[STDS-802-16] Call for Contributions regarding Potential Bridging Project 802.16k
Folks,
I have posted a Call for Contributions regarding the potential project 802.16k on 802.16 bridging:
<http://ieee802.org/16/docs/06/80216-06_010.pdf>
Even though the PAR has not yet been formally approved for submittal, I believe that it is likely to go ahead, perhaps with modest changes made during the March 802 Plenary. I think we would benefit from a quick start on this work. Also, I would like to take advantage of the co-located 802.1 meeting.
The document is calling for contributions relevant to a draft that might be developed under the PAR. Comments on the draft PAR are also welcome. We will assign any contributions to the NetMan Task Group for review.
The deadline is 27 February 2006 AOE <http://tinyurl.com/cc43o>.
Dr. Roger B. Marks <mailto:marks@nist.gov> +1 303 497 7837
National Institute of Standards and Technology/Boulder, CO, USA
Chair, IEEE 802.16 Working Group on Broadband Wireless Access
<http://WirelessMAN.org>
>Dear 802 EC Colleagues:
>
>I am writing to notify you of a new PAR that arose out of the Working Group's January interim session:
>
>* P802.16k: <http://ieee802.org/16/docs/06/80216-06_003.pdf>
>This is for a proposed amendment to 802.1D on 802.16 Bridging.
>
>The 802.16 Working Group members agreed on 12 January, without objection, to forward this PAR. The meeting was without a quorum, so the motion will be formally considered at the March 802 Plenary. We are open to comments and ask that they be delivered to us, per the P&P, by 5 pm on Tuesday of the Plenary Week (7 March).
>
>As background information: Tony Jeffree raised a concern at the 802 EC meeting of 18 November regarding the potential for the 802.16 Mobile Multihop Relay Study Group activity to lead to bridging problems. We identified a 802.16 member (DJ Johnston) to represent 802.16 at the 802.1 interim last week, to explain the Study Group's thinking, gather feedback from 802.1, and be the contact for subsequent discussions during the week (while 802.16 and the Study Group were simultaneously meeting in New Delhi). This discussion led us to understand the importance of adding an additional subclause to 802.1D calling out the specific case of 802.16. We proposed to address the problem by immediately proposing a PAR. It is closely modeled after 802.17a, which, to my understanding, is the most recent project to amend 802.1D.
>
>I'd like to thank DJ for his invaluable assistance. I also want to thank Tony and the others in 802.1 (especially Mick Seaman and Norm Finn) for helping DJ to better appreciate the issues.
>
>Regards,
>
>Roger