Letter to the FCC by IEEE802

["Jim Carlo" <jcarlo@ti.com>]

Vic, I am very concerned with the appropriateness of this letter. We had
quite a go-around and discussion on whether the other two letters that IEEE
802 submitted to the FCC had gone through due-process and I believe we made
significant progress by our inviting different parties to hear the responses
before submission. In the end, I felt we had done our job properly.

We still have concerned parties on the prior letters, with an appeal into
the IEEE, and I do not know what the status of this is.

The problem I have with the letter below:

1) I was not aware of the fact that the FCC had extended the response time
for comments.  Therefore in a previous note you sent me that there was no
need to submit additional comments by the IEEE 802. I am concerned that
interested parties may not have realized that this issue would be discussed
at the 802 meeting.
a) Was the discussion of this letter announced as part of your agenda for
the 802.11 meeting and when. I probably missed it?

2) Your updated letter to the FCC is confusing. Do I understand correctly
that the cover page will not actually be submitted? Therefore the clear
definition of what is the RAHG Regulatory Ad Hoc group, how many members
were in this group (I think five members - I'd like a list and their
companies) to show some balence. I believe this should be included in the
actual letter with the other tallies.

3) What more review does this letter need? Why does it need review by
Council? We discussed this in the SEC meeting, and the summary was not clear
on how council could modify an 802 letter. As I understand it, the letter,
after we get it correct, will be circulated to IEEE-USA and IEEE-SA Staff
for comment and review.

4) I would also send the letter, after you update per 2), to Steve Berger
and Ian Gifford for forwarding to Bluetooth and HomeRF for information.

I will be in Hawaii for the next four days, so you can call me at my room,
or on my cellular phone. Can you call me at 9:00am on Monday?

Jim Carlo(jcarlo@ti.com) Cellular:1-214-693-1776 Voice&Fax:1-214-853-5274
TI Fellow, Networking Standards at Texas Instruments
Chair, ISO/IEC JTC1/SC6 Telecom and Info Exchange Between Systems
Chair, IEEE802 LAN/MAN Standards Committee

-----Original Message-----
From: Hayes, Vic (Vic) [mailto:vichayes@lucent.com]
Sent: Friday, November 12, 1999 3:55 PM
To: Pribula, Denise IEEE; Sauthoff, Dr. Ned - IEEE-USA VP
Cc: Rutigliano, Janet; Carlo, Jim TI
Subject: Request for review by Counsel
Importance: High


Hi Denise,
Could you please request counsel to review this letter planned for filing at
the FCC for the proceedings in ET Docket 99-231 as Reply-Comments.

The filing date should be November 19, 1999 (FCC delayed the deadline). I
can make a PDF file of the version Tom approves. I will then have that one
e-mailed to him for electronic filing.

In addition, I ask Dr. Ned Sauthof to review the contents with the IEEE-USA
policy.

Thanks a lot.
----------
Vic Hayes,
Chair, IEEE P802.11, Standards WG for Wireless Local Area Networks
Lucent Technologies Nederland B.V.
Zadelstede 1-10
3431 JZ  Nieuwegein
The Netherlands
voice phone number: +31 30 6097528 (Time Zone UTC+1)
fax phone number: +31 30 609 7556
e-mail: vichayes@lucent.com
  <<92658r2_Proposed_Reply_Comments_on_FCC_99-231r1.doc>>

92658r2_Proposed_Reply_Comments_on_FCC_99-231r1.doc