IEEE P802-97/@@

AGENDA & MINUTES(Unconfirmed) - IEEE 802 LMSC EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEETING

Thursday, March 11, 1999 - 7:00 p.m.

Hyatt Regency, Austin, TX

1. MEETING CALLED TO ORDER

Jim Carlo called the meeting to order at 7:04 pm Members in attendance were:

Jim Carlo - Chair, IEEE 802 LAN / MAN Standards Committee
Paul Nikolich - Vice Chair, IEEE 802 LAN / MAN Standards Committee
Buzz Rigsbee - Executive Secretary, IEEE 802 LAN / MAN Standards Committee
Howard Frazier - Recording Secretary, IEEE 802 LAN / MAN Standards Committee
Bill Lidinsky - Chair, IEEE 802.1 - HILI Working Group
Dave Carlson - Chair, IEEE 802.2 - Logical Link Control Working Group
Geoff Thompson - Chair, IEEE 802.3 - CSMA/CD Working Group
Bob Love - Chair, IEEE 802.5 - Token Ring Working Group
Jim Mollenauer - Chair, IEEE 802.6 - Metro Area Network Working Group
Chip Benson - Chair, IEEE 802.8 - Fiber Optic TAG
Vic Hayes - Chair, IEEE 802.11 - Wireless LANs Working Group
Robert Grow - Treasurer LMSC
Robert Russell - Chair, IEEE 802.14 - Cable TV Protocol Working Group

The meeting was attended by approximately 10 IEEE 802 Working Group members and several guests.

2. APPROVE OR MODIFY AGENDA

Thompson: Add concise representation of PAR title to agenda

Love: Item 4.15 802.5v Conditional Approval should be changed to Information Item. It is a WG ballot, not a sponsor ballot

Carlo explains agenda items regarding 802.11 WPAN PAR

Rigsbee: Add 4.25 MI Equipment purchases 10 minutes

Approve Agenda as modified M: Hayes, S: Love 10/0/1 Approved

AGENDA - IEEE 802 LMSC EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEETING

Thursday, March 11, 1999 - 7:00 p.m.

Hyatt Regency, Austin, TX

 

1. MEETING CALLED TO ORDER -CARLO 1 07:00 PM

2. APPROVE OR MODIFY AGENDA -CARLO 4 07:01 PM

3. APPROVE MINUTES OF NOVEMBER, 1998 MEETING -FRAZIER 10 07:05 PM

4. TREASURER'S REPORT & Attendance Project -GROW 20 07:15 PM

Category (* = consent agenda)

