Re: [802SEC] Teleconference on WG P&P Revision for Friday 11/13 @ 12 noon Eastern Time
Hi Roger,
I will include this on the agenda for tomorrow.
Thanks!
Mat
Matthew Sherman, Ph.D.
Engineering Fellow
BAE Systems - Network Systems (NS)
Office: +1 973.633.6344
Cell: +1 973.229.9520
email: matthew.sherman@baesystems.com
-----Original Message-----
From: Roger Marks [mailto:r.b.marks@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Roger B. Marks
Sent: Thursday, November 12, 2009 7:42 PM
To: Sherman, Matthew J. (US SSA)
Cc: STDS-802-SEC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [802SEC] Teleconference on WG P&P Revision for Friday 11/13 @ 12 noon Eastern Time
Mat,
I would like to introduce contribution ec-09-0004, at:
<https://mentor.ieee.org/802-ec/documents>
Roger
On 2009/11/09, at 05:19 AM, Sherman, Matthew J. (US SSA) wrote:
> All,
>
> This is just a reminder that we will have a teleconference to
> discuss status on the WG P&P revision this Friday @ 12 Noon ET.
> This will of course be followed Sunday by our usual P&P Review
> meeting.
>
> If you have any issues concerning the WG P&P revision please bring
> them (and your proposed resolutions) forward by Friday. If there is
> any redrafting of the revisions required, I'd like to have them done
> by Sunday.
>
> Note that I will be proposing the following change on Friday:
>
> To address the recent concern that WG Chairs should bring vote
> counts for any matters they bring forward for consideration by the
> EC on behalf of their WG I suggest the following be added to Clause
> 3.1.2 of the LMSC OM revision:
>
> "Votes brought to the EC on behalf of a WG or TAG shall include vote
> counts for the approval votes to bring the matter forward to the EC."
>
> In addition, I have a concern about approval of WG Ballots to
> forward Drafts to Sponsor ballot. I feel the current rules are
> ambiguous, and I am concerned that they are substantially different
> than for Sponsor ballot. Currently the Draft WG P&P (9.6) has:
>
> "Approval to forward a draft standard to the Sponsor shall require
> approval by a WG Letter Electronic Ballot. Abstains shall require a
> reason be given, and Do Not Approve votes shall require comments on
> changes required to modify the vote to Approve. For a letter ballot
> on a draft standard to be valid a majority of all the voting members
> of the Committee must have responded Approve, Do Not Approve, or
> Abstain ."
>
> The Process for Sponsor Ballot is as follows (SA SB OM 5.4.3.1):
>
> For a standards ballot to be effective, at least 75% of the ballots
> shall be returned. In the event that a 75%
> return from the balloting group cannot be obtained, the balloting
> process is considered to have failed.
> Further disposition of the document shall be the responsibility of
> the Sponsor. A minimum of 75% of those
> voting affirmative or negative with comment must approve the draft
> in order to submit the ballot result to
> the IEEE-SA Standards Board. In the event that 30% or more of the
> returned ballots are abstentions, the
> ballot shall be considered invalid.
>
> Note that in the WG rules, there is no abstention requirement, and
> the return requirement is lower.... I'm not saying this is wrong,
> but I felt we should revisit it to make sure this is what we intend.
>
> The call in info is the same as previously:
>
> 12 Noon Eastern Time:
> Toll Free Dial In Number: (866)205-4008
> Int'l Access/Caller Paid Dial In Number: (801)886-8167
> ACCESS CODE: 6336344
>
> Regards,
>
>
> Matthew Sherman, Ph.D.
> First Vice Chair, IEEE 802
> Engineering Fellow
> BAE Systems - Electronics, Intelligence, & Support (EI&S)
> Office: +1 973.633.6344
> Cell: +1 973.229.9520
> email: matthew.sherman@baesystems.com<mailto:matthew.sherman@baesystems.com
> >
>
> ----------
> 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.