Thread Links Date Links
Thread Prev Thread Next Thread Index Date Prev Date Next Date Index

Re: [STDS-802-16] Is it in scope for the current all for comments of the Maintenance TG?

Dear Roland,

Thanks for raising this question.  I know there are others who would like to
submit comments in order to fix additional errors or ambiguities that have
been discovered, and have a similar question as to what to do with them.
There are a number of options available:

1) If you feel that your comments and/or contributions are relevant as reply
comments to one or more comments in 80216maint-04_09.USR in the current call
for comments, then submit them as such. Your particular contributions, I
would say, are not entirely relevant to comment #304 in
2) A primary intent of the Call for Comments on the Working Document is to
see that the resolved comments from the last meeting were implemented
correctly in the working document.  But I appreciate the need to clean up
the baseline document.  I will not reject comments on new corrections in the
call for comments on the working document.  However, the priority will be
given at the next meeting to first resolve the Reply Comments to
80216maint-04_09.USR, then the comments on the working document specifically
to implementation of the resolved comments, and lastly new comments for
additional corrections. In the worst case that we don't get to the last set
of comments, you can fall back on the next option.
3)The other option you have is to submit your comments for corrections
during the Working Group Letter Ballot.

I hope this answers your question,

-----Original Message-----
From: MUENZNER, Roland []
Sent: Tuesday, January 11, 2005 1:39 PM
To: 'Jonathan Labs'
Subject: Is it in scope for the current all for comments of the
Maintenance TG?

Dear Jonathan,

during the last 802.16 meeting our two .16e comments #1081 and #1629 on
timing and frequency accuracy in OFDM as well as OFDMA (referring to
contributions have been
rejected as being a corrigenda issue. Thereby TGe consensus was to suggest
these comments for acceptance in the maintenance TG.

Looking on the current call for reply comments of the Maintenance TG, I
would like to ask you whether it is appropriate to submit these two comments
for the Corrigenda in the current call for comments or if they would be
ruled out of scope.
Note that comment #304 in 80216maint-04_09.USR already refers to
which is addressed in C80216e-04_470 whereas no comment in the database
refers to 8.3.12 which is addressed in C80216e-04_469.

Thank you very much in advance for your help.

Best regards


Dr. Roland Münzner
Research & Innovation
Alcatel SEL, Dept. ZFZ/A
Holderäckerstr. 35
D-70499 Stuttgart
Phone +49-(0)711-821-40925
Fax +49-(0)711-821-32453
e-mail <>

-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: Roger B. Marks [mailto:r.b.marks@IEEE.ORG]
Gesendet am: Mittwoch, 15. Dezember 2004 18:13
Betreff: [STDS-802-16] Call for Reply Comments regarding Maintenance
Task Group

This note is a Call for Reply Comments regarding the Comment Report at:

Note that many of the comments already include replies. We are
seeking additional input in the form of specific proposed comment
resolutions, in the form that can be adopted when the TG meets at
Session #35. In other words, we aren't just asking for your thoughts;
we are asking you to draft specific text that can be used by the Task
Group as resolutions of the comments and as reasons for the
resolutions. Such draft text should allow the TG to move more quickly
through the comment resolution process.

The deadline of Thursday 13 January 2005 AOE
<>. The instructions are below.

Keep in mind that some of these comments may yet be ruled out of
scope. You are welcome to suggest this in your reply comments.


To create and submit reply comments:

(1) Obtain Commentary <>, if you
don't have it.

(2) Unzip the Comment Report to get a ".USR" file, which will open in

(3) Read the comments in Commentary. When you want to respond to a
comment, check the "Marked" box at the top of that record. Then fill
out the following fields:

Recommendation by:
Proposed Resolution:
Reason for Recommendation:

You are justified in recommending rejection on grounds of
incompleteness or lack of a specific change request.

(4) When you are finished entering replies, look under Scripts and
choose "Find Marked Records". This will find the records for which
you checked the "Marked" box. Only the found records will be exported
in Step (5). Don't include records on which you have no reply comment.

(5) Under Scripts, choose "Export Clause Editor's Proposals". Choose
the file type "FileMaker Pro Runtime Files". Enter a file name of the
form "Maint_reply_Name.USR", where "Name" is your name.

(6) Upload the exported file to <>.

Dr. Roger B. Marks  <> +1 303 497 7837
National Institute of Standards and Technology/Boulder, CO, USA
Chair, IEEE 802.16 Working Group on Broadband Wireless Access