4.1 ME 802.11b Conditional Approval -HAYES 5 07:35 PM

4.2 PA BWA PAR -MARKS 15 07:50 PM

4.3 PA WPAN PAR 802.11 Recommendation -HAYES 10 08:00 PM

4.4 PA WPAN PAR Study Group Recommendation -HEILE 10 08:10 PM

4.5 PA WPAN PAR SEC Action -HAYES 20 08:30 PM

4.6 PA 802.11 Additional Regulatory Domains PA -HAYES 10 08:40 PM

4.7 PA 802.1v PAR to NESCOM -LIDINSKY 5 08:45 PM

4.8 PA 802.1w PAR to NESCOM -LIDINSKY 5 08:50 PM

4.9 PA*802.5aa Enhanced Source Routing -LOVE 5 08:55 PM

4.10 ME - 0 08:55 PM

4.11 ME 802.11a Conditional Approval -HAYES 5 08:55 PM

4.12 ME Letter to FCC Re: RF Lighting -HAYES 5 09:00 PM

4.13 ME Internationalization Process -CARLO 10 09:05 PM

4.14 ME 802.14 Coordination w/ CableLabs -NICKOLICH 5 09:15 PM

4.15 II 802.5v Conditional Approval WG Ballot -LOVE 5 09:20 PM

4.16 ME*802.5t to REVCOM -LOVE 5 09:25 PM

4.17 ME 802 Overview and Architecture to Sponso -LIDINSKY 5 09:30 PM

4.18 Break - 15 09:35 PM

4.19 MI - 0 09:50 PM

4.20 MI Higher Speed Study Group -THOMPSON 15 10:05 PM

4.21 MI QoS/FC ECSG -MOLLENAUE10 10:15 PM

4.22 MI New Registration Process -GROW 10 10:25 PM

4.23 MI Meeting Services Agreement Renewal -RIGSBEE 10 10:35 PM

4.24 MI Rules Change Ballot -NIKOLICH 10 10:45 PM

4.25 MI Equipment purchases -RIGSBEE 10 10:55 PM

4.26 II 802.3ab 1000BASE-T -THOMPSON 15 11:05 PM

4.27 II DTE Power Call for Interest -THOMPSON 10 11:20 PM

4.28 II FCC Teleconference -HAYES 5 11:30 PM

4.29 II Seminar Adjacent to 802.11 Interim -HAYES 5 11:35 PM

4.30 II 802.5 WG Recirculation -LOVE 5 11:40 PM

4.31 II 802.5 Interim Meeting -LOVE 5 11:45 PM

4.32 II Future Meeting Venues -RIGSBEE 10 11:50 PM

4.33 II AlphaGraphics -GROW 10 12:00 AM

4.34 II - 0 12:10 AM

4.35 DT SEC Meeting Automation -FRAZIER 10 12:10 AM

4.36 DT - 0 12:20 AM

4.37 DT - 0 12:20 AM

4.38 DT - 0 12:20 AM

DT- Discussion Topic II - Information Item

ME - Motion, External MI - Motion, Internal

PA - PAR APPROVAL

 

3.0 Minutes from November, 1998 meeting

No comments on November, 1998 minutes

Motion to Approve November, 1998 minutes M: Lidinsky, S: Mollenauer 7/0/2 Approved

4.0 Treasurer's report and attendance projections (transparency)

see file (fritreas.pdf)

see file (attendance.pdf)

fritreas.pdf

attendance.pdf

Higher than expected attendance. +$6420 change in operating reserve.

Carlo: What happened to all of the deadbeats?

Marks: One of the deadbeats from BWA paid up, three were not here.

Grow: Time to send annual report to Computer Society. Same format as has been used before. Will submit report, with

copy to Carlo.

Grow: Meeting Attendance. Forecast is woefully under what Grow expects actual attendance to be.

Nikolich: Responses from dot1, dot5, dot11.

Thompson: Predict 200 bodies for the next six meetings.

Grow: Complaints from meeting services about services received from our bank. Our bank is incredibly slow about responding to requests. Grow does not yet have signature authority. Current bank is US Bank at Whitebear Lake. Received Quote from Well's Fargo. Cannot keep money in interest bearing checking account, would have to keep in money market and transfer in order to earn interest. Grow will keep investigating banks, likely to change banks in near future.

Carlo: For next meeting, we need cost/reserve projection so that we can plan fee for next meeting.

4.1 ME 802.11b Conditional Approval (LCD Overheads)

see file (80211b.pdf)

80211b.pdf

Postponed item until Hayes has presentation materials ready.

Picked up at 8:09.

change tape.

Presentation of Disapprove comments and WG response. Comment from J Fischer, Comment from J. Cafarella, Comment from D. Bagby.

Motion:

To submit the draft standard for IEEE P802.11b to LMSC ballot,

subject to compliance with the Conditional Approval Procedure.

M: Hayes

S: Carlson

Carlo: Reviews steps for conditional approval. Asks: "Do negative comments, if still outstanding, get included in sponsor ballot package?"

A: Yes

Thompson: It is not a RevCom requirement to include the WG ballot negative comments.

Passes 12/0/0 8:23 pm.

4.2 PA BWA PAR approval (LCD overheads)

see file (80216par.txt)

80216par.txt

Marks: reviews changes. received 3 comments.

One from NESCOM member about item 9 wanting more explanation of

why other standards work is not adequate here.

Comment from Geoff Thompson "interoperability should be in scope".

Comment from Jim Carlo "title should be more specific".

A motion to submit the revised PAR passed 27 to 3. Two of the dissapproves come from representatives from one company.

Disapprover asks "Would the IEEE extend the life of the study group so that the coexistence PAR can be prepared and substituted for the air interface PAR".

Thompson: If we did not do a standard for air interface, and equipment were to come in to the market place, how would overlap problem be addressed.

Marks: FCC's position is that license holders should work it out amongst themselves. There is an active US/Canada committee that is working to resolve the issue for that border.

Second disapprove comment is that completion target of January 2001 is too optimistic, lack of succesful field experience.

Nikolich: What is the focus for the frequency range:

Marks: 30 GHz. Access mechanism can be applied to a broader range of frequencies, 10 to 66 GHz.

