Re: [802.19] Comments on Draft Liaison

["Shellhammer, Steve" <sshellha@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Good point.  We will do two counts according to our process.

 

·        Everyone in the room

·        WG members

 

Steve

 

From: Michael J. Lynch [mailto:MJLynch@xxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2016 12:29 PM
To: Shellhammer, Steve <sshellha@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; STDS-802-19@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [802.19] Comments on Draft Liaison

 

Steve and Rich,

In the past there have been objections when the EC is asked to approve a document and the vote totals are not provided. It may be best to provide the voting totals especially to avoid a delay in the approval process.

Best regards,

Mike

Sent from my Windows 8.1 Phone

---

From: Shellhammer, Steve
Sent: ‎5/‎18/‎2016 9:12
To: STDS-802-19@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [802.19] Comments on Draft Liaison

Rich,

 

               Thanks for leading the group of interested parties in updating the liaison yesterday.

 

               I made some suggested edits, which are attached.

 

               We can discuss these and any other comments from others at the PM2 WG meeting later today.

 

               My main two comments are,

 

·        I think we need to follow the approved process and send this liaison from IEEE 802

o   Here is link to the process, https://mentor.ieee.org/802.19/dcn/14/19-14-0089-01-0000-liaison-approval-process.pptx

o   We can run a EC email ballot with an early close.  We should be able to get the EC approval quickly.

·        My comment on the content is related to the use of the term “consensus”  It is my recollection that at the 3GPP workshop the RAN Chair said that 3GPP would address comments from all stakeholders.  I do not recall any statement on the organizations “reaching consensus” and I do not know how that would be done anyways.  So I made a few edits accordingly.

 

Regards,

Steve