Instead of waiting to publish more refined notes from our discussion this afternoon, I will share the list captured in its raw form below. Feel free to revise as appropriate. Thank you for your time and contributions. Next meeting is scheduled for 1-2pm ET Tuesday 19 January 2021. Have a great holiday season all.
1.Specify what problem(s) we are
trying to solve:
discuss
and
enumerate
1.3 time/year
PAR
submission
limitation
vs value of review
2.Identify the benefit/services 802
provides
3.What service
does
the
802
EC
provide
and
what
is
the
cost
of
providing
it?
4.PAR review is valuable, 3 times per
year
is
too
infrequent,
6
times
per
year
is
better
5.802 EC should provide more
technical oversight or coordination between WGs&TAGs,
draft
PAR
review
provides
this
to
a
degree,
this is one of the benefits the 802 EC provides, perhaps we should formalize
technical coordination?, e.g., IETF example,
6.Potential Values:
competent
technical review, training for new groups, ensure process is followed to avoid
appeals/delays, what we do should be closely aligned to the SASB calendar,
e.g., NesCom and RevCom
deadlines,
7.Efficiency gains wrt
rules, e.g., need for face to face mtg requirements, registration rqmts,
gaining
voting membership, look for a shift from FtF
meetings to online meetings, perhaps FtF
meeting become more social than necessary to complete work
8.Support
technical coherence/coordination.
Comparing to other societies, 802 provides value as a family
9.Need to be able to initiate and
complete a stds
project within a 2.5 year time frame, because it is essential to the success of
the std, allow participants to gain membership at electronic meetings, permit
more frequent meetings to gain membership
10.There is
redundancy
in
the
above
list.
802 has
outside
of
the
formulating
group reviewers, this
provided better review, built in set of naïve readers. A new project brings in new participants that
want to make quick progress, but the 802 EC has a broader, long range
perspective that helps fit the process better.
Quality – what we have is a loose confederation that enables us to form
systems of value over time, e.g., operational technology networks/factory
automation is occurring, going towards 802 wired/wireless/TSN technologies.
11. We
discussed cost/benefit analysis, but we now have monthly EC meetings which has
raised the cost of EC participation. We talk about the value of 802, 802 has
become the General Motors of networking, which brings significant brand value
to networking. Perhaps we need to split
the larger WGs into smaller WGs?
To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-SEC list, click the following link: https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-SEC&A=1