Carlo: We would be approving this PAR and establishing a new WG, 802.15.

Thompson: Shouldn't we add "Local and Metropolitan Area Networks" blah, blah.

Carlo: Agrees and asks group to approve PAR contingent upon title being fixed.

Nikolich: Need a charter for the new WG. Suggests using scope and purpose from this PAR as initial charter of WG.

Marks: Concerned that lifting scope and purpose would be too limiting for new working group.

Carlo: Need name of WG and charter, action item for new WG

Marks: IEEE 802.16 Working Group on Broadband Wireless Access.

Nikolich: agree that first order of business for new WG is to define charter.

Action: first order of business for new WG is to define charter

Carlson: Is there a formal mechanism to announce formation of new WG.

Thompson: PAR approval announced in IEEE Standards Bearer.

Action: Prepare an announcement of this activity.

Motion: To Approve BWA PAR for an air interface fixed BB wireless access and the formation of a new 802 Working Group 802.x

M: Nikolich

S: Grow

Thompson: Wants working group number assigned.

Carlo: Another activity has dibs on .15, if they don't take it, BWA gets it.

Frazier: Please add " contingent upon appropriate title change"

Motion:

To Approve BWA PAR for an air interface fixed BB wireless access

and the formation of a new 802 Working Group 802.x,

contingent upon appropriate title change.

Passed: 12/0/0 7:58 pm

Carlo: Entertain motion to

Affirm Roger Marks as interim chair of 802.15/16 until the end of the July, 99 plenary

Moved: Mollenauer

Second: Nikolich

Passes 12/0/0 8:02 pm.

Carlo: Marks needs a letter from his company, as described in 802 operating rules, confirming support.

Action: Marks needs a letter from his company, as described in 802 operating rules, confirming support.

Carlo: Membership in Working Group. Attendees of first meeting (during Plenary week) become voting members.

Grow: No quroum can be established at an iterim.

Hayes: We established 802.11 WG at an interim meeting.

Marks: Plan to call an interim meeting of two task groups, wait until July plenary to form WG.

Thompson: Suggests affirming motions from interim meeting at July plenary meeting.

Grow: Does attendance at interim meeting count towards gaining membership?

A: If person shows up at interim, it counts towards acquring voting rights.

4.3 PA WPAN PAR 802.11 Recommendation (LCD Overheads)

see file (wpanexec.pdf)

wpanexec.pdf

Vic introduces Bob Heile, vice chair of WPAN Study Group. Since Dick Braley's departure, acting as chair.

Heile recaps history of development of WPAN PAR.

Bob O'Hara presents the 802.11 WG position, which is to conduct this work in a task group within 802.11 (no materials)

Nikolich: How big is the WPAN SG?

O'Hara: Steady state, 10 or 12.

4.4 PA WPAN PAR Study Group Recommendation (LCD Overheads)

Bob Heile presents WPAN Study Group Recommendation.

Nikolich: what percentage of the WPAN SG wants new WG?

Heile: 100 % of the core group of 10-12 people.

Marks: What was the vote, this week, on this issue?

Heile: Unanimous consent.

Carlo: What was the number of attendees of the Study Group meeting?

Heile: 12

Love: If Bluetooth is so big (500 companies), why are your meetings so small?

Heile: Until the group is "real", interested parties don't care to attend.

4.5 PA WPAN PAR SEC Action

Motion:

To submit the WPAN PAR (rev 10) to NesCom

M: Hayes

S: Rigsbee

Mollenauer: Motion to ammend the WPAN motion to enable WPAN to function as a working group of LMSC.

M: Mollenauer

S: Carlson

Grow: I don't know what this means. Needs the specific words that are to be added or deleted to motion.

Rigsbee: This is really an amendment to the PAR, not an amendment to the motion.

Mollenauer: Changes amendment to read: ammend the WPAN motion to

enable WPAN to function as a working group of LMSC

by replacing "Rev 10" with "Rev 9".

Rigsbee: Does 802.11 MAC have sufficient lattitude to support WPAN? directs question to O'Hara and Heile.

O'Hara: Yes, that was the result of the exercise to examine PICs.

Heile: If the result is a substantially different MAC, which is possible, then a new MAC needs a new WG.

Mollenauer: Saw 802.14 disolve because of inability to address industry needs. If we keep the project in 802.11, will Bluetooth and HomeRF participate.

