Dear all,
For interaction of last confirmation
email for Invitation Letter, I found three editorials. Two of them is minor change for name and company. One is missing his
application.
And there are still Not-Yet-Applied
persons, send me the email for invitation letter application.
================================================================================================
So, I would like to extend the
Deadline until this Friday Midnight (24:00). i.e., 6th Aug. Korean
Standard Time.
================================================================================================
Plz., Do not misunderstood. This dead
line is not AOE, but rather KST.
Do not miss this last chance. If
you loss this chance, you may not have full time for VISA application process
time of Korean Embassy.
Plz., Also read the following
information written by Roger Marks.
If you read the following
carefully, you may not confuse if you really believe it.
Visa Requirements to enter Republic of Korea
You may request
a Visa Invitation Letter before August 1.
===============================================================
Thank you in advance
Best Regards
Panyuh Joo
From:
owner-stds-802-16@listserv.ieee.org [mailto:owner-stds-802-16@listserv.ieee.org]
On Behalf Of Panyuh Joo
Sent: Wednesday, August 04, 2004 8:11 PM
To: STDS-802-16@listserv.ieee.org
Subject: [STDS-802-16] Please
confirm your Invitation letter request
Dear All
I have
finished to process the invitation letter.
The
following person's invitation letter is on processing.
I would not
process further request.
thank you
in advance
Regards
Panyuh Joo
Name Company
First phase
Sanjeev
Athalye Qualcomm Inc.[Panyuh
Joo] editorial
Rajesh
Bhalla ZTE San Diego .[Panyuh
Joo] editorial
Ning Zou Intel (China) Ltd.
Praveen Dhodla Kumar Invenova Corporation
Nikhil Goel Nex-G
Systems Pte Ltd.
Dinesh S
Nambisan Proxim
Mukesh
Taneja Texas Instruments (India) Pvt.
Ltd.
Second
Phase
Jose Paul
Puthekulam Intel
Shilpa
Talwar Intel
Yuehua
Chen Huawei
Trevor
Pearman Beceem Communications, Inc.
Masoud Olfat Nextelè sorry I loss you by editorially
mistaken
Baraa Al-Dabbagh Intel
David
Maez Navini Networks
Lester
Francis Eastwood Jr. Motorola
Yang
Weidong Navini Networks
Prakash
Natarajan Iyer Intel
Homayoon
Sam Texas
Instruments
Ruobin
Zheng Huawei
Shujun
Dang Huawei
WU
XUYONG Huawei
Gordon
Antonello Wi-LAN Inc.
Aditya
Agrawal Beceem Communications, Inc.
|
--------
|
Panyuh Joo
Ph.D.
Global Standards & Research Team
Telecommunication R&D Center
Telecommunication Network
SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD
TEL: 82-31-279-5096
FAX: 82-31-279-5130
Mobile : 82-16-9530-5096
panyuh@samsung.com
|
------- Original Message -------
Sender : Vladimir
Yanover<vladimir.yanover@ALVARION.COM>
Date : 2004-08-04 19:39
Title : Re: [STDS-802-16]
Maintenance Task Group (was: Re: Corrigenda gro up)
Roger,
Regarding Maintenance Ad Hoc, I would like to say that I respect willing to
do a job in the
direction before formal establishment of Maintenance project. But the group
decided to concentrate on "ruling out" certain comments.
I cannot really accept operations in this procedurally "grey" region. I
believe that clear guidance must be
developed/published/approved before such work starts. This concerns also
procedural part: a comment was [or was not] "ruled out", what next?
My understanding of the WG procedure is that there is no "ruled out"
resolution for a comment; any comment must be considered technically
including question whether it is in or out of the scope of the project and
resolved as Accepted/Accepted-Modified/Rejected/Superceded.
Your clarification would be appreciated.
Such resolution may be not simple as it probably looks. If there are parts X
and Y in REVd that contradict each other,
so fixing comment might be formally "ruled out" as it contradicts at least
one of them and thus "breaks backward compatibility".
If a comment fixes catastrophic performance failure is it in or out? I don't
want to argue here, but it must be decided before the work starts.
Vladimir
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Lalit Kotecha [mailto:lkotecha@SBCGLOBAL.NET]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 04, 2004 4:19 AM
> To: STDS-802-16@listserv.ieee.org
> Subject: Re: [STDS-802-16] Maintenance Task Group (was: Re:
> Corrigenda group)
>
>
> Roger,
>
> I have 2 questins in the similar line.
>
> 1. Sometimes in June 2004, you had requested for comments for
> Maintenance Task group and many commentary were submitted located at
>
> maint folder of upload.wirelessman.org. Do we need to resubmit these
> comments or they get carried forward.
>
> 2. In last session 802.16e WG deffered many comments and
> Reply comments
> to Maitenance Task Group with reasoning that these comments
> were out of
> scope of 802.16e activities. Is there some mechanism in place that
> those comments will be forwarded to 802.16 maint Task group or an
> individual comment submitter has to look into status and re-submit?
>
> Best Regards
> Lalit Kotecha
>
>
>
> --- "Roger B. Marks" <r.b.marks@IEEE.ORG> wrote:
>
> > Ran,
> >
> > Our Corrigenda PAR will be on the agenda for approval by the IEEE-SA
> > Standards Board on September 23. The PAR was renumbered by IEEE-SA,
> > in accordance with their numbering policy, as:
> > P802.16-2004/Cor 1
> > http://ieee802.org/16/docs/04/80216-04_41r1.pdf
> >
> > We have set up a Maintenance Task Group
> > http://ieee802.org/16/maint
> > to handle the project. Even though the project will not be chartered
> > until after Session #33, the Maintenance TG will be issuing a Call
> > for Contributions. The deadline will be August 20 or a little later.
> > The format will be comments, in Commentary format, regarding IEEE
> > Standard 802.16-2004.
> >
> > Roger
> >
> >
> > >Hi Roger, all,
> > >
> > >I'd like to query about the status of the Corrigenda group 802.16h.
> > >What is the form of submitting comments to the group? Will there be
> > >a call for contributions?
> > >
> > >Thank you,
> > >Ran
> > >
> > >===========================================================
> > >Ran Yaniv
> > >Alvarion Ltd.
> > >21a Habarzel St., Tel Aviv, 67910, Israel
> > >tel. +972-3-7674583
> >
>
>
> This mail passed through mail.alvarion.com
>
> **************************************************************
> **********************
> This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
> PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code,
> vandals & computer viruses.
> **************************************************************
> **********************
>
This mail was sent via mail.alvarion.com
************************************************************************************
This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals & computer viruses.
************************************************************************************