Re: [802SEC] +++ 10-day EC Email Ballot +++ IEEE 802 Inputs to ITU-R WP5A
Pat,
Thank you for your advice. I'll make the changes and submit with a motion for the 5 day EC ballot. While I will be the mover I expect that either Bruce Kraemer or Bob Heile will second and will contact them shortly. If the ballot starts on the 26th and closes on the 31st it can the documents can still make it to the ITU-R by the deadline on 1st November.
The revised version of 18-10-0067 will be posted soon and the motion sent after that.
Paul,
I presume that you are okay with my proceeding with the ballot.
Regards,
Mike
-----Original Message-----
From: Pat Thaler [mailto:pthaler@broadcom.com]
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2010 17:03
To: MJLynch@mjlallc.com; STDS-802-SEC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: RE: [802SEC] +++ 10-day EC Email Ballot +++ IEEE 802 Inputs to ITU-R WP5A
Removing the first sentence of Source information is necessary but not sufficient. This would need to be clearly marked as a contribution from only IEEE subgroups if it was sent forward without an EC vote.
Regardless of whether this goes forward as 802 subgroup or 802 input, you would have to correct the statements in the Introduction that state that this is IEEE's input to indicate the correct source. In the second paragraph, IEEE in "The IEEE looks forward to..." should also be changed to the correct group.
The second paragraph of Source information would also need changes if this is sent forward under 9.2.2 rather than 9.2.1. "the IEEE 802 Executive Committee would need to be removed from the list of those that approved it and "represents the view of IEEE 802" would need to be deleted.
What day are you counting the 5-day review as having started? The cover letter was uploaded today. It seems like you could get an EC ballot closed within the next 5 days. (If you want to do that, remember to put in the motion that due to the urgency of the decision, the early close provision of 4.1.2.2 will apply. Then you can close the ballot when 2/3 of the EC has voted approve.) If you had the vote, this could be sent forward as an IEEE 802 position and only the Introduction would need to change.
Regards,
Pat
-----Original Message-----
From: MJLynch@mjlallc.com [mailto:MJLynch@mjlallc.com]
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2010 2:46 PM
To: Pat Thaler; STDS-802-SEC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: RE: [802SEC] +++ 10-day EC Email Ballot +++ IEEE 802 Inputs to ITU-R WP5A
Pat,
Thank you for the suggestion. It could go forward as an 802.18 input. Would removing the first sentence of the paragraph titled "Source information" accomplish that?
Regards,
Mike
-----Original Message-----
From: Pat Thaler [mailto:pthaler@broadcom.com]
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2010 16:38
To: MJLynch@mjlallc.com; STDS-802-SEC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: RE: [802SEC] +++ 10-day EC Email Ballot +++ IEEE 802 Inputs to ITU-R WP5A
Mike,
Are these being sent as input from IEEE 802 or from 802.18?
If they are from IEEE 802, a vote with 2/3 approval is required (see 9.2.1 of IEEE 802 LMSC Communication) so we would need a motion.
If they are being sent as IEEE 802.18 inputs, a 5-day EC review is all that is needed. If no EC member makes a motion to block during that time, the statement can be released. If a motion to block is made, the communication is held until the vote on the motion to block. (I don't recall if we have ever had a motion to block - usually any comments have been dealt with without going to that step. I think that the normal majority would apply to a vote to block - that proceeding to release wouldn't require the 2/3 that is required for an IEEE 802 communication.)
Pat
-----Original Message-----
From: ***** IEEE 802 Executive Committee List ***** [mailto:STDS-802-SEC@ieee.org] On Behalf Of MJLynch@mjlallc.com
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2010 1:38 PM
To: STDS-802-SEC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [802SEC] +++ 10-day EC Email Ballot +++ IEEE 802 Inputs to ITU-R WP5A
Roger,
While I have found in my email archives some proposals that differ from the format you have described. I have also found a number that simply seek EC review rather than a ballot.
Based on the remaining time to the ITU-R deadline I am asking the EC's indulgence to propose changing this from an EC ballot to an EC review ending on 30th October.
Pat has asked that the cover letter be included. To accommodate that the responses, with the cover letter, have been uploaded to the RR-TAG Mentor web site as Doc. 18-10-0067.
Regards,
Mike
-----Original Message-----
From: Roger Marks [mailto:r.b.marks@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Roger B. Marks
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2010 13:55
To: MJLynch@mjlallc.com
Cc: STDS-802-SEC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [802SEC] +++ 10-day EC Email Ballot +++ IEEE 802 Inputs to ITU-R WP5A
Mike,
I didn't understand that there was a ballot underway.
Normally, a ballot begins with an announcement with a stated motion, a mover, and a seconder. And normally there is a statement that the ballot has been authorized by the LMSC Chair.
Roger
On 2010/10/25, at 11:25 AM, MJLynch@mjlallc.com wrote:
> Dear EC,
>
> An update on the status of this ballot:
>
> Vote categories: APP DIS ABS DNV
> --------------------------------------------------
> VC Pat Thaler DNV
> VC Mat Sherman DNV
> ES Jon Rosdahl ABS
> RS James Gilb DNV
> TR John Hawkins DNV
> 01 Tony Jeffree DNV
> 03 David Law DNV
> 11 Bruce Kraemer DNV
> 15 Bob Heile DNV
> 16 Roger Marks DNV
> 17 John Lemon DNV
> 18 Mike Lynch APP
> 19 Steve Shellhammer DNV
> 20 Mark Klerer DNV
> 21 Subir Das DNV
> 22 Apurva Mody DNV
> 23 Geoff Thompson DNV
> ---------------------------------------------------
> 17 TOTALS result 01 00 01 15
>
> Please vote. The ballot closes on 29th October. The documents need to be received by CoB, Geneva time, 1st November.
>
> Regards,
>
> Mike
>
> +1.972.814.4901
> mike.lynchieee (Skype)
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ***** IEEE 802 Executive Committee List ***** [mailto:STDS-802-SEC@ieee.org] On Behalf Of MJLynch@mjlallc.com
> Sent: Tuesday, October 19, 2010 11:28
> To: STDS-802-SEC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
> Subject: [802SEC] +++ 10-day EC Email Ballot +++ IEEE 802 Inputs to ITU-R WP5A
>
> Dear EC,
>
> At the Waikoloa interim meeting the RR-TAG received two documents that were jointly authored by 802.11 and 802.15. They provide a response to ITU-R WP5A on activities in 802.11 and 802.15 regarding wireless systems operating in frequency bands around 60 GHz. The original liaison from WP5A was received in June.
>
> Document 18-10-0063 proposes changes to WP5A's "Working Document Towards a Preliminary Draft New Report ITU-R [LMS.MGWS2]". The report will provide the general aspects of Multiple Gigabit Wireless Systems (MGWS) in frequencies around 60 GHz.
>
> Document 18-10-0064 proposes changes to WP5A's "Working Document Towards a Preliminary Draft New Recommendation ITU-R [LMS.MGWS1]". The recommendation will provide the general characteristics and radio requirement aspects of Multiple Gigabit Wireless Systems in frequencies around 60 GHz.
>
> These documents were approved by a vote of 5/0/1. The RR-TAG chair was authorized to develop a cover letter for transmitting these document to WP5A, making edits as needed, and to submit them to the EC for approval.
>
> I propose that the EC ballot period begin today (19th October) and close on 29th October.
>
> Both documents are available at https://mentor.ieee.org/802.18/documents. The WP5A liaison is also available as 18-10-0037.
>
> Regards,
>
> Mike
>
> +1.972.814.4901
> mike.lynchieee (Skype)
>
>
>
>
>
> ----------
> 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.