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

Re: [802SEC] Comment resolution on LMSC P&P ballot titled 'LMSCOrganization'



Having just last year been through the formation of a new WG, I agree
whole-heartedly with Bob's comments and suggestions.  (That's the way we did
it for 802.22 ... We waited until Thu night to have a reasonable number of
meeting slots for the attendees to achieve 75% attendance credit before
having elections.  The earlier part of the week we worked on P&P and other
organizational administrativa, which were all affirmed by the voting members
after the elections.)

Carl
 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Grow, Bob [mailto:bob.grow@INTEL.COM] 
> Sent: Friday, October 21, 2005 7:48 PM
> To: STDS-802-SEC@listserv.ieee.org
> Subject: Re: [802SEC] Comment resolution on LMSC P&P ballot 
> titled 'LMSCOrganization'
> 
> I had interim meeting responsibilities that prevented me 
> joining the call.  While I agree that when the WG is formed 
> is ambiguous, making it explicitly clear that the formation 
> is immediate creates a chicken and egg problem.  A few corner 
> cases to consider (this this either complicates or does 
> nothing to address).
> 
> 7.2.3.1 the initial meeting and membership has been a thorny 
> one with mulitple problems.  I believe thout it attempts to 
> create the WG at the first meeting, not immediately.  With 
> the change you have a WG on PAR approval, but no one is a 
> member of the WG.
> 
> There is no stipulation that the initial meeting must be at a 
> plenary meeting.  Therefore, for example, if a group wanted 
> to meet in May after March PAR approval, would that interim 
> meeting be the one where membership is established.  Yet, if 
> that is a WG meeting, it can't have elections since 7.2.2 
> only allows Chairs to be elected at a plenary meeting.
> 
> If we are going to fix it, I don't think this is the best way.  My
> preferences:
> 
> 1.  The LMSC Chair can appoint an initial Chair who has 
> responsibility to direct the organization of the WG.
> 2.  The initial session of a WG should be at a plenary.
> 3.  The agenda of the initial session whould include election 
> of a Chair and Vice Chair.  I favor those elections being at 
> the end of the session after 75% session participation could 
> be measured.
> 4.  Obviously with the above, I would change "participate in 
> the first meeting" to "All persons satisfying 75% 
> participation for the first session become members of the 
> Working Group."  Mandating the election for the final meeting 
> of the session allows WG membership to be established and 
> reduces "packing the room" problems for the initial election. 
> 5.  Consistent with subsequent elections, the newly elected 
> Chair does not take office until confirmed by the EC.
> 6.  The bottom line then is that the WG doesn't exist until 
> its organizational meeting.
> 
> --Bob
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Pat Thaler [mailto:pat_thaler@AGILENT.COM]
> Sent: Wednesday, October 19, 2005 12:35 PM
> To: STDS-802-SEC@listserv.ieee.org
> Subject: Re: [802SEC] Comment resolution on LMSC P&P ballot 
> titled 'LMSCOrganization'
> 
> I have no objection. Roger's text addresses the concerns 
> about the language that were raised during the meeting, i.e. 
> it replaces the somewhat ambiguous "where appropriate" with a 
> definition of when it happens. Pat
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Sherman, Matthew J. (US SSA)
> [mailto:matthew.sherman@BAESYSTEMS.COM]
> Sent: Monday, October 17, 2005 4:37 AM
> To: STDS-802-SEC@listserv.ieee.org
> Subject: Re: [802SEC] Comment resolution on LMSC P&P ballot 
> titled 'LMSCOrganization'
> 
> Folks,
> 
> Are there any objections to Roger's comments?  I have none, 
> and will implement them in an updated resolution next week if 
> I have heard no objection.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Mat
> 
> Matthew Sherman, Ph.D.
> Senior Member Technical Staff
> BAE SYSTEMS, CNIR
> Office: +1 973.633.6344
> email: matthew.sherman@baesystems.com
