RE: stds-802-16: P802.16/D4 Sponsor Ballot Recirculation results and approval schedule
Hi Roger,
Thank you for the great effort. I only have one minor comment.
Comment 162 misses part of the "Suggested Remedy." The following
lines/paragraphs are missing from the database:
***************************
suggested_remedy = Page 31, line 35, add the following normative reference:
"[ITU-T X690] ITU-T Recommendation X.690, "Information Technology --
ASN.1 Encoding Rules: Specification of Basic Encoding Rules (BER),
Canonical Encoding Rules (CER), and Distinguished Encoding Rules
(DER)," December 1997."
Page 302, line 34, add the following paragraph:
"
*****************************
-----Original Message-----
From: Roger B. Marks [mailto:r.b.marks@ieee.org]
Sent: Monday, October 08, 2001 10:06 AM
To: stds-802-16@ieee.org
Subject: stds-802-16: P802.16/D4 Sponsor Ballot Recirculation results
and approval schedule
The P802.16 Sponsor Ballot Recirculation ended last Thursday. The results:
http://ieee802.org/16/tg1/ballots/sponsorballot/result.html
are positive. Three of the four Disapprove voters changed their vote
to Approve. The approval ratio (32/33) is 97%.
Here is the plan:
*We received 14 new comments, all from Stanley Wang. These are published
here:
<http://www.ieee802.org/16/docs/01/80216-01_51.pdf>
Ten of them are editorial, and all are essentially straightforward
corrections to errors. Unless I hear objections, I will consider them
to be accepted.
*I will create Draft 5 this week from the 149 comments in the
original Sponsor Ballot and the 14 from the recirc.
*In accordance with our schedule <http://ieee802.org/16/tg1/schedule.html>,
I will work with the IEEE Balloting Center to get a final
Confirmation Ballot on Draft 5 opened by this Friday.
*We are still on track to file an application for approval to RevCom
by the October 26 deadline. I expect final approval of the standard
on December 6.
*It is likely that Draft 5 will be the last draft until after
December 6, when our IEEE staff project editor will make editorial
revisions. Those changes will be small.
*Since the TG3/4 document is an amendment to P802.16, its structure
is highly dependent on that of the base document. Therefore, before
we begin a Working Group Letter Ballot of the TG3/4 draft, it's
important to review that document to ensure that the structure and
clause references are consistent with Draft 5. This should be done
before Session #16.
Cheers,
Roger