Re: [RPRWG] P802.17 Interim Session (Oct 4-6)

While this will be an OPTIONAL feature to fully support, I am guessing that if you implement it there will be PICS entries for conformance that will be MANDATORY for the feature. If there are PICS, it would seem like you would have to have a sub-clause.

Michael

-----Original Message-----
From: Marc Holness [mailto:holness@NORTELNETWORKS.COM]
Sent: Sunday, September 05, 2004 5:00 PM
To: STDS-802-17@listserv.ieee.org
Subject: Re: [RPRWG] P802.17 Interim Session (Oct 4-6)

Could be a new clause or annex. Depending upon technical direction of specification could also be sub-clause. At this point in time, not sure what the best 802.17 specification vehicle should be.

Perhaps we can discuss.

Marc.

-----Original Message-----
From: Leon Bruckman [mailto:leonb@CORRIGENT.COM]
Sent: Sunday, September 05, 2004 6:07 AM
To: STDS-802-17@listserv.ieee.org
Subject: Re: [RPRWG] P802.17 Interim Session (Oct 4-6)

Marc,

What was the reason the decide to add a sub-clause instead of an Annex ?

Leon

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-stds-802-17@listserv.ieee.org [mailto:owner-stds-802-17@listserv.ieee.org] On Behalf Of Marc Holness
Sent: Friday, September 03, 2004 3:40 AM
To: STDS-802-17@listserv.ieee.org
Subject: [RPRWG] P802.17 Interim Session (Oct 4-6)

RPRWGers,

As previously stated by Mike Takefman, the focus of this session will be the Spatially Aware Bridging Study Group (SABSG).

To facilitate the finalization of the PAR and 5-Criteria for the project, please find attached 3 packages outlining:

        1) Aspects of a proposed PAR,
        2) Draft 5-Criteria,
        3) Operating objectives governing the project,

that we will review during the session.

Regards,

Marc Holness