O'Hara: The answer he has heard (during tutorial) was No, but we can go participate in Bluetooth.

Heile: Believes minimal participation in a TG within 802.11, better chance of participation in a separate working group.

Mollenauer: Do they need 802 at all?

Heile: There is a long term benefit to have a standing group to maintain document.

O'Hara: With volumes expected for these devices, no, they don't need IEEE to gain market acceptance.

Russell: Has this been a case of 802.11 chasing Bluetooth, or has Bluetooth been coming to 802?

Heile: Have had several meetings.

Carlo: Has been active in discussions with Bluetooth and HomeRF.

Russell: So the model is closer to our involvement with DOCSIS than to NWEST involvement with 802.

Ian Gifford: Bluetooth membership includes many types of members, application, etc.

Grow: Do I correctly infer that the reason why HomeRF and Bluetooth have not gotten together is because of cost?

Heile: HomeRF is working on a different problem from Bluetooth, too early in work.

Grow: Is this all targetting the same frequency spectrum?

O'Hara: Yes

Grow: What is the chance of 802.11 and some new working group suppling a contradictory response to an inquiry to the FCC?

Many: That is what the SEC is for, resolve conflicts.

Thompson: Don't always have sufficient time to resolve conflicts.

Carlo: If within 802.11, 802.11 would have to resolve, if separate WG, then SEC would have to coordinate responses to any external inquiries.

Thompson: Proposes amendment: Require 2 WG's shall collaborate on single submissions to regulatory agencies.

Mollenauer: Accepts as friendly.

Carlson: Accepts as friendly.

Ammendment reads:

To ammend the WPAN motion to enable WPAN to function as a Working Group under LMSC by replacing "Rev10" "by Rev 9" and add "the 2 WGs shall colaborate on submissions to regulatory agencies"

Michael Kinnis: In rev 9 PAR, states that study group plans to collocate. Believes that .11 Tga and TGb members will participate in new WG as their work winds down. In a new WG, there would be no preconceptions.

???: Have no doubt that 802.11 MAC can be slimmed down to fit WPAN. That's technically feasible, but not economically feasible. IP licenses fees alone are twice the amount of the cost of the product we need to deliver, so 802.11 wouldn't be economically feasible.

Floyd Ross: Obvious to me that if we want WPAN to thrive, it needs to be in a separate WG.

Russell: If we make this a separate WG, gonna be trying to chase Bluetooth or HomeRF. If we keep it in 802.11, we are adding feature to an existing standard.

Rigsbee: Sees merits to both sides of the argument. We are starting late, if we can't keep up with the industry, we may wind up missing the market, creating a hollow standard. I prefer we not do that. Favor motion to ammend. Recommends as much sharing and cooperatioon as possible.

Thompson: If WPAN moved rapidly, there could be space for both WPAN and Bluetooth. Looks like Bluetooth is going like gangbusters. It appears that we better get on the train, or get out of the business. If we have to drag to large a stone with us, we don't have a chance. Participation in WPAN SG is so low compared to Bluetooth, it is a sign that the real work is going on elsewhere.

Marks: Asks for comparison of companies involved in Bluetooth vs WPAN SG?

Heile: Don't have exact comparison, expects there is overlap.

Love: What does 802 loose if we have a separate WG?

Hayes: Interoperability goes down the drain.

Nikolich: Agrees that if work is in new WG, can move faster, in spite of vote within WG. Recommends creation of new WG.

Carlo: No Objection to calling question. Reads amendment.

To ammend the WPAN motion to enable WPAN to function as a Working Group under LMSC by replacing "Rev10" "by Rev 9" Require 2 WGs shall colaborate (single submissions) to regulatory agencies

Vote on Mollenauer/Carlson ammendment:

Passes 11/1/0 9:39 pm. Vic Hayes was the only negative. 12 SEC members in attendance.

Grow calls question on main motion.

Main motion as ammended:

To submit the WPAN PAR (REV 9) to NesCom and require the 2 WGs colaborate (single submissions) to regulatory agencies.

Vic objects to calling the question

Vote on calling the question 4/5/2 fails.

Hayes: Don't see how it is possible for two working groups to colaborate on single submissions to regulatory agencies.

Carlo: Could appoint one of the WGs to be point of contact.

Russell: Liaison with an external organization is a high priority.

