Re: [802SEC] +++EC Email Ballot+++Urgent motion to approve 802.18 doc+++
Given that the dates are corrected from "September" to "November" I vote
APPROVE and urge my EC colleagues to do the same in a prompt manner in light
of the reasons outlined in the "Information for the EC" part of the original
motion
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-stds-802-sec@listserv.ieee.org
> [mailto:owner-stds-802-sec@listserv.ieee.org] On Behalf Of
> Paul Nikolich
> Sent: Friday, November 19, 2004 7:36 PM
> To: STDS-802-SEC@listserv.ieee.org
> Subject: [802SEC] +++EC Email Ballot+++Urgent motion to
> approve 802.18 doc+++
> Importance: High
>
>
> Dear EC members,
>
> As agreed at the closing EC meeting, this is a 7 day email
> ballot to make a determination on the below motion to approve
> the attached document 18-04-0056-00-00 (TV Band NPRM Comments) as an
> 802 Document.
>
> Moved: Carl Stevenson
> Second: Jerry Upton
>
> The ballot opens Friday 19 September 2004 7pm edt and closes
> the sooner of Friday 26 September 2004 7pm edt or 24hours
> after all EC member have cast a vote (a vote consists of an
> explicit APPROVE, DISAPPROVE or ABSTAIN).
>
> Regards,
>
> --Paul Nikolich
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Carl R. Stevenson" <wk3c@wk3c.com>
> To: "Paul Nikolich" <p.nikolich@ieee.org>
> Sent: Friday, November 19, 2004 7:29 PM
> Subject: Urgent motion to approve 802.18 doc
>
>
> > Motion:
> >
> > To immediately and urgently
> >
> > approve the attached document 18-04-0056-00-00 (TV Band
> NPRM Comments)
> >
> > as an 802 Document, authorizing Carl Stevenson and Michael Lynch to
> >
> > make necessary non-substantive editorial cleanups and formatting
> >
> > changes, and to file the document with the FCC on behalf of IEEE 802
> >
> > in a timely fashion. (NOTE: the filing deadline is Nov. 30, 2004 and
> >
> > additionally, we need time to do the editorial cleanups and final
> >
> > Formatting for filing.)
> >
> > Moved: Carl R. Stevenson
> >
> > Seconded: Jerry Upton
> >
> > Information for the EC:
> >
> > The attached document was approved *unanimously* by 802.18
> with broad
> >
> > representation by voting members of 802.18 from both 802 as well as
> > the
> >
> > licensed incumbent services which future 802 wireless
> standards would,
> >
> > by FCC rule and the ITU Radio Regulations, be required to
> protect from
> >
> > harmful interference as a condition for access to the spectrum in
> > question.
> >
> > There are currently *NO* 802 wireless standards operating
> in the band
> > in
> >
> > question (the TV broadcast bands), so the recommendations in this
> > document
> >
> > would impose NO additional constraints on existing 802
> wireless standards.
> >
> > Any future 802 wireless standards desiring to operate in
> the band in
> > question
> >
> > *will* be *required* by the FCC to afford the incumbent licensed
> > services
> >
> > protection from harmful interference.
> >
> > (The standard to be developed by 802.22, under the scope of
> its PAR,
> > is
> >
> > specifically intended to operate in the TV broadcast bands, using
> > cognitive
> >
> > radio techniques to protect the incumbent licensed services from
> > harmful
> >
> > interference.)
> >
> > This document was reviewed by an ad hoc group from 802.11
> (none of the
> > other
> >
> > Wireless WG Chairs responded to an invitation for review).
> >
> > Any future 802 wireless standard proposing to use the TV
> bands under
> > the rules
> >
> > proposed by the FCC would, by definition, be required to
> operate on a
> > strictly
> >
> > non-interfering basis to the incumbent licensed services.
> >
> > Additionally, the attached document is a delicately
> crafted, yet fair,
> >
> > compromise, based on UNPRECEDENTED cooperation between the
> "traditional"
> >
> > 802 community and licensed incumbents, some of whom have
> gained voting
> >
> > membership, and others who have met the attendance requirements at
> > this
> >
> > session and will gain voting membership at the March plenary.
> >
> > These folks came to OUR table to work cooperatively with us in an
> > effort
> >
> > to avoid conflict over the FCC's proposal to allow
> unlicensed devices
> > to
> >
> > operate *in spectrum for which they hold licenses and have legal
> > rights to
> >
> > protection from harmful interference*.
> >
> > After months of cooperative work, NOT filing the comments that were
> > mutually
> >
> > Agreed between the RR-TAG and these incumbents will severely damage
> > the
> >
> > cooperative working relationship that has been forged between the
> > incumbents
> >
> > and "traditional 802 participants" and will almost
> certainly result in
> > their
> >
> > withdrawing from their attempts to work cooperatively with
> us and make
> > our
> >
> > prospects of gaining access to the spectrum.
> >
> > Finally, since IEEE 802.18 requested, and was granted, an
> extension of
> > time in the
> >
> > comment period, which the FCC granted - something that they
> normally
> > don't do - on
> >
> > the basis that we had all of the incumbents at the table working
> > cooperatively
> >
> > with us to bring a broad industry consensus position to the FCC, it
> > will virtually
> >
> > certainly *trash* 802's reputation with the FCC if we do
> not deliver
> > this document
> >
> > by the Nov. 30 filing deadline established by the extension of time
> > that was granted
> >
> > at our request - a relationship that we have worked hard to
> cultivate
> > and has been
> >
> > very productive.
> >
> >
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Carl R. Stevenson (outgoing Chair, IEEE 802.18 RR-TAG)
> >
> > Michael Lynch, Interim Chair, IEEE 802.18 RR-TAG
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
> ----------
> This email is sent from the 802 Executive Committee email
> reflector. This list is maintained by Listserv.
>
----------
This email is sent from the 802 Executive Committee email reflector. This list is maintained by Listserv.