Re: [802.21] Deadline for comments/submissions for March 2006 Plenary
On Wed, Jan 25, 2006 at 04:53:35PM -0500, Ajay Rajkumar wrote:
> Srini,
>
> This process is no different than the one which we had been following
> for the past few sessions. The only change is that this time we set the
> deadline for comments and replies three weeks before the f2f session
> (instead of 1 week), so that we get some more time to discuss the
> comments and build concensus.
>
> I would not call it an "internal ballot" since "ballot" has a certain
> connotation, which is not implied here. This is open to the whole .21
> community and not just voting members.
This clarification helps us a lot. I think we should call it a "straw
poll for a Letter Ballot" or something like that?
>
> I would agree that typically the hope would be that with more time we
> would get more comments. I would also agree that it would be desirable
> to get all issues on the current state of the draft pointed out at any
> time. In that case, we could keep an open bin such as a "todo" list of
> issues and get to discussing it once we exhaust the whole list of active
> comments. Submissions that are not directly changing specific text in
> the current draft could still be submitted a week in advance (Feb 27, 2006).
>
> Let me know if this resolves your concerns.
>
> Regards,
> -ajay
Thank you,
Yoshihiro Ohba
>
> Srinivas.Sreemanthula@nokia.com wrote:
>
> >Hi Ajay,
> >I agree that the internal ballot process may allow for faster resolution
> >of comments. But, if the intention to resolve as many comments and
> >issues by the March meeting, it would be better to provide another
> >opportunity to submit them, regardless of how hard we try to get all the
> >comments in by Feb 10th. THis may serve better than putting it off until
> >the deadline for May meeting.
> >
> >Regards,
> >Srini
> >
> >
> >________________________________
> >
> > From: ext Ajay Rajkumar [mailto:ajayrajkumar@lucent.com]
> > Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2006 8:16 AM
> > To: STDS-802-21@listserv.ieee.org
> > Subject: Re: [802.21] Deadline for comments/submissions for
> >March 2006 Plenary
> >
> >
> > Srini,
> >
> > At this time there is no other deadline being set for the
> >comment submission for the March Plenary other than the one mentioned
> >(February 10, 2006).
> >
> > Let us send as many comments to this iteration and see if we can
> >cover all (ok, most!) the comments.
> >
> > Regards,
> > -ajay
> >
> > Srinivas Sreemanthula wrote:
> >
> > Hi Ajay,
> > I have a few questions on the deadlines.
> >
> > 1. Do we have another deadline for contributions for
> >March plenary?
> > 2. Can we still submit additional comments for that
> >date? If so, is that
> > a different file or the same one used during internal
> >ballot?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Srini
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: ext Ajay Rajkumar
> >[mailto:ajayrajkumar@lucent.com]
> > Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2006 10:20 PM
> > To: STDS-802-21@listserv.ieee.org
> > Subject: [802.21] Deadline for
> >comments/submissions for March
> > 2006 Plenary
> >
> > Folks,
> >
> > As discussed in the just concluded Interim
> >session at Hawaii,
> > to give more time for comment resolution, the
> >deadline for
> > comment submission would be earlier than we have
> >typically had.
> >
> > Following are the deadlines for the March 2006
> >Plenary:
> >
> > New draft P802-21-D00-05.pdf made available at
> >the latest by
> > January 30, 2006.
> >
> > Comments/submissions deadline: February 10, 2006
> >midnight EST
> >
> > Merged comments file uploaded: on February 11,
> >2006
> >
> > Reply comments due: February 17, 2006
> >
> > We will have the following two Comment
> >Resolution adhocs
> > before the March 2006 Plenary session:
> >
> > - February 21, 2006; 9-11 am EST
> > - February 28, 2006; 9-11 am EST
> >
> > IMPORTANT: Please note that this process would
> >be more
> > effective if "reply comments" are submitted well
> >in time.
> >
> >
> > Most of the following procedures for submitting
> >comments have been
> > discussed in previous f2f meetings as well as
> >have been
> > followed for the
> > previous comment resolutions. Just to recap:
> >
> > 1. If you are submitting comments for the first
> >time then get the
> > "commentary" software from the following
> >directory:
> > http://www.ieee802.org/21/Commentary
> > Else you should have the software already
> >downloaded.
> >
> > 2. Submit comments on the current draft version
> >P802-21-D00-05.pdf
> >
> > The following fields need to be filled for every
> >comment submitted:
> > - Document under Review
> > - Comment Submitted by (First Name, Last Name)
> > - Comment Date
> > - Comment
> > - Starting Page#
> > - Starting Line#
> > - Fig/Table# (if applicable)
> > - Section#
> > - Suggested Remedy
> >
> > 3. All contributions should be in the form of a
> >FileMaker file with
> > extension ".USR" with the file name format as
> > D00-05_Lastname_Firstname.USR.
> >
> > 4. Once the comments deadline has passed, a
> >consolidated comment file
> > would be uploaded. Read the comments using the
> >commentary software and
> > if you want to respond to any comment, check the
> >"Marked" box
> > at the top
> > of that record. Then fill out the following
> >fields:
> >
> > - Proposed Resolution
> > - Recommendation
> > - Recommendation by
> > - Reason for Recommendation
> >
> > 5. When you are finished entering replies, look
> >under Scripts
> > and choose
> > "Find Marked Records". This will find the
> >records for which you checked
> > the "Marked" box.
> >
> > 6. Under Scripts, choose "Export Clause Editor's
> >Proposals". This will
> > only export the marked records that one wanted
> >to reply to. Choose the
> > file type "FileMaker Pro Runtime Files". Enter a
> >file name of the form
> > "D00-05_reply_Lastname_Firstname.USR".
> >
> > Best Regards,
> > -ajay
> >
> > Ajay Rajkumar
> > Chair, IEEE 802.21 WG
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>