Love: This is not a unique situation. Other WGs have liaison activities with external parties which overlap, and must be coordinated.

Nikolich: Make decision on PAR/WG first, then sort out liaison issues.

Carlson: Can't imagine that an exceedling high percentage of time is required for liaison.

Carlo: As chair, I have to make sure that coordination happens.

Marks: One of the strong appeals of an 802 WG is the credibility in dealing with regulatory agencies.

Thompson: Don't want 802 to have two conflicting positions represented to the FCC.

Russell: How much does this relate to 802.1, how does it fit into architecture.

Lidinsky: Don't see any tie-in. Believe that there will be a bridge at some point in the future.

Carlo: This is a key value of 802. We have a bridging group.

Carlo: add to motion: Approval of this motion establishes a new working group, 802.15

To submit the WPAN PAR (REV 9) to NesCom and

require the 2 WGs colaborate (single submissions) to regulatory agencies.

Approval of this motion establishes a new working group, 802.15

Vote on Hayes/Rigsbee motion 11/1/0 Passes 9:51 pm 12 SEC members, Vic Hayes in dissent.

Carlo: Entertain motion to:

Affirm Bob Heile as the interim chair of the 802.15 WG through the end of the July plenary meeting.

M: Rigsbee

S: Lidinsky

vote on Rigsbee/Lidinsky 12/0/0 9:54 pm 12 SEC members.

Carlo notes that Bob Heile needs a letter of support from his company.

Carlo: Ian Gifford is the principle liaison to HomeRF and Bluetooth through the end of July plenary.

Chair observes that we are 1:15 behind schedule. Take a break. Resume at 10:05 pm.

Resume at 10:09 pm

4.6 PA 802.11 Additional Regulatory Domains PAR

see file (80211ard.pdf)

80211ard.pdf

Hayes: Asserts that this is a maintenance PAR

Carlo: Announces that agenda time for each item is cut in half.

O'Hara: Explains PAR, title, scope, purpose. This is a supplement. Extends 802.11 so that can be used in different countries.

Frazier: This looks like more than a maintenance PAR

Mollenauer: Could this be done as a Recommended Practice?

O'Hara: No, takes MIB additions.

Carlson: Could this be finished by next plenary

O'Hara: No

Carlson: Then you can do the work, and get this approved at the next plenary.

Frazier: Can we vote on this by electronic ballot?

Carlo: Not in rules, would require a motion to allow electronic ballot.

Motion: To submit PAR for a supplement to 802.11 for operation in additional Regulatory Domains to NesCom.

M: Hayes

S: Rigsbee

Grow: Would like to table but don't want to preclude electronic ballot.

Carlo: Entertains motion to table until 5 criteria are developed and then conduct electronic ballot.

Rigsbee: Seems to me we are in good shape, don't need 5 criteria.

Mollenauer: Don't need 5 criteria for this motion.

Lidinsky: We're are being too beauraucratic.

no one makes motion that Carlo entertained, Hayes/Rigsbee don't accept as amendment.

Vote on Hayes/Rigsbee motion: 6/3/3 Passes 10:21 pm 12 SEC members. Grow, Frazier, Nikolich in opposition.

4.7 PA 802.1v PAR to NESCOM

see file (8021v.pdf)

8021v.pdf

Lidinsky: PAR with 5 criteria was submitted in January.

Motion to approve the submission of the PAR for 802.1v

Standard for Local and Metropolitan Area Networks -

Supplement to Virtual Bridged Local Area Networks 802.1Q-1999:

VLAN Classification by Protocol and Port

 

to NesCom for approval as a 802.1 work item.

 

M: Lidinsky

S: Rigsbee

No objection to calling the question

Vote 10/0/0 Passes 12 SEC members. 10:22 pm

4.8 PA 802.1w PAR to NESCOM

see file (8021w.pdf)

8021w.pdf

Motion to forward 802.1w PAR to NESCOM

Motion to approve the submission of the PAR for 802.1w:

 

Supplement to ISO/IEC 15802-3 (802.1D): Information Technology-

Telecommunications and information exchange between systems - Local & Metropolitan Area Networks - Common specifications -

Part 3: Media Access Control (MAC) Bridges -

Rapid Reconfiguration

 

to NesCom for approval as a 802.1 work item.

