| Thread Links | Date Links | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thread Prev | Thread Next | Thread Index | Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index |
Mark, I think I understand, although I'm not sure I quite follow which are the "previous contributions in the Study Group phase discussing issues related to the proposal and consideration of additional evaluation criteria" from your note below. Would you mind providing an example of such contributions proposing additional evaluation criteria? Thanks Mark! Jorge From: Mark Laubach <laubach@xxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:laubach@xxxxxxxxxxxx>> Reply-To: Mark Laubach <laubach@xxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:laubach@xxxxxxxxxxxx>> Date: Thursday, September 6, 2012 5:35 PM To: EPoC Study Group <STDS-802-3-EPOC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:STDS-802-3-EPOC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>> Subject: Re: [802.3_EPOC] IEEE P802.3bn Call for Presentations for Geneva meeting Hi Jorge and all, Our approved Objectives along with our PAR and 5Criterial define the technical requirements for our standard development process. As part of the Task Force draft completeness review, we will be asking ourselves “have we met our Objectives?” (as well as the PAR, the 5Criteria, and any other adopted evaluation criteria) before requesting approval for Working Group ballot. Recall that the Objectives are a commitment between a Task Force and the 802.3 Working Group. Aspects of the Objectives and any other evaluation criteria will be reflected in some manner in our work; i.e. the Task Force draft will define a set of technical requirements that are to be met by future products that claim conformance with the approved standard. Following that, technical requirements that influence conformance are much more related to our technical selection consensus process for building the Baseline, as Marek overviewed. There are previous contributions in the Study Group phase discussing issues related to the proposal and consideration of additional evaluation criteria. I think this topic area is more central to the original question. The Call For Presentations for the upcoming meeting also highlights the need for contribution in these areas. Cheers, Mark Acting Chair IEEE P802.3bn From: Marek Hajduczenia [mailto:marek.hajduczenia@xxxxxx] Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2012 5:29 AM To: STDS-802-3-EPOC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:STDS-802-3-EPOC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Subject: Re: [802.3_EPOC] IEEE P802.3bn Call for Presentations for Geneva meeting Jorge, You’re 100% right on target there – since the group developing both sides (first Objectives and then Baseline Proposals) is typically the same, we do not need any intermediate steps. We move directly to baselines and start developing actual the product (standard draft). I understand now the context of your question in the first email :) Regards Marek From: Salinger, Jorge [mailto:Jorge_Salinger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]<mailto:[mailto:Jorge_Salinger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]> Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2012 12:32 To: STDS-802-3-EPOC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:STDS-802-3-EPOC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Subject: Re: [802.3_EPOC] IEEE P802.3bn Call for Presentations for Geneva meeting Thanks Marek! I guess I should have explained myself a bit better. I understand the purpose of the Baseline Proposals, and I am working on a few with some TF colleagues. And I understand the purpose of the Objectives as I worked on them. To mirror terms used in general during the product or service development process, I see the Objectives as being product requirements, and I see the Baseline Proposals as being the design. I was wondering about a step in the middle, between what I call product requirements (the Objectives) and the design (the Baseline Proposals) which I would call the technical requirements. This intermediate phase would define what needs to be designed in more detail than the product requirements would. But, I guess from the answer from Marek below, which I consider to be an expert in the IEEE 802 and 802.3 processes, I guess the answer is no, there isn't any requirements in between the Objectives and the Baseline Proposals. Please correct me if I misunderstood. I guess this makes sense since it is the same group that develops the Objectives and the Baseline Proposal. On the product or service development side the product requirements come from a different organization than the one that would do the design and development of the product or service, so the technical requirements are necessary to properly define the requirements. So, we can directly jump to Baseline Proposals from the Objectives, which is good. Saves time, which is great. Thanks! Jorge From: Marek Hajduczenia <marek.hajduczenia@xxxxxx<mailto:marek.hajduczenia@xxxxxx>> Date: Thursday, September 6, 2012 2:14 AM To: "Salinger, Jorge" <Jorge_Salinger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:Jorge_Salinger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>>, EPoC Study Group <STDS-802-3-EPOC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:STDS-802-3-EPOC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>> Subject: RE: [802.3_EPOC] IEEE P802.3bn Call for Presentations for Geneva meeting Hi Jorge, Since you asked “all” as well ... It is typical for any project to establish what is called “baseline proposals”, covering a set of technical agreements and requirements that the given device under specification must meet. Here are some examples of baseline proposals from other projects: • P802.3av (among the others, more available at http://www.ieee802.org/3/av/public/baseline.html): – “802.3av shall not support a physical XAUI interface between PHY and MAC in the ONU.” – “There shall be a Broadcast MAC instance for 10G distinct from the 1G Broadcast MAC instance” – “10GEPON shall accommodate FEC’s parity bandwidth by reducing the MAC’s effective data rate (sub-rating).” • P802.3bf: – “Adopt slide 7 from law_1_0110.pdf<http://www.ieee802.org/3/bf/public/1001/law_1_0110.pdf> as the baseline architecture” • P802.3bj: – “Move that the following be adopted as baseline proposals: - dudek_03_0312.pdf<http://www.ieee802.org/3/bj/public/mar12/dudek_03_0312.pdf> for the 12.9GHz-related objective - brown_01a_0312.pdf<http://www.ieee802.org/3/bj/public/mar12/brown_01a_0312.pdf> (excluding slides 4 and 26) and brown_02_0312.pdf<http://www.ieee802.org/3/bj/public/mar12/brown_02_0312.pdf> for the 7.0GHz related objective” Is this what you mean by “technical requirements”? If so, I believe we have mechanism already in place to establish those – all we need is proposals, discussion at the meeting and eventually – a vote to approve these. Howard described this process already in some detail in http://www.ieee802.org/3/epoc/public/jul12/frazier_02_0712.pdf presented at the last meeting. Regards Marek From: Salinger, Jorge [mailto:Jorge_Salinger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2012 01:24 To: STDS-802-3-EPOC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:STDS-802-3-EPOC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Subject: Re: [802.3_EPOC] IEEE P802.3bn Call for Presentations for Geneva meeting Mark and All, I have a question of technical organizational nature... Is it necessary and customary to establish technical requirements for a project once a Task Force is established? I know we have the Objectives, but I see those as product requirements versus technical requirements. If so, I suppose that we could/should start doing that during this next meeting, would you agree? Thanks! Jorge From: Mark Laubach [mailto:laubach@xxxxxxxxxxxx]<mailto:[mailto:laubach@xxxxxxxxxxxx]> Sent: Wednesday, September 05, 2012 01:40 AM To: STDS-802-3-EPOC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:STDS-802-3-EPOC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <STDS-802-3-EPOC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:STDS-802-3-EPOC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>> Subject: [802.3_EPOC] IEEE P802.3bn Call for Presentations for Geneva meeting Dear Members of the IEEE P802.3bn Task Force, We will be meeting for two days during the September IEEE 802.3 interim meeting at the ITU in Geneva, Switzerland, September 27th and 28th. Anyone who would like to deliver a presentation at the meeting is advised to read the "Procedure for Presenters", found at: http://www.ieee802.org/3/bn/public/presentproc.html You will need to send me a request for presentation time no later than September 14th, and a PDF file of the presentation (in English) no later than Tuesday, September 18th. As we’ve now entered the Task Force phase, a growing percentage of presentations should focus on incrementally building broad consensus and support for technical selections that meet our PAR, Objectives and Criteria, including developing our Channel Model, and any other evaluation criteria that will be used by the TF for Baseline selection purposes, and as well as on the co-existence of FDD and TDD. As this is the first meeting of the Task Force, please expect the first portion of the agenda to review IEEE SA, 802, and 802.3 processes for getting to an approved standard as well as some preparatory information on the email distribution list in the near future. In addition, before the close of the meeting we will need to adopt a Task Force Timeline. I look forward to seeing you in Geneva. Mark Laubach Acting Chair IEEE 802.3bn Task Force Broadband Communications Group Broadcom Corporation 1351 Redwood Way Petaluma, CA, 94954 [Description: Description: Description: broadcom.jpg] Tel: +1.707.792.9093 Cell: +1.650.996.2219 ________________________________ <="" p=""> ________________________________ ________________________________ ________________________________ <="" p=""> ________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-3-EPOC list, click the following link: https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-3-EPOC&A=1
Attachment:
image001.jpg
Description: image001.jpg
