" and clearly acknowledge that other technologies have different
and conflicting and/or competing interests" - this is speculation.
I oppose its inclusion in our response.
IMHO, If other technologies have different or competing
interests, it is up to them to represent those interests in
their own response.
Rich, Bob, Roger and All,
The guidance I received from Gordon Day, the chair of the
IEEE Global Public Policy Committee, yesterday is as follows:
"If 802 or SA is to submit a response to the NOI, I think
that, at a minimum, the document must prominently state that it
is responding only from the perspective of 802's technical
domain (appropriately described) and clearly acknowledge that
other technologies have different and conflicting and/or
competing interests. It can't be seen as a position
representing all of IEEE."
I consider Gordon's recommendation an editorial change and
recommend we include language to that effect in the opening
Introduction section. Bob and Roger, since you'll be working on
wording tweaks today, please add the language. Also, add a
signature from me as the 802 LMSC Chairman. Thank you.
Regards,
--Paul
------ Original Message ------
Cc:
Sent: 9/19/2017 12:47:59 AM
Subject: Re: [802SEC] +++10 day ECM (early close)+++ FCC NOI
Response
I would appreciate it. Paul wants unanimity.
----------
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.