 

M: Lidinsky

S: Rigsbee

Vote on Lidinsky/Rigsbee 11/0/1 10:24 pm 12 SEC members

4.9 802.5aa Enhanced Source Routing PAR

approved as part of consent agenda.

4.10 Agenda item not used

4.11 ME 802.11a Conditional Approval

see file (80211a.pdf)

80211a.pdf

Naftali Chayat: Presents WG ballot results. Asks for conditional approval to go to sponsor ballot.

Motion:

To submit the draft standard for IEEE P802.11a to LMSC ballot

subject to compliance with the conditional approval procedure

M: Hayes

S: Grow

Carlo: There are no negatives?

Hayes: No negatives

Vote on Hayes/Grow: 11/0/1 Passes 10:29 pm 12 SEC members.

4.12 ME Letter to FCC Re: RF Lighting

see file (FCCletter.pdf)

FCCletter.pdf

 

Hayes: Need to send a letter to the FCC, distributed by hardcopy.

Motion: to submit the letter shown in do: 99/83 to the FCC

M: Hayes

S: Rigsbee

Russell: All these letters flow through the SEC, right?

Carlo: Doesn't ask for a ballot on every single letter, due to time constraints.

Every letter is recorded on archive.

Vote on Hayes/Rigsbee 10/0/2 Passes 10:37 pm. 12 SEC members

4.13 ME Internationalization Process

Carlo: Presents Policy motion:

Motion:

 

 

 

 

 

M: Thompson

S: Grow

Thompson: We must formally organize a task group within 802 to generate the Technical Report that is involved with this process on an ongoing basis.

Question called with no objection

Vote on Thompson/Grow: 12/0/0 Passes 10:37 pm 12 SEC members

4.14 ME 802.14 Coordination with CableLabs

Nikolich: need to endorse statement in principle. see file (CableLabsprinciple.pdf)

CableLabsprinciple.pdf

Motion:

Move to endorse the attached "statement in principle" and submit it to CableLabs.

M: Nikolich

S: Russell

Nikolich: The 802.14 WG unanimously approved this statement in principle by 25/0/4. Only mod is that we can't state that we will "go for a PAR" since NESCOM must approve a PAR.

Rigsbee: What does a statement in principle do?

Nikolich: It is an invitation to CableLabs.

Russell: It is a statement from 802.14 of what their objectives would be.

Thompson: It is a start.

No objection to calling the question.

Vote on Nikolich/Russell 11/0/1 Passes 10:45 pm 12 SEC members.

4.15 ME 802.5v Conditional Approval

The chair ruled that this item is really an information item since it is about a working group ballot,

not a sponsor ballot. Thus, it is moved down on the agenda.

4.16 ME 802.5 t to RevCOM

Approved as part of the consent agenda.

4.17 ME 802 Overview and Architecture to Sponsor Ballot

see file (802oa.pdf)

802oa.pdf

Lidinsky: There were no disapprove ballots as a result of WG recirculation. Updates to references requested by Thompson have been made. D27 is to be produced by the editor. Ask for an electronic sponsor ballot.

approve an electronic sponsor ballot of P802/D27, based on the procedures that have proved
successful in P802.1 WG ballots, with any changes that may be agreed in discussion with the
IEEE Standards Office.

M: Lidinsky

S: Rigsbee

Thompson: Can't assume that all future sponsor ballots can be done electronically.

Carlo: IEEE has approved conducting 802.0, 802.11a, 802.11b electronically.

Vote on Lidinsky/Rigsbee 11/0/0 Passes 10:47 pm 12 SEC members.

4.18 Break

Already took break

4.19 Empty agenda item

4.20 MI Higher Speed Study Group

Motion: Affirm the establishment of the 802.3 Higher Speed Study Group as an outcome of the 10 Gigabit Ethernet call for interest(140 participants from 55 companes supporting)

M: Thompson

S: Rigsbee

802.3 vote: 45/0/3

interim meeting (to be determined) 6/1-3 Boulder, CO

Vote on Thompson/Rigsbee 12/0/0 Passes 10:52 pm 12 SEC members.

4.21 MI QoS/FC ECSG

Mollenauer: Introduces motion.

The executive committee would like to express its appreciation for the

time and effort put in by the QoS/FC study group. The group is invited

to come back at a later time with a well-defined proposal for a

standards development activity in the area of quality of service and/or

flow control.

