Re: [802SEC] EC Motion - RE: [802SEC] Update to EC on IMT-Advanced
All,
Some clarification.
At last week's IMT-Advanced meeting two things happened:
1) A decision was taken to develop a further IMT-Advanced Requirements
input. That work will begin in September and the goal is indeed to
finish it at the November meeting or certainly in time for the first
meeting of WP8F (or however it is designated) in 2008.
2) A discussion was held on starting work on an IEEE 802 joint input on
IMT-Advanced Technology. This had been discussed originally in the
London meeting. As I reported at the closing EC meeting there was
discussion on this and some felt that it would be too difficult to do,
that it would be better for IEEE 802 to submit multiple technology
inputs. As chair I closed off the discussions and reported last Friday
that will continue later, probably in November.
Any such joint technology input would not need to be a single air
interface as the total IMT-Advanced solution. There seems to be the
opportunity to allow for different IEEE 802 technologies to have
specific roles in IMT-Advanced. In the development of the current
IMT-2000 technologies only air interfaces were suggested and adopted.
IEEE 802 has the possibility to develop a complete end-to-end solution.
Therefore I would suggest an amendment to Carl's motion to replacement
"requirements" with "technology". I feel that is an excellent
opportunity for IEEE 802 to have a serious impact on IMT-Advanced.
Regards,
Mike
-----Original Message-----
From: ***** IEEE 802 Executive Committee List *****
[mailto:STDS-802-SEC@ieee.org] On Behalf Of Shellhammer, Steve
Sent: Tuesday, July 24, 2007 11:54
To: STDS-802-SEC@listserv.ieee.org
Subject: Re: [802SEC] EC Motion - RE: [802SEC] Update to EC on
IMT-Advanced
Roger,
I believe that Carl wants to ensure that all the working groups
work together with 802.18 to prepare a unified submission from IEEE 802
to the ITU. I believe that Mike has a goal of finishing this work by
the November Plenary at which point is can be voted on by the EC. So I
believe he wants to resolve this issue well before the next Plenary. So
it sees that an electronic ballot would be required since waiting until
November would be too late. Carl and Mike can elaborate in more detail
themselves in case I did not touch on all the main points.
Regards,
Steve
-----Original Message-----
From: ***** IEEE 802 Executive Committee List *****
[mailto:STDS-802-SEC@ieee.org] On Behalf Of Roger B. Marks
Sent: Monday, July 23, 2007 5:42 PM
To: STDS-802-SEC@listserv.ieee.org
Subject: Re: [802SEC] EC Motion - RE: [802SEC] Update to EC on
IMT-Advanced
Carl,
I don't understand the nature of your proposal. Are you proposing an
Electronic Ballot, under 7.1.3.4? If so, then you should address the
terms specified in 7.1.3.4: "At times, it may become necessary for the
EC to render a decision that cannot be made prior to the close of one
plenary but must be made prior to the opening of the following plenary.
Such decisions may be made using electronic balloting."
Considering that the next ITU-R meeting on this topic is scheduled for
January 2008, what is it about this issue that the EC needs to decide
before the November plenary?
I'm also confused by the content of your suggestion. That's because the
existing P&P includes a subclause (14.2) with a detailed procedure to
cover the issue. We've used that procedure many times.
Are you saying it is inadequate in this case? Is there an aspect of the
existing procedure that raises your concern about "individual WGs...
presenting individual, potentially differing, inputs to ITU-R"?
And are you suggesting that your motion would override the existing
procedure in 14.2?
Regards,
Roger
On Jul 23, 2007, at 04:32 PM, greenspana@BELLSOUTH.NET wrote:
> I'd be happy to second Carls' motion if no one has beaten me to it.
>
> Arnie
>>
>> From: "Carl R. Stevenson" <wk3c@wk3c.com>
>> Date: 2007/07/22 Sun PM 06:58:21 EDT
>> To: "'Michael Lynch'" <mjlynch@NORTEL.COM>, <STDS-802-
>> SEC@listserv.ieee.org>
>> Subject: [802SEC] EC Motion - RE: [802SEC] Update to EC on IMT-
>> Advanced
>>
>> Dear Mike and other fellow EC members,
>>
>> I believe that there is no appropriate course other than to develop a
>> joint IEEE 802 input on IMT-Advanced requirements.
>>
>> To allow individual WGs to deliver individual inputs to this work
>> would present differing, and likely conflicting, views. To do so
>> would only cause confusion and give the impression that IEEE 802
>> "doesn't have its act together." This would be "a bad thing" because
>> it would diminish our credibility and influence in these important
>> matters.
>>
>> Thus, I make the following EC motion:
>>
>> Moved: That IEEE 802 and its interested WGs continue to work under
>> the auspices of the IEEE 802.18 RR-TAG to develop a single joint
>> input to the work of ITU-R on IMT-Advanced, and that individual WGs
>> be prohibited by the EC from presenting individual, potentially
>> differing, inputs to ITU-R on this topic.
>>
>> Is there a second?
>>
>> Regards,
>> Carl
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: owner-stds-802-sec@ieee.org [mailto:owner-stds-802-
>> sec@ieee.org] On Behalf Of Michael Lynch
>> Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2007 2:42 PM
>> To: STDS-802-SEC@listserv.ieee.org
>> Subject: [802SEC] Update to EC on IMT-Advanced
>>
>> Dear EC,
>>
>> Attached is a report from 802.18 to update the status of the work on
>> IMT-Advanced.
>>
>> Please note that the work on developing a further joint IEEE 802
>> input on IMT-Advanced requirements will continue beginning in
>> September.
>>
>> Also note that no decision was taken on developing a joint IEEE
>> 802 input on
>> IMT-Advanced technology. While it was discussed at the Tuesday
>> evening meeting it was not possible to take a decision at that time.
>> Hopefully that can be addressed at the November plenary.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Mike
>>
>> +1.972.814.4901 Mobile
>>
>> <<18-07-0065-00-0000_EC_IMT_Advanced_Update.ppt>>
>>
>> ----------
>> 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.
>>
>
> ----------
> 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.
----------
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.