I vote to approve this
motion.
Thanx,
Buzz
Dr. Everett
O. (Buzz) Rigsbee
Boeing -
SSG
PO Box 3707,
M/S: 7M-FM
Seattle,
WA 98324-2207
(425)
865-2443 Fx: (425) 865-6721
everett.o.rigsbee@boeing.com
-----Original
Message-----
From: Paul
Nikolich [mailto:paul.nikolich@att.net]
Sent: Saturday, January 25,
2003 8:48
AM
To: IEEE802
Cc: Matthew Sherman; stuart@ok-brit.com;
Matthew B. Shoemake
Subject:
[802SEC] +++ SEC EMAIL BALLOT +++ MOTION: Authorize conditional forwarding of
P802.11g/D6.1 to Sponsor Ballot
Dear SEC,
This is a 10
day SEC email ballot to make a determination on the below SEC motion
to conditionally forward IEEEE P802.11g/D6.1 to LMSC Sponsor Ballot, moved by
Stuart Kerry, seconded by Mat Sherman.
The email ballot opens on Saturday
January 25 12noon EST and closes Tuesday February 4 12noon
EST.
Please direct your responses to the SEC reflector and to Matthew
Shoemake, chair of the 802.11g task group.
Regards,
--Paul
Nikolich
Subject: SEC Motion: Conditionally
forward P802.11g/D6.1 for Sponsor Ballot.
Moved: Stuart
Kerry Second: Matthew Sherman
MOTION: To
conditionally forward IEEE P1802.11g/D6.1 ("Draft Ammendment for Further
Higher data rate extension in the 2.4GHz band") for Sponsor
Ballot.
Explanation:
The Working Group 802.11g Letter
Ballot 50 ("To forward IEEE P802.11g/D5.1 for Sponsor Ballot") ran
from November 27, 2002 to January 8,
2003.
The results were:
Approve: 256
Disapprove: 34 Approval Ratio: 88% [75% required]
Abstain:
18 Ballots: 308 Elligble
Voters:321 Return Ratio: 96%
[50% required]
Comments (no votes) : 185
The Ballot Resolution Committee met
January 13-17th, and as a result several voters confirmed they would change
their votes based on D6.1. The updated vote tally is as follows:
Approve: 281
Disapprove: 9 Approval Ratio: 97% [75% required]
Abstain:
18 Ballots: 308 Elligble
Voters:321 Return Ratio: 96%
[50% required]
Comments (unresolved no votes): 57
Responses to the
comments developed by a Ballot Resolution Committee, and the
comments, responses and draft P802.11g/D6.1 are in the process of being
recirculated (January 20, 2003 to February 6, 2003).
For a full
report of the Letter Ballot, see the attached Excel Spreadsheet
*
Comments that support the remaining disapprove votes and Working Group
responses.
The NO comments are contained in the attached spread sheet.
There are 57 total comments. Of these comments Task Group G counter 29 of them
and rejected 28 of them. There are many duplicate comments, and they have all
been included for completeness.
* Remaining schedule for balloting and
comment resolution if new no votes are received
These will be handled
(if necessary) at the March Plenary session (March 10-14
2003).
* Additional Information
IEEE 802.11 document 11-02-714
tracks the progress of 802.11g voting. The document is attached.
*
Clarifying Questions
What didn't IEEE 802.11 ask for conditional
approval at the ExCom meeting in November 2002?
At the November 2002
meeting, the results of Letter Ballot 50 were not back yet, so the
requiremetns to introduce the motion to ExCom could not be met at that
time.
What's the harm in waiting until the March 2003 session to vote
on this?
There is enough time between the January 2003 session and the
March 2003 session to do a Working Group Recirculation Ballot and a Sponsor
Ballot and have the results back by the March 2003 session. Doing so will
allow IEEE 802.11g to make quick progress. Waiting until the March 2003
session may delay IEEE 802.11g at least two months.
|