RE: stds-802-16: 802.16ab-01/01r1 published; Final Task Group Rev iew in progress
Retrans - this did not make it to all recipients
-----Original Message-----
From: Kiernan, Brian G.
Sent: Monday, August 06, 2001 1:23 PM
To: 'Vladimir Yanover'; Roger B. Marks (E-mail); Kiernan, Brian G.; 802.
16 Reflector (E-mail)
Subject: RE: stds-802-16: 802.16ab-01/01r1 published; Final Task Group
Rev iew in progress
Vladimir,
In response to your questions:
Yes, the 01/01r1 document was to have accommodated the resolutions, but
purely as placeholders for the insertion of future text. No specific text
relevant to the resolutions was approved. Much of this text is to be
developed by the various ad hocs for submission as comments against the
01/01r1 document and is to be discussed at the September meeting. In fact,
that text is due shortly, so that it can be posted, reviewed and commented
upon by all.
Aside from the fact that the document now stands as a Task Group document,
it is simply good practice to maintain an audit trail as the document
matures. Within 802.16, this is being done via the comment process and
commentary data base. Once those comments have been resolved, it is then up
to the editor to modify the document to reflect the comment resolution. As
I think you are aware, this can often be done in several ways, all of which
may be valid - so long as the editor makes no technical interpretations.
The editor does NOT have the latitude to insert new technical text nor
remove prior technical text without group approval via the comment process.
I cannot speak to your specific document comments until I have an
opportunity to review them, but it is becoming increasingly obvious that we
need multiple document section (clause) editors, especially on the MAC
portion of the document due to its complexity and the need to mesh neatly
with the basic 802.16 document. I openly solicit any inputs (and
volunteers) on this subject.
Note: any further e-mail discussions on this should be pursued on the 802.16
MAC reflector, not the general reflector.
Brian
-----Original Message-----
From: Vladimir Yanover [mailto:vladimiry@breezecom.co.il]
Sent: Sunday, August 05, 2001 1:19 PM
To: Roger B. Marks (E-mail); Brian G. Kiernan (E-mail); 802. 16
Reflector (E-mail)
Subject: RE: stds-802-16: 802.16ab-01/01r1 published; Final Task Group
Rev iew in progress
Roger and Brian,
Is it correct that 01/01r1 document was supposed to accomodate the
resolutions of Sessson #14?
I look at MAC part and see that a lot of things were taken out without any
relation to comments.
For example, the whole ARQ section. There were no comments on taking out the
whole section.
Opposite, there was a decision of MAC group to approve block-based numbering
(that constituted about
50% of the whole text) and delete MPDU-based numbering ( a single subsection
of ARQ in 01/01 doc, which
contained three lines and one picture).
ARQ Ad Hoc was created to add to ARQ section a description of ARQ ALGORITHM
(State Machines),
i.e. just to fill empty subsection 6.4 of 01/01 doc, not for rewriting all
the section. Another goal is to change
certain structures (ACKs etc.).
At Page 33 of 01/01r1 we find a list of Session #14 resolutions including
"MAC document must specify the numbering
scheme ... " etc. I am sorry, it was NOT a decision of the group. The
decision was to choose one of the schemes
(namely block-based) of two ALREADY PRESENT in the 01/01 and to reject the
second.
Were the motions passed at the MAC meeting published as "Minutes"? If no
(seems, this is the case), how does it
fit the IEEE procedure when all the motions should be published in "Minutes"
and "Minutes" should be approved by voting?
Another example is the resolution of the Comment #80 that addresses to the
section 8.3.4.4 and requests
"Insert the text from the document "802.16abc-01/03" by V.Yanover". The
resolution was "Accepted-Modifed" and
the modification was specified as follows:
"Not approved:
1. Section 8.3.4.4.5.1 Synchronization Field: Frame Duration
Code
2. Section 8.3.4.4.3 Minislot definition
(These two subsections were tabled: "Rejected sections under examination.
MAC/PHY ad hoc will provide a resolution.")
Thus the rest of material has had to be accomodated into the document.
But the section 8.3.4.4 in 01/01r1 appears empty.
I believe that these are editorial mistakes and they may be corrected
editorially.
Some SC specific MAC topics are present and some are not without any
relation to comments.
Similar incident has happened already with Runcom OFDMA stuff (before the
Session #14).
I think, at this point we don't need more proof that there is a serious
problem with our procedures in MAC editorial
activity and even in writing a minutes. This really is going too far.
Situation when the editorial team takes the topics in and out without
any legal procedure is not acceptable.
My understanding is that there should not be any way to change the document
other than a resolution of the specific comment.
Can I ask, is it correct?
Some people at the last meeting expressed opinion that it is a faster way to
go forward to jump over procedural issues.
For example, MAC part of the 01/01r1 document was voted while not existed in
any form.
Let me remind that at MAC group at least one day was wasted for the
discussion on the issues that were actually
just an implication of incorrect assembling of 01/01 document (MAC part).
After investing a lot of time into consolidation
of ARQ material and OFDM related MAC issues, we may meet at the next session
with nothing, and all the consolidation
has to be restarted. Seems that the next meeting will start the same
counterproductive way.
Vladimir
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Roger B. Marks [mailto:r.b.marks@ieee.org]
> Sent: Tuesday, July 31, 2001 8:17 AM
> To: stds-802-16@ieee.org
> Subject: stds-802-16: 802.16ab-01/01r1 published; Final Task
> Group Review in progress
>
>
> Revision 1 of the TG3/4 Working Document has been posted:
>
> Title: Air Interface for Fixed Broadband Wireless Access
> Systems (Working Doc)
> Number: IEEE 802.16ab-01/01r1
> URL: <http://ieee802.org/16/tg3_4/docs/80216ab-01_01r1.zip>
> Source: Nico van Waes (IEEE 802.16ab Editor)
>
> This document is now in Final Task Group Review through August 27.
> For details and instructions, see:
>
> Title: Final Task Group Review of IEEE 802.16ab-01/01r1
> Number: IEEE 802.16ab-01/06r1
> URL: <http://ieee802.org/16/tg3_4/docs/80216ab-01_06r1.pdf>
>