Re: [802SEC] Proposed P&P Revision Ballot titled 'P&P Revision Process'
I vote disapprove. I think the changes the LMSC approves each plenary
session should be given some sort of formal status ('approved but
pending'?)at the close of the plenary session, even if they don't become
effective at that time. I don't like the ambiguity associated with how long
it will take the aforementioned 'approved but pending' P&P revisions to be
Audcom approved and posted. I also think 802 should be responsible for at
least keeping a link on its website which takes a user to the audcom website
which then serves up the approved 802 P&P.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Sherman, Matthew J. (US SSA)" <matthew.sherman@BAESYSTEMS.COM>
Sent: Friday, July 20, 2007 12:37 PM
Subject: [802SEC] Proposed P&P Revision Ballot titled 'P&P Revision Process'
Sorry to spring this at the last minute, but it should be obvious that
our current P&P revision process is in conflict with requirements of the
IEEE-SA Standards Board Operation Manual. While the SBOM takes
precedence, we still should update our P&P to be consistent.
The attached revision ballot is fairly short, and addresses this issue.
It also leaves open the possibility of further improving our revision
process based on interactions with AudCom, or other concerns from EC
Let me know if you have any comments.
Matthew Sherman, Ph.D.
BAE Systems - Network Systems (NS)
Office: +1 973.633.6344
Cell: +1 973.229.9520
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.