Thread Links Date Links
Thread Prev Thread Next Thread Index Date Prev Date Next Date Index

Re: [802SEC] ballot FAILED +++ SEC EMAIL BALLOT +++ MOTION: Authorize the Link Security Executive Study Group to become an 802.1 Study Group



Paul,
 
I'll come prepare.
Meanwhile, I am available to answer any additional questions or concerns.
 
Thanks,
 
Dolors
404 728-0643
 
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Friday, February 21, 2003 2:48 PM
Subject: [802SEC] ballot FAILED +++ SEC EMAIL BALLOT +++ MOTION: Authorize the Link Security Executive Study Group to become an 802.1 Study Group

Dear SEC,
 
The vote tally as of the close of the ballot at 2PM EST Friday February 21 2003 was:

    Vote categories:    DIS    DNV    APP    ABS
 -----------------------------------------------
 01 Geoff Thompson      DIS
 02 Mat Sherman         DIS
 03 Buzz Rigsbee                      APP
 04 Bob O'Hara          DIS
 05 Bill Quackenbush    DIS
 06 Tony Jeffree                      APP
 07 Bob Grow                          APP
 08 Stuart Kerry               DNV
 00 Bob Heile                  DNV
 10 Roger Marks         DIS
 11 Mike Takefman                     APP
 12 Carl Stevenson      DIS
 13 Jim Lansford               DNV
 14 Mark Klerer                       APP
                 total: -6-    -3-    -5-   -0-
 
8 APPROVES required to PASS, 5 APPROVES received, the motion FAILED.
 
Dolors please plan to present a brief (<5 minute) status on the Study Group at the Monday SEC meeting.  I will put the ECSG report agenda item as early as possible in the agenda.  You may leave the SEC meeting after the report (unless there are objections). 
 
The ECSG may continue to conduct the ECSG meetings in conjuction with the 802.1 WG meetings as originally planned. 

Please come to the Friday SEC meeting prepared to make a recommendation on how to proceed with the SG activities.

