FW: [802SEC] Further Info re. 802.11g to Sponsor Ballot

["Bob O'Hara" <bob@airespace.com>]

Title: Message

Here is the set of comment files in zip format.

 -Bob
 

-----Original Message-----
From: Paul Nikolich [mailto:paul.nikolich@att.net]
Sent: Thursday, February 06, 2003 12:25 PM
To: Bob O'Hara; stds-802-sec@ieee.org
Cc: shoemake@ti.com
Subject: Re: [802SEC] Further Info re. 802.11g to Sponsor Ballot

Matthew,

 

I cannot open the TAR.GZ file--can you please resend it uncompressed?

 

Thank you,

 

--Paul Nikolich

----- Original Message -----

From: Bob O'Hara

To: stds-802-sec@ieee.org

Cc: shoemake@ti.com

Sent: Thursday, February 06, 2003 3:16 PM

Subject: FW: [802SEC] Further Info re. 802.11g to Sponsor Ballot

Here is the response from Matthew Shoemake, chair of 802.11 TGg on the question I raised.

 -Bob
 

-----Original Message-----
From: Matthew B. Shoemake [mailto:shoemake@ti.com]
Sent: Thursday, February 06, 2003 12:02 PM
To: Bob O'Hara
Cc: stuart.kerry@philips.com
Subject: Re: [802SEC] Further Info re. 802.11g to Sponsor Ballot

Bob,

I will try to answer your question the best that I can. Please forward this reply to the SEC.

There were 11 voters that submitted comments on LB54. Of these 10 voted YES WITH COMMENTS.

The 11th voter maintained his NO vote based on one issue that he had previously voted NO on. This voter was Carl Temme. Carl was willing to change his vote to YES if his NO vote was going to prohibit us from going to Sponsor Ballot. It is not Carl's intent to delay us. Carl's comment will be submitted again during the Sponsor Ballot.

All comments on LB54 have been rejected by motion of the IEEE 802.11 Working Group.

Best regards,

Matthew

P.S. - The comments that were previously submitted to the SEC contain only the comments from the NO votes, of which there are 7 current NO voters.

LB54comments.zip