RE: [RPRWG] Agenda Items for Albuquerque
Hi Bob,
It is great to see your gusto even as you transition to other efforts.
I like the spirit in which you have stated what we need to do for 17a.
However, let me voice my concerns of doing some of the specific things
mentioned by you now.
I feel the best process would be to identify what we want to work on 17a.
I am sure, as vendors, we all have our pet features but we need some
direct input from users. I have started this dialog with a few and requested
them to provide inputs and rationale behind it directly to the WG. This
requires us to identify a time point when we can get these users either on a phone
or in person to do this. So, picking a point in time is good. However, approving
the formation of study group now has it drawbacks as mentioned below.
The risk of opening such a discussion now and letting it become a
debate implying that the current standard lacks these features will propagate
an impression that even after 4 years of work the standard *lacks* useful
features. I feel we should do this after we are into sponsor ballot and
FCS-ed our first product. We still need "all-hands-on-deck" for this.
Finally, I think we need diversity of thought. After 4 years we are all
standard-weary and either agree or disagree on the same issues. We will
perpetuate this unless we bring some fresh minds into the dot17 enclave and allow them
to be thought leaders for a while. At the same time, people like you and Mike
can guide them through the process they have to go.
I am open to indicate that we prefer such a formation in early 2004 and announce
to all concerned of the time line to come prepared for the first gathering in
Spring of 2004. However, approving the formation of the group right now will
dilute our efforts on the current ballot and make it a distraction for others.
-----Original Message-----
From: Robert D. Love [mailto:rdlove@xxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Wednesday, November 05, 2003 9:52 AM
To: Mike Takefman; stds-802-17
Subject: Re: [RPRWG] Agenda Items for Albuquerque
All, at this meeting there should be a concerted effort to begin the work
necessary for the next edition of the RPR standard. At a minimum, by
Thursday afternoon there should be a motion requesting a "study group" that
will be looking into the standardization of some extension of RPR.
Best regards,
Robert D. Love
President, LAN Connect Consultants
7105 Leveret Circle Raleigh, NC 27615
Phone: 919 848-6773 Mobile: 919 810-7816
email: rdlove@xxxxxxxx Fax: 208 978-1187
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mike Takefman" <tak@xxxxxxxxx>
To: "stds-802-17" <stds-802-17@xxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, November 05, 2003 11:00 AM
Subject: [RPRWG] Agenda Items for Albuquerque
>
> RPRWGers,
>
> Our opening Plenary will start on monday afternoon at 1, but
> the agenda appears to mostly be administrative at the moment.
>
> I have not received any requests for presentation slots, but
> there are always late requests. So there may be some technical
> content.
>
> Right now the agenda appears as follows.
>
> Usual Boilerplate
> Review of Financial Operations for 2002, 2003
> Vice-Chair Election or Acclamation ?
> Sponsor Ballot - Are we Ready and What is the Process
> 802.17a - Start of WG Ballot
>
> Tuesday morning we will start with the editors report
> and then figure out what the CR schedule is.
>
> We will also review 802.17a on tuesday and resolve
> some comments that came from Norm/Tony. But everyone
> is free to give it a read prior to the meeting and
> generate some discussion.
>
> Wednesday morning the ballot closes and in the
> afternoon we get the editor's report and finish CR.
>
> We may begin our closing plenary on wednesday IFF
> we are ahead on schedule. Otherwise we start it thursday
> morning.
>
> mike
> --
> Michael Takefman tak@xxxxxxxxx
> Distinguished Engineer, Cisco Systems
> Chair IEEE 802.17 Stds WG
> 3000 Innovation Dr, Ottawa, Canada, K2K 3E8
> voice: 613-254-3399 cell:613-220-6991
>
>