To facilitate this, the EC agrees to continue to continue hosting the

study group reflector and web page as follows:

∑ The groupís web page is to be frozen with its current record of the

Study Group work.

∑ A hot link to a new web page will be displayed, together with a ca-veat

that the content of the new web page is not the responsibility

of the IEEE and LMSC.

∑ The e-mail reflector is to migrate to a new site by the July 1999

plenary.

M: Mollenauer

S: Lidinsky

Khaled Amer: Thanks for the opportunity.

Vote on Mollenauer/Lidinsky 11/0/1 Passes 10:55 pm 12 SEC members

4.22 MI New Registration Process

Grow: Outline of new registration process. $300 onsite/late registration, cancellation fees, early payment incentive.

Motion:

Adopt and authorize implementation of the new fee structure for meeting registration,

and the new policies as outlined by meeting planners in 3/11/99 memo.

M: Grow

S: Carlson

Frazier: Thinks two-tier cancellation is too complicated.

Rigsbee: Higher cancellation fee for no-shows is justified based on extra expense.

Russell: agrees.

Grow: Another important point is that paper mailing ends after July meeting announcement.

Marks: There is no definition of when cancellation fee changes over

Vote on Grow/Carlson motion: 7/0/5 Passes 11:05 pm 12 SEC members

4.23 MI Meeting services agreement renewal

Motion:

To direct Exec Secy to finalize and execute agreement with Face-to-Face Events, Inc
(nee CCI) for meeting planning services for the term of 3 years at fee structure the
same as current agreement.

M: Rigsbee

S: Grow

Carlo: Has treasurer reviewed agreement

Grow: Yes, but hasn't seen latest draft.

Rigsbee: Amended to remove references to physical mailing, add web site.

Grow: Required that fee structure be pulled out and moved to an annex.

Carlo: Wants note on motion that before executed, Carlo and Grow must review and agree.

Rigsbee and Grow accept this as friendly amendment.

To direct Exec Secy to finalize and execute agreement with Face-to-Face Events, Inc
(nee CCI) for meeting planning services for the term of 3 years at fee structure the
same as current agreement, such final draft to be approved by Jim Carlo and Bob Grow

Vote on rigsbee/grow 12/0/0 passes 11:10 pm.

4.24 MI Rules Change Ballot

Move to take attached rules ballot revision text on voting rules to SEC letter ballot.

M: Nikolich

S: Benson

Lidinisky: Document as currently constituted makes no sense. Will vote no, and submit new text.

Carlo: Nikolich will send current document out for letter ballot. There is no mailing in the future.

Many: Objection to conducting paper ballot. Need to do electronic ballot.

Thompson: Need to provide balloters with a single PDF that is the equivalent of what we send out in the mail.

Nikolich: Will distribute to the entire constituency.

Lidinsky: Why go through the motions to distribute this rule change, when it will probably go down in flames.

Benson: Call the Question

Carlo: Notes objection to calling the question.

Call the Question 3/7/0 Fails.

Thompson: How many mailings do we do?

Rigsbee: 1600

Thompson: We could save money by not doing mailing

Carlo: We are going to mail this along with July meeting announcement.

Rigsbee: Call the question

No Objection to calling

Vote on Nikolich/Benson 3/7/2 Fails 11:19 pm 12 SEC members

Thompson: Notes that we didn't reach the threshold for further study.

Motion to reconsider offered by Lidinsky, who voted on prevailing side. Seconded by Thompson.

Motion to reconsider 8/1/3 Passes 11:21 pm 12 SEC members

Nikolich/Benson motion returns

vote on Nikolich/Benson 5/7/0 Fails 11:22 pm 12 SEC members Returned for further study, by 42%

Bill Lidinsky agreed to conduct further study activity on this rules change

4.25 Equipment Purchases

Motion:

To approve the Exec Secy to acquire the following LCD projectors:

1 ea TLP-711u (1400 lumen) w/ case, spare lamp, & 3 year warranty ~ $9k

1ea TLP-511a (700 lumen) w/ case, & 3 year warranty ~ $7k

to be available for July plenary.

M: Rigsbee

S: Grow

Grow: Raises concern that new fee structure may introduce risk to budget. Lots of people may take advantage of early registration discount. Upcoming Hawaii meeting will probably deplete reserves.

