Re: stds-802-mobility: High level agenda is available

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

All,

I am very concerned that the posted agenda still has us muddling along with no likelihood of progress. Specifically, the highest priority task we have at this meeting is closing on the requirements document. We have spent a year on this task and the process we are using to create the document still shows no signs of closure. We have failed utterly by looking at the document as a whole entity and trying to get consensus on what it should contain. I believe the way forward at this point is to look at the document one section at a time and to deal with comments on those sections. After a limited discussion time we need to develop alternative proposals. If any proposal gets a 75% consensus, then we have a requirement for that subclause. If not, we have no requirement. If there is consensus to leave the section open for future proposals we can do that. We need to get through the document and end the March meeting with a set of requirements that is based on votes that show WG consensus.

I believe that we are wasting precious time by waiting for the March meeting to make our comments. We need a posting of the Requirements Draft based on those areas where we have had the greatest group agreement. Unfortunately, with the exception of a few minor areas, most of the statements in the document were never approved by WG vote. Therefore, the present text does NOT represent a "BASE DRAFT". It will take 75% agreement to leave those words as is, or to change them. Otherwise, they get deleted. The comments that we should be dealing with at the meeting should be based on comments against the draft posted on the reflector prior to the meeting. This way, we will not waste one or more days sitting through presentations of material that could instead be posted ahead of the meeting.

I believe we must put pressure on ourselves to review the current draft and post comments to the reflector now, prior to the March meeting. By resolving those comments at the meeting, and voting on each section then, we can produce a requirements document in March. The present plan as reflected in the posted agenda has us continuing to do what we have done for a year. I expect if we take that path, we will get the same result we have gotten for a year, stalemate.

I will be requesting substantial changes in the posted agenda to give us the possibility of making progress this coming meeting.

On a second item unrelated to the first, but related to the schedule, I would like to see elections held during normal meeting hours on Monday afternoon. The IEEE Staff Tutorial can be moved to that evening or some other day. If we have too much work to get through then we should skip the joint meeting for March so that we can have our elections during the normal work day on Monday. As a rule, all of our normal WG business, including elections, should be scheduled during the normal work day. When there isn't enough time during the normal work day to conduct all of our business, we should be scheduling evening meetings for Ad-Hoc groups (as we are already doing) and for special interest presentations.