RE: [802SEC] Re: Request SEC Motion: P1802.16.1/D2 to RevCom+Clarification+
Bob,
The 802 rules specify a 15-day minimum for WG Letter Ballot recircs.
802.16 observes this rule.
However, as I read the 802 rules, the 15-day minimum does not apply
to Sponsor Ballot recircs. I don't think that the 802 rules have
anything to say on this topic.
Roger
At 12:26 PM -0800 03/01/15, Grow, Bob wrote:
>Angela:
>
>LMSC rules still specify a 15 day minimum recirculation ballot.
>
>--Bob
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: a.ortiz@ieee.org [mailto:a.ortiz@ieee.org]
>Sent: Wednesday, January 15, 2003 11:54 AM
>To: Tony Jeffree
>Cc: Grow, Bob; owner-stds-802-sec@majordomo.ieee.org;
>stds-802-sec@ieee.org
>Subject: RE: [802SEC] Re: Request SEC Motion: P1802.16.1/D2 to RevCom
>+Clarification+
>
>
>
>Hello All:
>
>The B-Center has a 10 day minium requirement to conduct a recirculation,
>however, the length of the recirculation depends on the WGC. It can go
>from 10 days up to 30 days if that is the desire of the WGC.
>
>Have a good day!
>
>Angela Ortiz
>Program Manager - Technical Program Development
>__________________________
>IEEE Standards, 445 Hoes Lane,
>Piscataway, NJ 08855-1331 USA
>Telephone: 1732-562-3809 >< Fax: 1732-562-1571
>E-m: a.ortiz@ieee.org >< standards.ieee.org
>
>FOSTERING TECHNOLOGICAL INNOVATION
>
>
>
>
>
> Tony
>Jeffree
> <tony@jeffree.co.uk> To: "Grow,
>Bob" <bob.grow@intel.com>
> Sent by: cc:
><stds-802-sec@ieee.org>
> owner-stds-802-sec@majordom Subject:
>RE: [802SEC] Re: Request SEC Motion: P1802.16.1/D2 to RevCom
>
>o.ieee.org
>
>
>
>
> 01/15/2003 02:41
>PM
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>Bob -
>
>The last Sponsor recirc that I needed to run had a similarly short period -
>
>seems like that is what the balloting service is defaulting to these days.
>
>Regards,
>Tony
>
>At 11:31 15/01/2003 -0800, Grow, Bob wrote:
>
>>Roger:
>>
>>Looks like Mike beat me on the second. I should warn you though I will
>>probably oppose conditional approval for submission to RevCom if you are
>>only allowing 10 days for Sponsor recirculation as outlined on your
>>schedule (based on draft availability, I don't understand why the
>>abreviated ballot time).
>>
>>--Bob
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Mike Takefman [mailto:tak@cisco.com]
>>Sent: Wednesday, January 15, 2003 11:24 AM
>>To: Paul Nikolich
>>Cc: Roger B. Marks; stds-802-sec@ieee.org; stds-802-16@ieee.org
>>Subject: Re: [802SEC] Re: Request SEC Motion: P1802.16.1/D2 to RevCom
>>
>>
>>
>>Second
>>
>>mike
>>
>>Paul Nikolich wrote:
>> >
>> > Roger,
>> >
>> > You'll need someone on the SEC to second the motion first.
>> >
>> > If there is an SEC member that is willing to second the motion, please
>> > indicate that to me and Roger.
>> >
>> > Thank you,
>> >
>> > --Paul
>> >
>> > ----- Original Message -----
>> > From: "Roger B. Marks" <r.b.marks@ieee.org>
>> > To: <p.nikolich@ieee.org>
>> > Cc: <stds-802-sec@ieee.org>; <stds-802-16@ieee.org>
>> > Sent: Wednesday, January 15, 2003 1:56 PM
> > > Subject: Request SEC Motion: P1802.16.1/D2 to RevCom
>> >
>> > > Paul:
>> > >
>> > > I request that the following motion be entered as an SEC email
>ballot:
>> > >
>> > > MOTION: To forward IEEE P1802.16.1/D2-2002 ("Draft Standard for
>> > > Conformance to IEEE Standard 802.16 - Part 1: Protocol Implementation
>> > > Conformance Statements for 10-66 GHz WirelessMAN-SC Air Interface")
>> > > for Sponsor Ballot.
>> > >
>> > > Here is an explanation:
>> > >
>> > > The Working Group Letter Ballot results are clean. 802.16's Letter
>> > > Ballot #9 ("To forward IEEE P1802.16.1/D1-2002 for LMSC Sponsor
>> > > Ballot") ran from 21 Nov to 21 Dec. The results were:
>> > >
>> > > Approve: 41 Disapprove: 0 Approval Ratio: 100% [75% required]
>> > > Abstain: 8 Ballots: 49 Return Ratio: 59% [50% required]
>> > > Comments: 77
>> > >
>> > > Responses were developed by a Ballot Resolution Committee, and
>> > > P1802.16.1/D2 was issued. The comments, responses, and draft were
>> > > subject to 15-day Recirculation Ballot #9a (31 Dec 2002 - 14 Jan
>> > > 2003). No responses were received. Therefore, the ballot is closed
>> > > and final.
>> > >
>> > > For a full report of the Letter Ballot, see
>> > > <http://ieee802.org/16/tgc/C1/ballot09/report9.html>.
>> > >
>> > > I am asking for an email vote instead of waiting until the March
>> > > meeting because I believe that approval will give us an excellent
>> > > chance of making the 14 April RevCom deadline. Here is the schedule:
>> > >
>> > > http://ieee802.org/16/tgc/C1/schedule.html
>> > >
>> > > The Sponsor Ballot Group is already in place.
>> > >
>> > > Thanks,
>> > >
>> > > Roger
>>
>>--
>>Michael Takefman tak@cisco.com
>>Manager of Engineering, Cisco Systems
>>Chair IEEE 802.17 Stds WG
>>2000 Innovation Dr, Ottawa, Canada, K2K 3E8
>>voice: 613-254-3399 cell:613-220-6991
>
>Regards,
>Tony