| Thread Links | Date Links | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thread Prev | Thread Next | Thread Index | Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index |
|
On behalf of Phil Barber:
From: Phillip
Barber [mailto:pbarber@huawei.com] All TGm participants, I know these tag
applications on the comments and contributions is not usual for us, and I know
that they are a bit of an inconvenience, but I do believe that they are very
necessary. Essentially TGm has three
different types of material being submitted for Session 57: SDD Cleanup; 7 RG
outputs; 8 new topics. As expected, and as observed in past sessions, the
comment and contribution response on these calls is substantial, over 600
comments and nearly 300 contributions. Big numbers. Brian and the TGm
leadership had anticipated this high volume. Consequently they had previously
determined to break TGm into two parallel meeting tracks in So, the question then
became how to identify and assign comments and contributions for processing in
these two tracks in Kobe, how to appropriately plan the agenda and time
allocations to resolve comments and contributions as expeditiously as possible,
with maximum opportunity for participants and, most importantly, with maximum
opportunity to accept SDD text necessary to maintain our project plan. Hence the tags. So, while I know this may
have been a little confusing for participants tags seemed the simplest and most
effective way to obtain the necessary categorization information so that we can
plan for our most effective outcome in Session 57. While you are grumbling
you might want to consider the work of Avi to construct the extremely useful
Excel spreadsheet with contribution identification, categorization, and
submittal validation, including providing missing tags. And think of Shkumbin
and Carl who are spending endless hours filing the missing category tags from
the so many comments where authors omitted the requested tags. At 802.16 we work hard to
protect participants from the drudgery and tedium of process so that we can
focus on technical material when we gather for Sessions. But sometimes we do
have to ask that participants make some effort to facilitate process. Use of
the Commentary Tool is a very good example of that. Adherence to the
Contribution template is another. I hope all will understand the necessity of
adding this slight increase in participant requirement, in this particular
instance. I cannot say that we will need to do this every Session. But you may
see similar additional process requirements, as the work load demands, from
time-to-time. Your continued patience
and understanding is appreciated. Thanks, From: Avi
Freedman [mailto:avif@HEXAGONLTD.COM] Dear Jinyoung All I can do is refer you
to Phil's e-mail from Sept. 5. I cannot put it better. I just
deleted the text not relevant to your question: __________________________Excerpts
from Phil's
Mail________________________________________________________________ The valid entries for the
Re: field on the contribution cover page are: SDD
Session 56 Cleanup [related to CfC&C item: Newly accepted text output from the
Rapporteur Groups in Session #56, primarily in Sections 4, 6, 8, 10 and 11] PHY:
Text PHY:
Link PHY: HARQ PHY:
MIMO MAC:
HO MAC:
Idle Mode MAC:
Sleep Mode MAC:
Data Plane MAC:
Network Entry MAC:
Connection Establishment & Maintenance PHY & MAC aspects of Location Services* PHY & MAC aspects of enhanced MBS* Multi - Carrier Operation* Security* Multi-Radio Coexistence* For these last five italicized* topics the author
should clearly segment and identify the work as PHY or MAC The RG and Ad-hoc Chairs
will be filing consensus contributions on behalf of the following Rapporteur
Groups, by the deadline: PHY: Text PHY:
Link PHY:
HARQ PHY:
MIMO MAC: HO MAC:
Idle Mode MAC:
Sleep Mode Sixth, obviously the
restrictions and process for RG and Ad-hoc material does not apply to those
items that were not part of any RG or Ad-hoc harmonization efforts: SDD
Session 56 Cleanup [related to CfC&C item: Newly accepted text output from the
Rapporteur Groups in Session #56, primarily in Sections 4, 6, 8, 10 and 11] MAC:
Data Plane MAC:
Network Entry MAC:
Connection Establishment & Maintenance PHY & MAC aspects of Location Services* PHY & MAC aspects of enhanced MBS* Multi - Carrier Operation* Security* Multi-Radio Coexistence* Comments and
contributions related to these topics will be reviewed, and for SDD Session 56
Cleanup items resolved during the Session. Expect the creation of Rapporteur
Groups to continue harmonization and consensus development on the unresolved
topics for the period after Session 57 till Session ____________________END_____________________________________________________________________________________- From: jychun
[mailto:jychun03@LGE.COM] Dear Avi and all, I wonder how items are
classified into ‘PHY SDD cleanup’ or “PHY text’. For example, as JK’s email, there are many
contributions related to UL control. But some contributions are in ‘PHY SDD cleanup’ and some are in ‘PHY text’. Please let me clarify it. Jinyoung From: Dear Avi, After reviewing the contribution classifications from
others, I would like to change the classifications on our contribution form
“PHY text” to “PHY SDD cleanup” to be more aligned with
the rest of the group. Please change the classifications on the following 5
contributions for me (to “PHY SDD cleanup”). Thank you. -JK
From: Avi
Freedman [mailto:avif@HEXAGONLTD.COM] Dear All, I have uploaded the contribution
list of session 57 to the temp directory http://dot16.org/ul//upload/temp_db/TGmContributions57_Kobe_2008_09_08.xls Please note the
following:
Thanks for all the
efforts all the contributors make in preparing and submitting the contributions Avi
|