[STDS-802-16] 802.16k PAR for 802 EC consideration
Dear EC,
The 802.16 WG received no external comments on its proposed P802.16k PAR.
At its Thursday Closing Plenary, the WG approved (72/0/0) a motion "To accept 802.16-06/003r1 as the revised 802.16k PAR and authorise forwarding the revised PAR to the 802 EC."
The updated PAR is:
<http://ieee802.org/16/docs/06/80216-06_003r1.pdf>
This document differs in only one way from the version submitted to the EC according to the 30 day rule. The difference is in Item 6 ("TYPE OF PROJECT"). Instead of "802.1D-2004", the new document proposes to amend "802.1D". The purpose of striking out the year is to allow the amendment to address any issues arising from a previous amendment to 802.1D-2004; that amendment was called 802.17a.
Roger
>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