Re: [802SEC] 802.11 response to comments on two PARS

[James Gilb <gilb@IEEE.ORG>]

All

Thanks for the consideration of my comments.  Essentially all my 
comments were rejected.

I was surprised that the group did not list 802.15.3c as a project that 
is similar is scope (which it clearly is).  Ecma TC48 should have also 
been referenced.  This is not only an easy change, it is clear that it 
is the correct answer.

Most important, however, is the statement of coexistence.  The history 
of the 802 wireless groups is that coexistence is only taken seriously 
when the group is forced to do it.  This is not something that is 
limited to a single wireless group, rather it is likely due to the fact 
that we are all busy and work very hard to develop our standards. 
Addressing coexistence takes time that we often don't feel we have.

In my opinion, the PAR should acknowledge the existing standards in 
development and include a strong statement that requires the TG to 
address coexistence with these standards.

James Gilb

Jon Rosdahl wrote:
> https://mentor.ieee.org/802.11/file/08/11-08-0880-01-0vht-reponse-to-official-comments.ppt
>
> This response document was posted just prior to noon and was approved by the 802.11 WG.
> If you have any further questions or comments Please let Bruce, Eldad or I know.
> Respectfully submitted,
> Jon Rosdahl
> WG11 VC
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Jon Rosdahl                          10871 North 5750 West
> hm:801-756-1496                   Highland, UT 84003
> cell:801-376-6435
>  
> A Job is only necessary to eat!
> A Family is necessary to be happy
>
> ----------
> 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.