[RPRWG] ATTENTION: This is a different Ballot Announcement: WG Ballot on Multicast Scoping in P802.17b D1.2
- To: STDS-802-17@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: [RPRWG] ATTENTION: This is a different Ballot Announcement: WG Ballot on Multicast Scoping in P802.17b D1.2
- From: "Mike Takefman (tak)" <tak@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2005 17:45:12 -0500
- Reply-To: "Mike Takefman (tak)" <tak@xxxxxxxxx>
- Thread-Index: AcYByTVo3Ma98DBMSyi++gg/tpX4sQ==
- Thread-Topic: ATTENTION: This is a different Ballot Announcement: WG Ballot on Multicast Scoping in P802.17b D1.2
Dear RPRWGers,
This is a second WG ballot that is running concurrently with the
main ballot on P802.17b D1.2.
Please read this notice carefully as it is NOT a typical
ballot announcement.
Announcement of opening of 802.17 WG Ballot and Comment Period
--------------------------------------------------------------
Dear IEEE 802.17 Working Group Member:
This e-mail is to advise you of the opening of the IEEE 802.17 Working
Group
Ballot for IEEE P802.17b Draft 1.2 Multicast Scoping section.
This ballot refers to text in the P802.17b Draft 1.2 document currently
under ballot. Specifically, text that is marked within an editor's
note referencing comment #25 is what should be reviewed.
At the November 2005 Plenary in Vancouver, we failed to reach
concensus on the question of multicast scoping and bi-directionally
balanced flooding (although we came close, please see the
minutes at
http://www.ieee802.org/17/documents/presentations/nov2005/minutes_051117
_01.pdf
The working group made decisions to:
1) Authorize the editor to add text to the draft in the form
of editor's notes that captured the majority view on the
implementation
of bidirectionally balanced flooding and multicast scoping.
2) Conduct a ballot on the new text separate from the draft ballot
to attempt to achieve concensus.
This will not be an "ordinary" ballot. Rather then a simple
approve / disapprove I request all members to read the minutes
and see the straw poll results.
There is a ballot_form at
http://www.ieee802.org/17/member/802_17b/d1_2_multi/index.htm
Please fill in the form and email it back to the chair.
The form asks a number of questions concerning how whether/how
to implement bi-directionally balanced flooding and multicast
scoping. The form asks for specific answers in some questions
and acceptable/unacceptable choices in others. In each case there is an
area where you can write in comments. All members are asked to
answer all questions and consider:
1) Taking each option individually - which of the options is
their number 1 choice and which of the other options they would
be willing to accept and which options would generate a negative
ballot on the overall draft if they were to be accepted.
2) A comment on which set of options when taken together is their
number 1 choice and any other set of options that would be
acceptable.
If we can achieve 75% agreement on one set of options (where
the set of options is the first choice) then we can authorize
the editor to encorporate the changes and remove the editor's
notes surrounding them.
If two or more sets of options can achieve 75% (where the none of
the sets of options are the first choice for 75% of the members)
we will encorporate the option with the larger degree of concensus
and hold an email confirmation ballot.
Failure to achieve concensus means that this issue will (hopefully)
be resolved during the March 2006 Plenary Session in Denver.
Furthermore, members are encouraged to formulate other options
in order to help drive concensus and are encouraged to send these
to the mailing list during the ballot for review by others.
Any comments related to the text in the editor's notes should be
placed in the CRD for D1_2.
The comment period opens on Thursday, 15 December 2005 at 6:00 PM ET
and closes on Saturday, 14 January 2005 at 23:59 PM AOE (anywhere on
earth).
THIS IS AN 802.17 BALLOT. All members of the WG are required to
participate.
Failure to respond to ballots jeopardizes your voting rights.
All valid ballots (votes on the document) that are submitted will be
counted
towards approval or disapproval of the draft. To be valid, a ballot must
be
cast by a voting member of the 802.17 working group. Comments from
non-voters
are also welcome, and will not be counted towards approval or
disapproval of
the draft.
All properly submitted comments will be resolved during the January 2006
Conference Calls (January 17/18, 2006).
A copy of this draft can be found on our password-protected website:
http://www.ieee802.org/17/member/802_17b/d1_2/index.htm
The draft is posted in Adobe PDF document format and can be viewed
online,
or downloaded and printed. You will need a copy of Adobe's Acrobat
Reader
to view or print the draft. This software is available for free
downloading
from Adobe at:
http://www.adobe.com/prodindex/acrobat/readstep.html.
The draft prints out as 322 pages. It is copyrighted by the IEEE and is
for your review and balloting purposes only. It should not be copied or
otherwise distributed.
The ballot/comment executable, which requires Windows, is available at:
http://www.ieee802.org/17/member/802_17b/d1_2_multi/index.htm
If this is your first time using the comment executable, please read the
instructions available at the same location.
Please submit ballots and comments (using the output of your comment
executable) electronically to the editor, Marc Holness, at the email
address
given at:
http://www.ieee802.org/17/projects/P802_17b/index.htm#EditorialStaff.
If you should have any questions, problems, or comments please contact
the chair, Mike Takefman, at the email address given at:
http://www.ieee802.org/17/index.htm#Officers.
NOTE:
According to the RPR Working Group ballot process, official ballots will
be
accepted only from voting members of the 802.17 Working Group. The draft
is
also, however, being circulated to those who have been participating in
the
standardization process but are not members of the Working Group, in
order to
provide a wide review of the document and to solicit comments.
You should also be aware that Technical-Binding (TB) comments are not
required
to be tracked amongst non-Working Group members. If a TB is entered by a
person
who is not a Working Group member, and this person is not at attendance
and
readily available at the interim meeting to review the Working Group's
response, we will not obligate the editor or staff of 802.17 to track
down the
commenter and obtain the sign-off.
cheers,
mike
-------------------------------------------
Michael Takefman tak@cisco.com
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