Response: IEEE-ISTO BoD Meeting Invitation
I plan to send the following response late on Friday. Any comments are
The following response is from Jim Carlo (chair of 802) after discussion
with Roger Marks (chair of 802.16) and circulation to the IEEE 802 SEC:
I received your letter of August 2 informing me the ISTO Board of Directors
believes its sponsorship of the BWIF was "appropriate". Please note that the
IEEE 802 position did not center on appropriateness of the ISTO's actions
from an ISTO standpoint. I continue to believe that they were not in the
best interests of IEEE (The Institute) overall.
I already have responded directly to you that a meeting on the dates of
August 17 and August 18 are not possible because of travel difficulties.
Moreover, I believe a meeting with BWIF would not be useful. IEEE 802 has
not taken issue with the BWIF itself but with ISTO's association with it and
the method with which it has been promoted. Furthermore, we would be
concerned about any implications of a special relationship between IEEE 802
and BWIF, given that a number of competing groups exist in this field.
I also think that the issues IEEE 802 sponsor committee raised are generally
relevant to all of the IEEE Standards Association sponsors and would suggest
a broader set of voices at the table, the IEEE-SA, IEEE-ISTO and IEEE 802.
Jim Carlo(firstname.lastname@example.org) Cellular:1-214-693-1776 Voice&Fax:1-214-853-5274
TI Fellow, Networking Standards at Texas Instruments
Chair, ISO/IEC JTC1/SC6 Telecom and Info Exchange Between Systems
Chair, IEEE802 LAN/MAN Standards Committee