RE: stds-802-mobility: March agenda
I'd like to support the decision to start the 802.20 plenary after the
joint plenary.
Best,
-Arak
At 12:59 PM 2/24/2004 -0800, Thomas Kolze wrote:
>Jerry, colleagues,
>
>I prefer continuing with the policy we at 802.20 decided upon months ago,
>and practiced in Vancouver: we should conduct the 802.20 plenary after the
>joint wireless plenary.
>
>I feel it would be inappropriate for you to change this decision and
>practice of the group, at this time.
>
>With all respect for our colleagues, and I encourage all to speak their
>opinions and wishes, as you have indeed requested, but I do not see how a
>true "sense of the group" can be collected now, to justify changing the
>starting time of our plenary. There is less than a month to go!
>
>It is an additional matter of concern, for me at least, that the starting
>time for our plenary is being suggested to move EARLIER. How could any
>majority of the group members, regardless of how sizable, move the meeting
>to an EARLIER time, on short notice, if even ONE member is not heard from
>and in agreement? How is it fair to move UP the starting time of the
>plenary, by any non-unanimous majority? Again, I feel it would be
>especially inappropriate for you to move the start time of the 802 plenary
>to an earlier time; this would have an especially bad appearance for a
>Chair, in overturning the direction and practice previously selected by the
>group. My opinion.
>
>Finally, for those interested in the wireless PARs, and possibly other
>activities and concerns of the 802 wireless groups, it seems to me more
>efficient to attend the wireless opening plenary, and use the occasion to
>ask questions, and coordinate, than to blow off the meeting and try to
>coordinate in a more ad hoc manner. I think the two-hour opening plenary
>should be a priority, and be utilized, by those greatly interested in the
>wireless PARs. Of course, there are many reasons for interest in the
>wireless plenary, and it is not my position here to weight one more than any
>other. It IS my opinion that moving up our 802.20 plenary is inappropriate
>at this time.
>
>Sincerely,
>
>Thomas J. Kolze, Ph.D.
>
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-stds-802-mobility@majordomo.ieee.org
>[mailto:owner-stds-802-mobility@majordomo.ieee.org] On Behalf Of Steve
>Crowley
>Sent: Tuesday, February 24, 2004 11:29 AM
>To: 'Robert D. Love'; 'Jerry Upton'; stds-802-mobility@ieee.org
>Subject: RE: stds-802-mobility: March agenda
>
>
>I prefer keeping the original 4 pm time for the opening 802.20 plenary.
>Since 802.20 was formed, I think I have attended all of the joint wireless
>plenary meetings, as well as many 802.11 closing plenary meetings on Friday.
>Though I spend most of my time in 802.20, I am interested in what is
>happening in all other 802 wireless groups. I find those two meetings to be
>useful for getting a sense of where things stand, and for exchanging
>information with participants from other groups.
>
>Regards,
>
>Steve Crowley
>
>-------
>Steven J. Crowley, P.E.
>1201 Pennsylvania Ave., N.W. Suite 300
>Washington, D.C. 20004
>
>Tel. +1-202-544-5400
>Fax +1-202-478-1763
>
>E-mail scrowley@attglobal.net
>
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-stds-802-mobility@majordomo.ieee.org
> > [mailto:owner-stds-802-mobility@majordomo.ieee.org] On Behalf
> > Of Robert D. Love
> > Sent: Tuesday, February 24, 2004 9:51 AM
> > To: Jerry Upton; stds-802-mobility@ieee.org
> > Subject: Re: stds-802-mobility: March agenda
> >
> >
> > All, whether you are for or against moving the opening 802.20
> > plenary at 1:00pm rather than at 4:00pm, please make your
> > preference known by a quick email to this reflector if you
> > haven't already done so. Dawn needs to know what our Monday
> > afternoon meeting room requirements are by this Friday, so
> > Jerry needs to make a decision by then and let Dawn know.
> >