Re: [802.15.4B] mid-week summary from Vancouver
Rob,
Your mid week summary did not capture my concern voiced during
yesterday's 802.19 TAG meeting during your attendance.
The NO comment was Steve Shellhammer's individual vote. The NO comment did
not come from the 802.19 TAG as a whole. This never occurred.
I understand that it is confusing that since Steve Shellhamer is the Chair
of the 802.19 TAG, that he can vote as an individual, rather than as the
representative of the 802.19 TAG.
Steve Shellhammer agreed that his individual NO vote and comment on IEEE
802.15.4b letter ballot was addressed since a CA document was produced.
The IEEE 802.19 TAG motioned to provide information that since the 802.19
TAG did not vote on 802.15 working group ballot, it would not delay
802.15.4b's progress and hopes that some individual will be eligible to
vote in the sponsor ballot for 802.15.4b who will technically consider the
CA accompanying the 802.15.4b draft.
We must keep the record and future 802 letter ballot procedures clean and
clear to avoid misrepresentation or precedence setting. To do so will
void the purpose for the 802.19 TAG.
David Cypher
=====================
At 10:50 AM 11/16/2005, you wrote:
>Gang:
>
>Herewith a brief summary of What's Going On in Vancouver:
>
>LETTER BALLOT 32
>- Letter Ballot 32 has closed with no new NO votes, a number of YES
>votes with technical comments (17) and editorial comments (47).
>- We have dealt with all 17 technical comments: 6 were rejected on
>the basis that they referred to text that hadn't changed, 8 were
>accepted as editorial comments, 3 were withdrawn.
>- We're grinding through the 47 editorial comments. 27 have been
>accepted, 3 withdrawn.
>
>COEXISTENCE
>- We met with the 802.19 TAG. The group agrees that the CA document
>that we submitted (15-05-0632-01-004b-coexistence-
>assurance-802-15-4b.doc) satisfies the issue that caused them to vote
>NO on the previous ballot. There will be edits to the CA document,
>but both sides are proceeding in good faith and we don't see any
>major issues ahead.
>
>SPONSOR BALLOT
>- We're on track for going to Sponsor Ballot between now and the
>Hawaii Interim meeting in January.
>- At this moment, we have 41 respondents from a pool of 384. It's an
>appropriate balance of producers (30%), users (30%) and all the rest
>(Academic, Consultant, General Interest).
>- We will make a motion to the Working Group today to go to sponsor
>ballot.
>
>OTHER
>- Monique put in an appearance. It was fun to see her.
>- Eric Gnoske is doing a yeoman's job as secretary.
>
>Best regards,
>
>- Rob
>