Re: [RE] What's wrong using FireWire as the home backbone?
John:
The PAR contains a scope statement limited to five lines. The PAR
though is the statement of work as far as the IEEE-SA Standards Board is
concerned. Generally, the scope statement is quite broad, and the
purpose (also five lines) also typically. If the draft developed by a
group is not consistent with the PAR, RevCom may not approve it as a
standard.
The Five Criteria are unique to IEEE 802. They serve a number of
purposes, but in my view, the most important is establishing that there
is a timely need for a project. The "why" is covered by Broad Market
potential and Distinct Identity, and the "why now" by Broad Market
Potential, Technical Feasibility and Economic Feasibility.
The PAR and Five Criteria define our work in the view of the LMSC
Executive Committee. (It is interesting to note that the 2004 PAR form
added 14a which is intended to stimulate some of the same kind of
thought process for all IEEE_SA groups that an 802 group goes through if
it seriously considers the Five Criteria.)
As David pointed out, the objectives are not required, but are something
done by virtually all 802.3 groups (look on the web site for completed
or ongoing projects -- P802.3ae, P802.3ah, P802.3an, etc.) Objectives
define items and levels of consensus, and will typically evolve until
there is a draft (sometimes even after). Objectives should not be used
to write the standard, but to provide greater detail than practical in a
five line scope statement. When approved/accepted by the 802.3 WG, they
can be viewed as a "contract" between the project task force and IEEE
802.3 on the work to be done. For example, if the project will only
address full-duplex operation, than that could either be included in the
PAR scope or as an objective depending on the level of agreement. If
the task force believes the "contract" needs to be revised, an amended
or new objective is presented to 802.3 for approval. If the change
though is in the PAR scope statement, then a modified PAR must be
prepared and approved by 802.3, the LMSC Executive Committee, NesCom and
the IEEE-SA standards board.
--Bob Grow
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-stds-802-3-re@IEEE.ORG
>[mailto:owner-stds-802-3-re@IEEE.ORG] On Behalf Of John Grant
>Sent: Friday, September 03, 2004 6:45 AM
>To: STDS-802-3-RE@listserv.ieee.org
>Subject: Re: [RE] What's wrong using FireWire as the home backbone?
>
>At 13:26 03/09/2004 +0100, David Law wrote:
>>Hi John,
>>
>>I just wanted to comment on your statements 'this group is
>tasked with producing
>>an enhancement to 802.3' and 'This project is about making
>Ethernet an option
>>for such applications.' that you made in your e-mail. In
>IEEE-SA terms, this is
>>not yet a project, a project requires a Project Authorisation
>Request (PAR)
>>approved by the IEEE-SA Standards Board. This instead is a
>IEEE 802.3 Study
>>Group.
>
>Sorry, there should have been an extra level of indirection in
>there, not "this" group but the group that might exist at the
>next stage.
>
>
>>Regardless of terminology I just wanted to clarify the
>following. The task of
>>this Study Group is to achieve consensus on a draft PAR and
>five criteria then
>>gain approval for them from the IEEE 802.3 Working Group, the
>Sponsor and then
>>the IEEE-SA. In addition it is normal practice, and in my
>opinion essential in
>>gaining IEEE 802.3 approval, for a set of objectives for the
>project to be also
>>generated.
>
>So it's not just (PAR + 5 criteria) but (PAR + 5 criteria +
>objectives)? Can you give an example of what the objectives
>might look like? Is there anything else that's implicitly required?
>
>
>
>John Grant
> ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___
> | || || || | | || || || || |
> | N || i || n || e | | T || i || l || e || s |
> |___||___||___||___| |___||___||___||___||___|
>
>Nine Tiles Networks Ltd, Cambridge, England
>+44 1223 862599 and +44 1223 511455
>http://www.ninetiles.com
>