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

RE: Letter to be filed at the FCC for comments on NPRM

I don't have a problem discussing the NPRM with HomeRF, showing our
support for open-discussions in the eyes of the industdry and the FCC.
If the HomeRF agrees to meet with 802.11 at the September meeting, we'll
capture the dialogue in the minutes and post it on the IEEE web site as
public information.

However, I don't believe (we) 802.11 should prolong the letter to the
FCC. It's clear 802.11 has a position and HomeRF has another.

I support option 1, listed below, stating that IEEE 802.11 send the
letter to the FCC as is. 

Jim.....This morninging Vic, Stuart and myself had a teleconference call
at 11AM eastern time  to discuss the NPRM -WBFH and concluded that we
send the letter to the FCC as is. 

We can always send a revised letter in later .11 sees a need to do so.
Besides, we need to put the WBFH issue to rest so the 802.11 working can
focus on the 2nd part of the NPRM...the processing gain test. We'll need
most of the September meeting to discuss this and resolve this issue.

Jim, maybe we schedule a conference call with the 802.11 officers and
yourself this week to discuss this further.  Please let us know your

Al Petrick

-----Original Message-----
From: Jim Carlo []
Sent: Monday, August 16, 1999 3:14 PM
To: James Zyren; Vic Hayes; Al Petrick
Cc: Ian Gifford; IEEE802
Subject: Letter to be filed at the FCC for comments on NPRM

I had asked that Ian Gifford to pass-on the FCC draft letter to Ben
Manny at
the HomeRF and he received the following response.

What response should IEEE 802.11 provide?

1) Just send the letter as-approved to the FCC. The due date is end of

2) Meet with HomeRF at the September Rosa interim meeting and discuss
HomeRF the issues and then send letter to the FCC (I am sure the SEC
approve this).

It is my belief that the stature of IEEE 802.11 will have much stronger
status with the FCC if IEEE is seen as facilitating discussions between
different factions. At the very least we should be prepared to meet with
HomeRF and discuss the FCC response.

Jim Carlo( Cellular:1-214-693-1776
TI Fellow, Networking Standards at Texas Instruments
Chair, ISO/IEC JTC1/SC6 Telecom and Info Exchange Between Systems
Chair, IEEE802 LAN/MAN Standards Committee

-----Original Message-----
From: Manny, Ben []
Sent: Monday, August 16, 1999 1:42 PM
To: 'Gifford, Ian C.'
Cc: Jim Carlo (E-mail) (E-mail)
Subject: RE: Letter to be files at the FCC for comments on NPRM

Thanks for getting back to me on having the HomeRF working group answer
questions and address concerns regarding the Wide band FH NPRM reflected
the draft FCC letter that was attached.  Based on the objections raised
the letter, I believe the most effective why to work through them would
for our technical committee to participate in the IEEE 802 review of the
letter that you indicate below.  How is this review being done?  Will
be a teleconf. or meeting to review comments that are received on the
proposed letter?  Will the letter be reviewed on voted on at the
IEEE meeting in Santa Rosa?   We can provide written comments to the
but would like an opportunity to explain these comments to the
IEEE members or at least know how the comments will be considered by
		Best regards,