Mollenauer: Don't need such fancy projectors

Carlo: There is a value to all of the projectors being the same

Vote on Rigsbee/Grow motion 12/0/0 Passes 11:30 pm

Motion:

To approve the Exec Secy to acquire new Pentium II laptop w/ case, 3 year warranty, and windows 2000 and office 200 software ( or equivalent) for support of new Access Database, such DB to be in production for 11/99 plenary. Total < $5K Old laptop to be made available for Reg Office/Service functions.

M: Rigsbee

S: Grow

Carlo: Dr. Rigsbee has promised that if this purchase is approved, then Dr. Rigsbee will convert our databases to Access by November, 1999.

Marks: Will WG registration databases be integrated with this database?

Thompson: This should be a goal.

Grow: says that we can afford this.

Vote on Rigsbee/Grow 9/2/1 Passes 11:34 pm

4.26 II 802.3ab 1000BASE-T

Thompson: The information item from hell. Presents sponsor ballot results. Recap of WG ballot and Sponsor ballot history.

presents discussions and motions from Thursday am 802.3 closing plenary. Bottom line is that 802.3ab does not have conditional approval to be placed on RevCom agenda before September, 1999 meeting

Colin Mick: Presents additional information about the conduct of the closing plenary. Asks SEC to consider ways to place 802.3ab on RevCom agenda before September.

4.27 DTE Power Call for Interest

Skipped

4.28 FCC Teleconference

Skipped

4.29 Seminar Adjacent to 802.11 Interim

Skipped

4.30 802.5 WG Recirculation

Skipped

4.31 802.5 Interim Meeting

Skipped

4.32 Future meeting venues

Buzz asks for straw poll of preferences for future meeting venues. Buzz records tally of straw poll results.

4.33 Alpha Graphics

skipped

4.34 empty item

4.35 DT SEC Meeting Automation

Skipped

 

The meeting was adjourned at 12:00pm.

 

IEEE 802 LMSC Plenary Meeting

Friday, March 12, 1999

Hyatt Regency, Austin, TX

Jim Carlo calls meeting to order 8:00 am

see file (802close.pdf)

802close.pdf

Review of Agenda

Review of Thursday evening SEC meeting

Paul Nikolich: Review of Rules ballot. Rules change proposal motion to conduct letter ballot failed, issue returned for further study. Bill Lidinsky will draft new rule change proposal.

Treasurer's report

Bob Grow reports that meeting was profitable. Addition to operating reserve roughly equal to cost of purchasing another overhead projector.

see file (fritreas.pdf)

fritreas.pdf

Bob Grow presents new fee structure. Preregistration fee will go down in July. Cancellation fees will be imposed starting with November, 1999 plenary. Preregistration with on-site payment will not be allowed.

Q: Will electronic registration be secure?

A: Not by November meeting, probably.

Q: IETF allows use of PGP encryption, why not us?

A: Not all individuals have access to PGP encryption. Can send fax, or use credit card information on file.

Working Group summary reports.

802.1 Bill Lidinsky

see file (8021close.pdf)

8021close.pdf

802.3 Geoff Thompson

see file(8023FriPlen.pdf)

8023FriPlen.pdf

Q: What are expectations for HSSG for July Plenary

A: No expectation of having PAR and 5 Criteria by July. Expect two tutorials in July.

Tony Jeffree: 802.3ad Link Aggregation will meet co-located with HSSG in Boulder, June 3-4.

802.5 Bob Love

see file(8025ClosePlen.pdf)

8025ClosePlen.pdf

802.11 Vic Hayes

see file (80211cls.pdf)

80211cls.pdf

802.14 Robert Russell

see file (dot14cls.pdf)

dot14cls.pdf

802.15 WPAN SG Tom Siep

see file (dot15cls.pdf)

dot15cls.pdf

BWA SG Roger Marks

see file (80216FriPlen.pdf)

80216FriPlen.pdf

QoS/FC SG Khaled Amer

see file (qosfc.pdf)

qosfc.pdf

Future meeting arrangements

see file (meetschd.pdf)

meetschd.pdf

July in Montreal. Reserve early because of Jazz festival, holidays around meeting dates.

November in Kaui, Hawaii.

The mailing for the July meeting will be the last postal (paper) mailing. After July, will distribute meeting notices electronically.

AlphaGraphics is no longer going to be supported. Drafts will be available from the IEEE, or via WWW.

Respectfully Submitted,
Howard M. Frazier, Jr.
Recording Secretary