Re: wpan/ New Structure of the Coexistence Group

["David Baddeley" <david.baddeley@motorola.com>]

If it can be done within the working procedures, option 3.
sounds like it may be the approach needed.
Carl Temme points out 802 must avoid creating new wireless
standards (now or in the future) that operate in the same
radio space and yet do not coexist with any of its viable
existing standards in that radio space.
The groups developing the standards have multiplied
recently, so a seperate entity may be more future-proof in
case more groups appear. It was also pointed out that the
guidelines need to be adhered to by those developing the
specifications, so some independence is needed.
Another reason for attempting this in a seperate group may
be the need for a certain continuity in the expertise
which has to include familiarity with regulatory matters
and legislation, preferably international. Co-existence
can be achieved through technical and/or regulatory means.
(Unlicensed does not equal unregulated) e.g. regulatory
means usually set power limits, and could impose different
conditions on fixed versus mobile or nomadic devices, or
impose adoption of channel plans, and a specialist group
may develop expertise in these and trade-offs better than
the technical specialists working on the other
specification details.

David Baddeley
begin:vcard 
n:Baddeley;David 
tel;fax:+41 22 7991 307
tel;work:+41 22 7991 216
x-mozilla-html:TRUE
version:2.1
email;internet:David.Baddeley@motorola.com
adr;quoted-printable:;;207 rte de Ferney=0D=0AGrand-Saconnex;Geneva;;1218;Switzerland
x-mozilla-cpt:;-14544
fn:David  Baddeley
end:vcard