 
Regards,
 
--Paul Nikolich
 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Paul Nikolich" <
paul.nikolich@att.net>
> To: "IEEE802" <
stds-802-sec@ieee.org>
> Cc: "Dolors Sala (E-mail)" <
dolors@ieee.org>
> Sent: Wednesday, February 12, 2003 2:04 PM
> Subject: [802SEC] +++ SEC EMAIL BLLOT +++ MOTION: Authorize the Link
> Security Executive Study Group to become an 802.1 Study Group
>
>
> >
> > Dear SEC,
> >
> > This is a 10 day SEC email ballot to make a determination on the below SEC
> > motion to authorize the Link Security Executive Study Group to become an
> > 802.1 Study Group. Moved by Tony Jeffree, seconded by Bob Grow.
> >
> > The email ballot opens on Wednesday February 11 2PM EST and closes Friday
> > February 21 2PM EST.
> >
> > Please direct your responses to the SEC reflector.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > --Paul Nikolich
> > Chairman, IEEE 802 LMSC
> >
> > MOTION: "The SEC resolves that the Link Security Study Group will become a
> > study  group of the 802.1 HiLi working group, effective from the start of
> > the  March 802 Plenary meeting."
> >
> > MOVER: Tony Jeffree
> > SECOND: Bob Grow
> >
> > background material:
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Tony Jeffree" <
tony@jeffree.co.uk>
> > To: <
stds-802-sec@ieee.org>
> > Cc: "Dolors Sala" <
dolors@ieee.org>
> > Sent: Tuesday, February 11, 2003 1:54 PM
> > Subject: Re: [802SEC] Link Security Monday morning session announcement
> and
> > update
> >
> >
> > >
> > > Paul has suggested (and Dolors agrees) that we might decide the
> placement
> > > of the SG ahead of time by means of an Email motion; this would have the
> > > advantage of allowing more time to discuss over the Ether than might be
> > > available during the opening SEC meeting in March, and would also free
> > > Dolors to make best use of what will be a crowded agenda in March.
> > >
> > > I would therefore like to make the following motion:
> > >
> > > "The SEC resolves that the Link Security Study Group will become a study
> > > group of the 802.1 HiLi working group, effective from the start of the
> > > March 802 Plenary meeting."
> > >
> > > I believe that Bob Grow is happy to act as a second.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Tony
> > >
> > > At 08:39 08/02/2003 +0000, Tony Jeffree wrote:
> > >
> > > >Dolors -
> > > >
> > > >802.1 clearly needs to formally  confirm the decision, which it can do
> on
> > > >Monday afternoon. However, as 802.1 made the offer to the SG to become
> an
> > > >802.1 SG at the end of the November meeting, this should be a
> formality.
> > > >So, I don't see any problem with moving the SEC decision to Monday
> > morning
> > > >- I would also prefer this option.
> > > >
> > > >Regards,
> > > >Tony
> > > >
> > > >At 01:29 08/02/2003 -0500, Dolors Sala wrote:
> > > >>Geoff, I do plan to attend the Exec meeting on Monday morning and
> assign
> > > >>someone to run the session.
> > > >>
> > > >>However, I like Howard's suggestion of changing the placement of the
> > project
> > > >>on Monday (instead of Friday) to free me of the exec meeting if the
> > rules
> > > >>allow us to do so. The SGs are chartered until the closing exec
> meeting
> > of
> > > >>the following plenary. But if this can be moved to Monday, it would
> > help. It
> > > >>would be my preferred option.
> > > >>
> > > >>I think the decision can be moved to the beginning of the meeting
> > because
> > > >>the opinion of the Link Security members was clear with the straw
> poll,
> > and
> > > >>no further discussion is needed. The poll was done when we were in
> > session
> > > >>together with 802.1. So it is representative of 802.1 members too. But
> > I'll
> > > >>let Tony comment if he thinks 802.1 needs this meeting to confirm the
> > > >>decision.
> > > >>
> > > >>Dolors
> > > >>
> > > >>----- Original Message -----
> > > >>From: "Howard Frazier" <
millardo@dominetsystems.com>
> > > >>To: "Geoff Thompson" <
gthompso@nortelnetworks.com>
> > > >>Cc: "Dolors Sala" <
dolors@ieee.org>; <stds-802-sec@ieee.org>
> > > >>Sent: Friday, February 07, 2003 8:15 PM
> > > >>Subject: Re: [802SEC] Link Security Monday morning session
> announcement
> > and
> > > >>update
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> >
> > > >> >
> > > >> > Since the Link Security Study Group members seem to
> > > >> > want conduct their work within 802.1, it might
> > > >> > be appropriate to change the study group from an ECSG
> > > >> > to an 802.1 SG. If you do this early Monday morning,
> > > >> > the Dolors won't have to stick around through the SEC meeting.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > I appologize if I have just trod heavily on Tony's or Dolor's
> > > >> > toes.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > Howard
> > > >> >
> > > >> > Geoff Thompson wrote:
> > > >> >
> > > >> > > Dolors-
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > Who is going to run the Monday morning meeting?
> > > >> > > You are supposed to be in the Exec until (at least) your proposal
> > is
> > > >> > > approved.
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > Geoff
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > At 05:42 PM 2/7/2003 -0500, you wrote:
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > >> Dear SEC members,
> > > >> > >>
> > > >> > >> The Link Security SG discussed the placement of the project in
> the
> > > >> > >> first SG meeting on January in Vancouver. The decision was to
> > place
> > > >> > >> the project in P802.1. A brief summary of the meeting, including
> > > >> > >> straw poll numbers, is included at the end of this message.
> > > >> > >>
> > > >> > >> Based on this decision, we (802.1 and LinkSec) are already
> > planning
