-----Original
Message-----
From:
owner-stds-802-mobility@ieee.org [mailto:owner-stds-802-mobility@ieee.org]On Behalf Of Gal, Dan (Dan)
Sent: Wednesday, February 23, 2005
3:28 PM
To: STDS-802-MOBILITY@listserv.ieee.org
Subject: [802-20-GENERAL:] IEEE
802.20 Technology Selection Process Discussion
All,
In the January 2005 802.20 interim
meeting we have discussed the revised TSP (Technology Selection Procedure)
contribution http://grouper.ieee.org/groups/802/20/Contribs/C802.20-04-72r1.doc* and have identified several
key issues that we wanted to discuss further via email.
* Note: In fact, the later version (attached herewith) -
C802.20-04-72r3 - should have been posted there instead.
The
issues are:
1. SRD-Compliance: How should we deal with a
technology proposal (TP) that is NOT FULLY COMPLIANT with the 802.20 SRD?
Should
we -
a. Reject it or
b. Provisionally accept it and require compliance after revisions
and consolidation with other TPs, or
c. Agree on redefining COMPLIANCE as meeting or exceeding some TBD
subset of the SRD requirements, or
d. Revisit the SRD, if no TP is fully compliant, and amend the
appropriate requirements (i.e., "lower the bar"), or
e. Accept all TPs without regard to their SRD-compliance status
and let the 802.20 working group select the best proposal.
2. Voting Style: What should be the
elimination criteria in the down-selection rounds?
Note 1:
The down-select rounds should start only after the TP
revisions-and-consolidations stage is complete.
Note 2:
Each TP shall be voted on separately. Voters can vote for each TP if they
wish.
Note
3: The objective of the down-select rounds is to vote the top-two
TPs; the winning TP shall be selected in the final-round.
The down-select criteria should be -
a. A TP would require 25% or more votes in order to be considered in the
next down-select round, or
b. A TP would require 50% or more votes in order to be considered in the next
down-select round, or
c. A TP would require 75% or more votes in order to be considered in the next
down-select round, or
d. The TP that gets the least amount of votes is eliminated without regard to
the percentage of the votes.
3. Voting Style: What should be the
criteria for selection of the winning TP in the final round?
Note 1: In the final round, the winning TP shall be selected among
the remaining two TPs.
Note 2: In the final round, each voter can vote one time only,
i.e., she/he can vote (or abstain) for either TP.
The winning TP is -
a. The TP that gets the most votes (without regard to minimum voting
percentage).
b. The TP that gets the most votes and must receive at least
75% of the eligible members' votes.
4. Sunset Rule: What should happen if no
TP gets 75% support (assuming option 3(b) is
adopted)?
a. Solicit more support and revote until
a 75% majority is reached, and, if unsuccessful, rescind the 802.20 PAR, or
b. Make any required revisions in the TPs and vote one last time. If the
support for either TP is still less than 75%, rescind the 802.20 PAR.
How to contribute
to this discussion:
1.
Please insert your concise
comments inline with the original text and,
also add your name, as shown in the following example.
2.
To avoid the automatic insertion of the >> symbols
typically associated with a REPLY email, edit the received email and send it
back using the FORWARD* method.
* forward your
response to STDS-802-MOBILITY@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Example:
4. Sunset Rule: What
should we do if no TP gets 75% support (assuming 3(b) is adopted)?
a.
Solicit more support and revote until a 75% majority is reached, and, if unsuccessful,
rescind the 802.20 PAR, or
b. Make appropriate revisions in the TPs (TBD by the WG) and vote one last
time. If the support is still less than 75%, rescind the 802.20 PAR.
[John Wayne]: comment or suggestion
[Sara Lee]: comment or suggestion
etc.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regards,
Dan Gal
dgal@lucent.com