments, fix formatting, etc. and then send the draft out. But a couple days change here and there won't change the overall schedule.
The proposed work during the holidays (12/24, 1/5) in session number 5 might not happen, but that shouldn't be a big problem. Session #5 will probably have much discussion around the MAC/PHY proposals.
It seems to me that much work has to happen between session #6 and 7: The invited proposals may need the help of editor(s) to unify the look-and-feel of the documents to make them easy to compare. Also, simulation/measurement results that allow for apples-to-apples comparison of the proposals should be available at session #7. Thus, session #7 seems the most "risky" part of the schedule to me.
Patrick Quinn World Access Inc. x      
Moshe Ran TelesciCOM Ltd. x      
Stanley Reible MICRILOR, Inc. x      
Michel Robidoux SR Telecom Inc. x      
Gene Robinson E. A. Robinson Consulting, Inc. x     I assume that updates may be made to this plan as need by vote at Plenary sessions or by letter ballot.
Jeff Rosenblatt WinStar Communications, Inc.        
Clemens C.W. Ruppel Siemens AG x      
Ray W. Sanders CircuitPath Network Systems x      
Howard Sandler Nortel Networks x      
David Schafer Wavtrace, Inc.        
Menashe Shahar Phasecom, Ltd.        
Steve Shattil IDRIS Communications        
Chet Shirali Phasecom Inc. x      
David Solomon Fujitsu Network Communications, Inc. x      
Marc St-Onge SR Telecom Inc. x      
Karl Stambaugh Motorola Inc. x      
Paul F. Struhsaker World Access Inc.        
Douglas Sward Industry Canada        
W.J. (Bill) Taylor Bell Canada        
Polychronis Tzerefos University of Sheffield x      
Jack Van der Star Belstar Systems Corp.        
Nico Van Waes Nokia x      
François Vigneron Alcatel USA        
Robert M. Ward SciCom x      
Roy Willy HighSpeed.Com x      
Kuang-Tsan Wu Nortel Networks x      
Jung Yee Newbridge Networks Corporation x     I propose that Sponsor ballot recirculation end at 01/02/09 to allow a full 10 working days of review.
Erol Yurtkuran Integrity Communications        
Hassan Zeino SR Telecom Inc. x      
Genzao Zhang Nortel Networks        
TOTAL 106 Voting Members 60 1 1