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Roger B. Marks [mailto:r.b.marks@ieee.org]
> Sent: Monday, October 17, 2005 1:48 AM
> To: Sherman, Matthew J. (US SSA)
> Cc: stds-802-sec@ieee.org
> Subject: Re: [802SEC] Comment resolution on LMSC P&P ballot 
> titled 'LMSCOrganization'
> 
> Mat,
> 
> I'm finding the color-coding tough to decipher. 
> So, please tell me if this version would introduce this line:
> 
> "When appropriate, a new working group is formed following 
> approval of a PAR by the IEEE-SA Standards Board."
> 
> I think that this language would waste an opportunity to 
> clarify the text. The P&P has always been ambiguous on this 
> issue, and I think this language still is. Does it mean that 
> a new WG is effective immediately upon the PAR approval? Or 
> does it mean that the EC can form a new WG after the PAR is approved?
> 
> I think it should mean the former. The name of the WG is an 
> element of the PAR. If the SASB approves a PAR that was 
> forwarded by 802 and that includes the name of a WG that had 
> not previously existed, then I think the WG should come into 
> existence immediately. There is no point to defer the 
> decision, because the EC already made the decision when it 
> forwarded the PAR.
> 
> So, I would suggest this language: "If the IEEE-SA Standards 
> Board approves a PAR, forwarded by the LMSC, that assigns the 
> work to a new LMSC Working Group, that Working Group shall 
> immediately come into existence."
> 
> Another comment: "A study group may meet for up to two 
> plenary cycles, at which point a PAR is expected to be 
> submitted to the EC for consideration." should be moved to 
> the section on Study Groups. A SG reading the P&P could 
> easily miss this instruction entirely if it sits under 7.2.
> 
> Roger
> 
> 
> At 21:44 -0400 2005-10-16, Sherman, Matthew J. (US SSA) wrote:
> >Folks,
> >
> >
> >
> >We had a very low turnout on Tuesday (Thanks Pat and 
> Steve!).  However
> >we reviewed the 'LMSC Organization' and sub-ballot titled 'when
> >appropriate'.  We decided to slightly modify the first line of 'LMSC
> >Organization" with 'When appropriate' and eliminate the sub 
> ballot.  We
> >reviewed the entire document, and did not see any other 
> issues.  Please
> >review the LMSC Organization ballot.  It is identical to 
> what we had in
> >July except for the one change mentioned.  I assume if I hear nothing
> >back in the next week or so that you will all support it in November!
> >
> >
> >
> >Thanks,
> >
> >
> >
> >Mat
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >PS - I will review all the changes in light of the updated P&P and do
> >editorial updates to the P&P ballots to reflect those 
> changes prior to
> >the Plenary.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >Matthew Sherman, Ph.D.
> >Senior Member Technical Staff
> >BAE SYSTEMS, CNIR
> >Office: +1 973.633.6344
> >email: matthew.sherman@baesystems.com
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >----------
> >This email is sent from the 802 Executive 
> >Committee email reflector.  This list is 
> >maintained by Listserv.
> >
> >Content-Type: application/msword;
> >
> name="802.0-WG_LMSC_Organization_-_Proposed_Resolutions_051012.doc"
> >Content-Description: 
> >802.0-WG_LMSC_Organization_-_Proposed_Resolutions_051012.doc
> >Content-Disposition: attachment;
> >
> filename="802.0-WG_LMSC_Organization_-_Proposed_Resolutions_05
1012.doc"
> >
> >Attachment converted: Little 
> >Al:802.0-WG_LMSC_Organiz#A70D0.doc (WDBN/<IC>) 
> >(000A70D0)
> 
> ----------
> This email is sent from the 802 Executive Committee email reflector.
> This list is maintained by Listserv.
> 
> ----------
> This email is sent from the 802 Executive Committee email reflector.
> This list is maintained by Listserv.
> 
> ----------
> This email is sent from the 802 Executive Committee email 
> reflector.  This list is maintained by Listserv.
> 
> 

----------
This email is sent from the 802 Executive Committee email reflector.  This list is maintained by Listserv.