Re: [802SEC] +++ 10-day EC Email Ballot +++ EC motion for 15.4q conditional approval
James
LInk to the package I circulated before the call is
https://mentor.ieee.org/802.15/dcn/15/15-15-0458-01-004q-15-4q-sponsor-ballot-conditional-approval-package.pptx.
Also please see my embedded comments below.
Regards
Bob
At 04:40 PM 6/11/2015 -0700, James P. K. Gilb wrote:
Bob
As it is conditional approval, can you provide a link to the
package?
Also, on the call, it seemed like the set of unsatisfied comments
provided by the TG only included those that were rejected. A
comment is unsatisfied, even if accepted or revised, unless the voter
says it is satisfied.
That is true of
those that are shown doc 457, all comments are in the consolidated doc
455.
To simplify the TGs work, only my last set of comments are unsatisfied,
the ones in the prior ballots are fine. I have been meaning to get
a ruling from ProCom on a disapprove voter that submits comments in
multiple ballots, but it is not at the top of my list. (Are all of the
comments still valid? Or do the new ones take precedence?).
Thank-you
Also, did the ballot resolution committee update the ballot resolutions
for any of the comments? It repeated
the reasoning for prior rejections if that qualifies as an
update.
Multiple (at least 18) rejected comment was given the reason
"Rejected, Editorial comment will be deferred to sponsor ballot and
please re-submit at sponsor ballot."
I am pretty sure that is not a correct rejection reason as the ballot
group cannot defer a comment to Sponsor ballot. A voter may choose
to withdraw the comment (this seems to be acceptable to RevCom, yet there
is nothing in the rules regarding this), but the TG cannot defer it.
As you pointed out in an earlier
email, a better resolution would have been " The draft will be
professionally edited prior to publication". What is more, it
is also true, giving the same (or similar) end result even if we did not
ensure we repeat these editorials in the sponsor (which we
will).
I think the BRC is scheduled to meet soon, they could update the
resolutions to conform to RevCom criteria (our WG ballots, by the IEEE
802 P&P, adopt the Sponsor ballot rules).
Finally, the summary of unsatisfied comments, in addition to not having
all the comments from the unresolved no voters, doesn't have line number,
clause numbers or page numbers, so it is hard to reconcile with the
draft.
Thanks
James Gilb
On 06/11/2015 03:49 PM, Bob Heile wrote:
All-
I consulted with Paul after the EC Telecon last week and he suggested
I
do two things, one being to cancel and reform the sponsor ballot
pool
for 15.4q, which seemed to be the principal objection, and after
that
was underway, to conduct an EC email ballot re-seeking the
conditional
approval, which he authorized me to conduct when ready. Based on
the
call discussion, I had already decided the pool needed to be
reformed.
That is in process. The original ballot pool has been terminated and
a
new invitation started. The invitation is scheduled to close on
June 20
23:59 et. A notification email was sent to the old pool indicating
that
if they still had interest they would need to sign up again and to
not
ignore the invitation. I am hoping that will help avoid any
surprises.
Assuming the current in process recirculation within the WG is
successful, the Task Group could pick up a full month in its
schedule.
While this does not seem to save that much time, it could over time
and
it is an important milestone. I am expecting a lively sponsor
ballot so
the sooner we get started the better. Your support would be
much
appreciated.
To wit:
802.15 moves that the EC grant conditional approval to submit
802.15.4q
draft D5.0 to Sponsor Ballot.
moved by Bob Heile
seconded by Clint Chaplin
Start of ballot: 2015-06-11
Close of ballot: 2015-06-21, 23:59 UTC-12
Early close: As required in subclause 4.1.2 'Voting rules' of the
IEEE
802 LAN/MAN Standards Committee (LMSC) Operations Manual, this is
notice
that, to ensure the release is provided in a timely manner, this
ballot
may close early once sufficient responses are received to clearly
decide
a matter.
Sufficient responses to clearly decide this matter will be based on
the
required majority for a motion under subclause 7.1.1 'Actions
requiring
approval by a majority vote' item (h), 'Other motions brought to
the
floor by members (when deemed in order by the Sponsor Chair)' of
the
IEEE 802 LAN/MAN Standards Committee (LMSC) Policies and
Procedures.
Regards
Bob
Bob Heile, Ph.D
Director of Standards, Wi-SUN Alliance
Chair, IEEE 802.15 Working Group on Wireless Specialty Networks
Chair IEEE 2030.5 Working Group for Smart Energy Profile 2
Co-Chair IEEE P2030 Task Force 3 on Smartgrid Communications
11 Robert Toner Blvd, Suite 5-301
North Attleboro, MA 02763 USA
Mobile: +1-781-929-4832
email: bheile@ieee.org
----------
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.
Bob Heile, Ph.D
Director of Standards, Wi-SUN Alliance
Chair, IEEE 802.15 Working Group on Wireless Specialty Networks
Chair IEEE 2030.5 Working Group for Smart Energy Profile 2
Co-Chair IEEE P2030 Task Force 3 on Smartgrid Communications
11 Robert Toner Blvd, Suite 5-301
North Attleboro, MA 02763 USA
Mobile: +1-781-929-4832
email: bheile@ieee.org
----------
This email is sent from the 802 Executive Committee email reflector. This list is maintained by Listserv.