Forwarding to
the EC list.
So far, I have
received one response from Adrian, suggesting that the text
on executive session documents is not needed (see below).
Are there any
other comments?
Thanks,
Dorothy
From:
Stanley, Dorothy
Sent: Wednesday, May 25, 2016 1:18 AM
To: ***** IEEE 802 Executive Committee List *****
<STDS-802-SEC@ieee.org> (STDS-802-SEC@ieee.org)
Subject: FW: Input required: March 2016 Item 4.01
Action item / was RE: EC Action Items
Forwarding to
EC list.
From:
Stanley, Dorothy
Sent: Monday, May 23, 2016 7:04 AM
To: 'John D'Ambrosia'; 'John Lemon'; James Gilb;
'Roger B. Marks'; 'Pat Thaler';
adrian.p.stephens@intel.com;
'***** IEEE 802 Executive Committee List *****'
Cc: 'Paul Nikolich'
Subject: Input required: March 2016 Item 4.01
Action item / was RE: EC Action Items
All,
Please see the
discussion and draft policy text for the Item 4.01 Action
item below.
The draft
policy text is based on a set of assumptions on the
underlying requirements.
Discussion
please on the underlying requirements, and then the text can
be refined as needed.
Thank you,
Dorothy Stanley
========================
Response
to EC Action Item 4.01
Item
4.01 Action Item - Dorothy Stanley to draft
policy language regarding submission of documents that will
be considered by the EC, including location on Mentor.
Discussion:
a.
Discussion from the EC meeting minutes is
below.
4.01
DT Requiring submission of documents to EC to be submitted
to Mentor Stephens 5 01:45 PM
Concerns
raised for and against placing the files on Mentor.
Discussions about time availability of pages, when writing
policy, it needs to be written in such a fashion that it
doesn’t impact executive sessions. Discussion of what
portion of the EC part of Mentor.
b.
(from Adrian):The point of the agenda item was
to ask for all docs brought to an EC meeting to be on
mentor, noting that currently some are on the 802 web
server, and have no identifying DCN.
c.
(Observation from Adrian): The sentiment of the
discussion on the topic (2016-03-18) was positive to have
this constraint, but undecided as to whether the location
should be ec-docs, or allow references to WG areas.
d.
(Observation from Dorothy): I also recall the
following from the discussion:
i. Prefer no required document duplication
Additional
input requested:
The draft policy language below assumes
“a/b/c/d” (in list below) answers are
“shall/shall/should/should”.
a.
Document availability (e.g. posted at all
anywhere)? Presumed “shall” except for exec session
b.
Document notification (require notification
prior to discussion). Presumed “shall”
c.
Uniform location for all documents? Presumed
“should” as long as posted.
Is this
a “shall?
d.
DCN provided for all documents? Presumed
“should” as long as posted.
Is this
a “shall?
e.
What are the practices for executive session
documents?
Draft
policy language (v0.1):
Prior
to EC consideration,
-
Documents
(excepting documents for consideration during executive
session) shall be posted on the document server (mentor)
in the EC area. When a document already exists in a WG
or other document server area, an email notification of
the link to the document shall be provided to the EC.
-
Documents
for consideration during executive session shall be sent
to EC and any other required participants as appropriate
for each document.
Draft
policy language (v0.2 ):
Prior
to EC consideration,
-
Documents
(excepting documents for consideration during executive
session) shall be posted on the document server (mentor)
in the EC area. When a document already exists in a WG
or other document server area, an email notification of
the link to the document shall be provided to the EC.
-
Documents
for consideration during executive session shall be
sent to EC and any other required participants as
appropriate for each document.
Draft
policy language (v0.25 alternate, include a note to
address executive session documents):
Prior
to EC consideration,
-
Documents
(excepting documents for consideration during executive
session) shall be posted on the document server (mentor)
in the EC area. When a document already exists in a WG
or other document server area, an email notification of
the link to the document shall be provided to the EC.
-
Documents
for consideration during executive session shall be
sent to EC and any other required participants as
appropriate for each document.
Note that documents for consideration during executive
session are sent to EC and any other required
participants as appropriate for each document.
-
All,
Below
are action items from March Sessions. I will need to update
EC at June teleconference. Please provide updates.
John
March
Opening –
Item
5.131 John Lemon to work with John Goldberg to clarify
steps in process to withdraw 802.17 standard.
Item
5.141 Gilb to implement text of Chair’s Interpretation
documented on Slide #6 into the Chair’s Guidelines
Item
5.141 Gilb / D’Ambrosia to provide text for
responsibility of maintaining CSDs for recording secretary
Item
5.144 Chair delegated future negotiations of “Get
IEEE802” to Roger Marks
Item
5.144 D’Ambrosia to update location of GetIEEE on 802
Website.
Item
5.144 D’Ambrosia to send note to reflector with URL
location of
agreement.
Item
5.46 D’Ambrosia - put indemnification policy on 802
website.
March
Closing –
Item
3.00 Action Item – Thaler to recommend policy
regarding putting items on consent agenda for June
Teleconference, including policies regarding notification
(agenda versus reflector notification).
Item
4.01 Action Item - Dorothy Stanley to draft
policy language regarding submission of documents that will
be considered by the EC, including location on Mentor.
Item
7.011 Action Item – Stephens to CC Nikolich on 3GPP
liaison
Item
8.041 Action Item – Thaler to report at June
teleconference on the remote technology and associated cost.
----------
This email is sent from the 802 Executive Committee email
reflector. This list is maintained by Listserv.