Re: [802SEC] +++ EC Consent Agenda items - 802.1 +++
John
A few questions:
P802.1X-Rev-D1.4 to Standards Association Ballot - Is D1.4, the revision
we are forwarding the last version balloted?
P802.1Qcx
- Why is there a recirculation ballot?
- Ballot resolution will be by the TSN TG, does the 802.1 WG intend to
empower a comment resolution group (CRG) to make decisions to resolve
comments from the recirculation?
P802.1AS-Rev
- Same question regarding CRG.
- Two of the unsatisfied comments were rejected with: "The commenter
does not point outn any errors in the draft. The suggested changes run
a significant risk of introducing errors in test that has been reviewed
by the committee."
There is no requirement that a comment point out an error in the draft.
A comment can be any requested change to the draft, including changes to
improve it. The commenter states "wouldn't this be better", clearly
indicating that the comment is to improve the draft and implementation.
There is a detailed suggested remedy, for which the committee has not
taken exception, so I would be led to believe that it is adequate to
make a change.
It appears that it is the committee that "did not point out any errors"
in the proposed remedy, but rather they state, without additional
justification, that there is a "significant risk of introducing errors"
Thanks for providing the documents early for review.
James Gilb
-
On 7/17/19 4:02 AM, John Messenger wrote:
Please find at: https://mentor.ieee.org/802-ec/dcn/19/ec-19-0121-00-00EC-802-1-consent-agenda-items-lmsc-closing.pptx
--
John Messenger
Director, Global Standards
ADVA Optical Networking Ltd
ADVAntage Houe, Tribune Way, York YO30 4TN, UK
----------
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.