stds-802-16: COEXISTENCE PRACTICE--COMMENTS

[Leland Langston <j-langston2@raytheon.com>]

To 802.16 Working Group Members:

Comments on the latest Coexistence Practice, Doc No. 802.16.2-00/01, 
are solicited.

Please note that a significantly revised working draft of the
coexistence practice has been posted on the 802.16 web site under
coexistence, doc. no. 802.16.2-00/01  (a revision of 802.16c-99/02r1). 
This revision includes numerous additions and changes which should be of
interest to most of the 802.16 members.  The coexistence task group will
be working in Albuquerque to get this document ready for letter ballot
following that meeting.  Please take a bit of time to review this
document and provide comments.  

Comments may take two forms: (1) General comments on the document
content and organization; (2) Specific recommendations.  For specific
recommendations, please identify the paragraph number, the current
wording and a redline of YOUR proposed changes. (Use the standard
redline/strike through format of Word.)  Then follow your proposed
re-write with any comments or rational in dark blue font immediately
following each proposed re-write.  If you wish to propose deleting a
specific paragraph, simply state "delete paragraph X.X.X".  Please keep
your comments and proposed changes in the same order as the document. 
Please DO NOT return a redline of the entire document. (Only changes
please.)  Also do not waste time with editing problems such as grammar
or document alignment--this will be taken care of when we get the
content correct.  (Exception--if you feel the current wording makes the
meaning ambiguous or unclear, then feel free to change.)  Please provide
your comments to me by e-mail no later than 4 March.  Comments can be by
way of this reflector. Be sure to place "coexistence" as the first word
in the subject.

There are a few sections of the document which may be of particular
interest to many.  These are:

	3.1.1 and all sub-paragraphs
	3.2.1.1
	3.2.2.1
	3.3
	4.4
	6.
	7.

We in coexistence are very interested in feedback on paragraphs 6 and
7.  I know most of you are working PHY and MAC issues, but please take a
minute to look at and comment on these two sections if you do not have
time to adequately review the entire document.

Thanks for your comments in advance.

Leland

P.S.  Please ignore the somewhat presumptions claim of authorship on the
first page of the document.  My name is there simply because the current
document is considered a "contributed document".  It is really the
totality of contributions from many people, mine being minor.  This will
be removed in the final document, and replaced with a preface which
lists the primary contributors.