G’day Steve
Responses in-line in red
Andrew
From: Shellhammer, Steve [mailto:sshellha@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Saturday, 8 August 2015 3:56 AM
To: Andrew Myles (amyles); STDS-802-19@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: More changes
Andrew,
Thanks for the update. I have a few comments. Talk to you on Monday.
Steve
--------------------------------------
General
·
Please merge all three presentations by Monday so we can vote on a single presentation on the call
I will have it published in the next few hours
Slide 12
·
I think the following statement is inaccurate: “IEEE 802 were told in 2014 during a presentation from 3GPP that influencing LAA required participation in 3GPP, and alignment with LTE operators”
o
I recommend it be replaced with the more accurate statement: “IEEE 802 were told in 2014 during a presentation from 3GPP that to influence the 3GPP process they can send their comments as IEEE via the official communication channels
(LSs) but it is probably best if they participate / make their points directly in the 3GPP debate convincing as many companies as possible about their thesis, including operators that have an important say in the process, and many of them have a Wi-Fi business
to protect”
o
By the way the presentation was in January 2015 if you would also like to fix the date.
·
It would also be good to clarify that the presentation also covered the work on LTE/Wi-Fi interworking
I disagree with your summary of what was said in January in response to a question I personally asked. That said, your summary actually includes the point I think we are making, which is that 3GPP processes
are set up so that external stakeholders do not have a sufficiently effective way to influence LAA. I have summarized your summary (there is not space for the full text) to
IEEE 802 were told by 3GPP RAN in January 2015 that the best way to influence 3GPP, particularly operator members, is to participate directly in 3GPP
I hope that resolves the issue
·
I recommend dropping the word “arbitrary” from the phrase “Many IEEE 802 participants believe that 3GPP has arbitrarily dismissed at many of the comments received via LS’s from IEEE 802.” I do not see any basis for saying this
Done
Slide 17
·
Change “Def” to “Define” At least one person on the last call said they did not know what “Def” means
Done
Slide 19
·
Lots of 802.11 acronyms which have not been written out. This makes it harder for the audience. Please write them out the first time they are used.
I am not sure the written out acronyms actually help but, I have added them anyway
From: Andrew Myles (amyles) [mailto:amyles@xxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Friday, August 07, 2015 12:25 AM
To: STDS-802-19@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [802.19] More changes
G’day all
I have received multiple objections from 802.11 experts to slide 39. As a result, I have turned it into a slide saying more work is needed
I have also added animation to the backup slide
See
https://mentor.ieee.org/802.19/dcn/15/19-15-0063-07-0000-proposal-for-ieee-802-submission-to-3gpp.pptx for latest
Roger, when will you send me your revised deck of integration? Ben has sent me his
Andrew
|
|
||
|
Andrew Myles |
Cisco Systems Limited |
|