> > > >> > >> the March meeting together. We are scheduling a Link Security
> > session
> > > >> > >> on Monday morning (8:30-10:30am) to encourage participation from
> > all
> > > >> > >> WGs by avoiding overlaps with regular WG meetings.
> > > >> > >>
> > > >> > >> Please forward the announcement and information below to your
> > > >> > >> respective WG members.
> > > >> > >>
> > > >> > >> Thank you,
> > > >> > >>
> > > >> > >> Dolors
> > > >> > >>
> > > >> > >> ---------
> > > >> > >>
> > > >> > >>
> > > >> > >> IEEE802 March 2003 Plenary Meeting
> > > >> > >> Monday Morning Link Security Session Announcement
> > > >> > >>
> > > >> > >> The Link Security ECSG is scheduled to meet on Monday Morning
> > > >> > >> (8:30-10:30am) March 10t. This session does not conflict with
> most
> > WG
> > > >> > >> regular meeting schedule. It is intended to facilitate
> > participation
> > > >> > >> from all WG members since the work of this group relates to
> > several
> > > >> > >> WGs efforts.
> > > >> > >>
> > > >> > >> The agenda for this meeting is to educate each other on the
> major
> > > >> > >> areas related to this project (e.g EPON, bridging, security),
> > > >> > >> converge on scope, scenarios and objectives and make progress on
> > the
> > > >> > >> work plan including architecture model, project partitioning and
> > PAR
> > > >> > >> definition. See work plan at
> > > >> > >>
> > >
> >
> >>http://www.ieee802.org/linksec/meetings/MeetingsMaterial/Jan03/LinkSecWork
> > Pl
> > > >>an_0103.pdf
> > > >> > >> .
> > > >> > >>
> > > >> > >> Contributions deadline: March 3rd, 2003 midnight PST
> > > >> > >>
> > > >> > >> Submission instructions: To submit your contribution please send
> > it
> > > >> > >> by email in pdf format to
dolors@ieee.org, dromasca@avaya.com
> > > >> > >> <mailto:dromasca@avaya.com> , and allyn@cisco.com
> > > >> > >> <mailto:allyn@cisco.com> . In your email please indicate title
> of
> > the
> > > >> > >> presentation, name of the presenter and amount of time needed to
> > > >> > >> present the material. Also if you are a member of another WG and
> > have
> > > >> > >> schedule conflict, please indicate so.
> > > >> > >>
> > > >> > >> The complete Link Security meeting schedule is posted at:
> > > >> > >>
http://www.ieee802.org/linksec/meetings
> > > >> > >>
> > > >> > >> -----
> > > >> > >>
> > > >> > >> Summary of Link Security Jan 2003 interim meeting in Vancouver:
> > > >> > >>
> > > >> > >> The two-days meeting covered the presentations including
> > discussion
> > > >> > >> on requirements, architecture model, and PAR and 5 criteria, and
> > > >> > >> lengthy discussion on scenarios, placement of the project and
> the
> > > >> > >> need of traffic analysis. The group also discussed the location
> > and
> > > >> > >> dates of the next interim meeting.
> > > >> > >>
> > > >> > >> Major decisions made:
> > > >> > >>
> > > >> > >>    1. The SG will recommend to the executive committee in the
> next
> > > >> > >>       IEEE802 plenary meeting to place the project in 802.1
> > > >> > >>    2. The next interim meeting in May will not be co-located
> with
> > EFM
> > > >> > >>       in Korea, but will be in Ottawa hosted by Nortel late May
> > early
> > > >> > >>       June and co-located with P802.3 10GBASE-CX4, P802.3
> > 10GBASE-T
> > > >> > >>       SG, and P802.1.
> > > >> > >>    3. Developed an initial set of scenarios. See
> > > >> > >>
> > >
> >
> >>http://www.ieee802.org/linksec/Meetings/MeetingsMaterial/Jan03/LinkSecUsag
> > eC
> > > >>ases_0103.pdf
> > > >> > >>
> > > >> > >>    4. A work plan for development of project PAR(s) was
> > identified.
> > > >> > >>       See
> > > >> > >>
> > >
> >
> >>http://www.ieee802.org/linksec/Meetings/MeetingsMaterial/Jan03/LinkSecWork
> > Pl
> > > >>an_0103.pdf
> > > >> > >>
> > > >> > >>    5. Three technical tutorials will be prepared for next
> plenary
> > > >> > >>       meeting to introduce SG participants to the three major
> > areas
> > > >> > >>       involved in this project. The areas are Bridging, EPON and
> > > >> > >>       Security. The volunteers to organize or prepare the
> > tutorials
> > > >> > >>       were: Norm Finn (
nfinn@cisco.com
> <mailto:nfinn@cisco.com> )
> > to
> > > >> > >>       prepare the Bridging tutorial, Jonathan Thatcher (
> > > >> > >>      
Jonathan.Thatcher@worldwidepackets.com
> > > >> > >>       <mailto:Jonathan.Thatcher@worldwidepackets.com> ) to
> > organize
> > > >> > >>       the EPON tutorial, and Bill McIntosh (
> > > >> > >>      
bmcintosh@fortresstech.com
> > <mailto:bmcintosh@fortresstech.com>
> > > >> > >>       ) to prepare the Security tutorial.
> > > >> > >>
> > > >> > >>
> > > >> > >>         Summary of Straw Polls
> > > >> > >>
> > > >> > >>
> > > >> > >>
> > > >> > >> 1. Where should the next LinkSec Interim meeting be held?
> > > >> > >> Specifically, are you will to go if:
> > > >> > >>
> > > >> > >> a. Co-lo with .3 in Seoul - 14
> > > >> > >>
> > > >> > >> b. Co-lo with .11 in Singapore - 10
> > > >> > >>
> > > >> > >> c. Meet with late may June in Ottawa - 30
> > > >> > >>
> > > >> > >>
> > > >> > >>
> > > >> > >> 2. Who thinks the approach outlined by Mick for development of
> the
> > > >> > >> PAR(s) is a good one?
> > > >> > >>
> > > >> > >> Yes - 36
> > > >> > >>
> > > >> > >> No - 0
> > > >> > >>
> > > >> > >> <?xml:namespace prefix = o ns =
> > > >> > >> "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />
> > > >> > >>
> > > >> > >> 3. Are you in favor of moving this SG group to 802.1?
> > > >> > >>
> > > >> > >> Yes - 26
> > > >> > >>
> > > >> > >> Negative - 0
> > > >> > >>
> > > >> > >> Abstain - 12
> > > >> > >
> > > >> >
> > > >> >
> > > >> >
> > > >
> > > >Regards,
> > > >Tony
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Tony
> > >
> > >
> >
>