| Thread Links | Date Links | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thread Prev | Thread Next | Thread Index | Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index |
|
Geoff, I agree with the vote dilution that you note with option #1, but a counter issue with #3 that I proposed is that a motivated subset could also sign up and dominate. On balance the consensus at the technical plenary was with the process
we used last time (effectively #1), so that’s what I announced. As an aside, all WGs including 802.1 have a penalty for not voting. One detail is how and if that would apply to #2 and #3 without a new rule, that is why I indicated quorum would be difficult. Anyway, while I thought we had consensus on a way forward, I will join the ad hoc discussion. Cheers, Glenn. From: thompson@ieee.org <thompson@ieee.org> The ad hoc that I agreed (@ Tuesday's EC teleconference) to form is to recommend to the EC and 802.1 (for adoption) a Working Group Balloting Procedure that is appropriate for
the P802 The PAR was approved on 24 Mar 2022 and is posted on MyProject: (downloadable) Listed by IEEE-SA as "P802." Listed by 802.1 as P802-REVc The issue is that this project affects all 802 standards and thus (in my view) should be available for Working Group Ballot to all 802 participants who are voting members of an
802 Working Group. This is in contrast to what would be the conventional practice for an 802.1 revision or draft that would only be voted on by the 802.1 voting membership. I don't believe we can look to IEEE-SA for direct guidance on this as Working Group ballots and balloting procedure are outside their normal scope. The goal of the ad hoc is to come up with a process that requires little or no changes to our rules yet gives each of our voters the opportunity to ballot at the WG level. That
is important because: 1. The earlier in the process that we get material comments, the better. 2. While the Standards Association Ballot allows for sufficient participation, it tends to be too far down the road to be open to real modification of the draft/revision. I am opposed to Glenn's method #1 (see below) as it dilutes the votes of participants from outside of 802.1 in terms of clout in the comment resolution process and the voting
results. I believe that #2 is difficult because it would greatly reduce the level of balloting participation. I believe that this is the normal procedure in 802.1 (as opposed to 802.3 which
has a penalty for not voting), but sudden implementation across 802 resulting in a statistical report of low participation would be a vulnerability that I would like to avoid. Number 3 seems to have the most potential because we can make it mimic SA Ballot procedure. In this context, all 802 voters would be the logical equivalent of those who sign up to be solicited for SA ballots in a particular area (What I will call the "Balloting Pool"). The members of the balloting pool would be invited to be members of the "Ballot Group" i.e. those who are entitled to participate in the WG Ballot on P802-REVc by responding to
the solicitation. The ballot group would be frozen just before the opening of WG ballot. I believe that we can do this under our existing rules. The 802.1 Chair can (under his discretionary power) grant 802.1 voting membership to those who express the wish to join
the ballot group. I believe that this membership should last until the submittal of the draft to RevCom. I further believe that there should be a specific motion at the EC to conduct the P802-REVc balloting under this procedure. This should legitimize the process in case there ever
is an appeal. This procedure should apply to future revisions as well. Whether or not it should apply to 802 amendments is, in my mind, an open question. I would like to place my proposal (enhanced #3) before the adhoc. Membership in the ad hoc is open to members of the EC and WG Vice Chairs by replying to this e-mail. Discussion
will be within the ad hoc, not on the EC reflector. We'll try for discussion and consensus by e-mail. I'll schedule Zoom calls if necessary. Refinements, criticisms and alternative proposals are, of course, welcome. Our output will be a report and a draft motion to the EC. Best regards, Geoff Thompson, Member Emeritus ============================================== On Sep 6, 2022, at 2:50 PMPDT, Glenn Parsons <glenn.parsons@ericsson.com> wrote: Geoff, The options we already discussed in the 802 technical plenary included: 1. Have WG chairs collect comments in their WGs and vote as ex-officio 2. Make all 802 WG voting members, an 802.1 voting member on P802-REVc 3. Make any 802 WG voting member that votes, an 802.1 voting member on P802-REVc 4. Create a new 802.x WG just for this with the appropriate set of voting members I originally proposed #3, but I recall you spoke against it as it was a new process. #2 is a variant on that but it would make quorum very difficult. #4 (another way to do #3)
was viewed as too heavy weight and would show non-confidence in 802.1. #1 is in our process and the way we did it last time (e.g., David collected comments in 802.3 and voted no if there were any no votes - [STDS-802-3] +++ Opportunity to vote in IEEE 802.1
WG BALLOT: IEEE P802-). So #1 is what I announced. Please advise what you will discuss in the ad hoc. Cheers, Glenn. -- Glenn Parsons Chair, IEEE 802.1 WG +1-514-379-9037 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 |