Re: [802SEC] Deadbeat rule change proposal
Mat,
Your raise a number of the issues that I considered when trying to
decide how to structure my proposed change. I elected to make minimal
changes to the existing text. However, I am generally sympathetic to
your suggestions.
I agree that there should be a section on meetings. In fact I think the
whole organization of the rules needs to reviewed, but I elected to not
undertake any portion of the that task in this proposal. I would be
willing to work with you on such a general reorganization.
Thanks,
wlq
mjsherman@research.att.com wrote:
>
> Bill,
>
> A couple of suggestions:
>
> Section 2 is titled "LAN MAN STANDARDS COMMITTEE PLENARY". It seems
> inappropriate to talk about gathering money for interim meetings under
> this title. Maybe the appropriate thing to do is pull the last line of
> that section:
>
> "The LMSC Treasurer may collect fees from all attendees of any
> meeting held in conjunction with the a Plenary or Interim
> session to cover the expenses of operating the LAN MAN Standards
> Committee."
>
> It could then be placed in to your section 6.0.
>
> Also, I'm of the opinion that Section 2.0 should really be generalized a
> little by replacing the word "Plenary" with "Meetings". If that was
> done, then your section 6.0 could then plug in as a subsection of
> section 2.0. One reason I might want to do this is while we refer to
> "interim" meetings in the rules a lot, I don't thing we ever clearly
> spell out what differentiates an interim from a plenary. If we
> generalized section 2.0, it would then be a good place to introduce this
> definition. I realize it is stretching the purpose of your rules change
> a little. But, the whole point is to bring interims under the coverage
> of your rules, so it makes sense to clearly spell out what an interim
> is. For instance, I attended a so called "interim" 802.11e meeting last
> week. It was not truly an interim - it was an ad hoc, and there was no
> attendance fee. But definitions like this need to be spelled out.
>
> Finally, I think we should at least have a pointer to your section 6.0
> in section 5.1.3.3 on "Loss" (of WG membership).
>
> Talk to you soon,
>
> Mat
>
> Matthew Sherman
> Vice Chair, IEEE 802
> Technology Consultant
> Communications Technology Research
> AT&T Labs - Shannon Laboratory
> Room B255, Building 103
> 180 Park Avenue
> P.O. Box 971
> Florham Park, NJ 07932-0971
> Phone: +1 (973) 236-6925
> Fax: +1 (973) 360-5877
> EMAIL: mjsherman@att.com
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bill Quackenbush [mailto:billq@attglobal.net]
> Sent: Monday, March 03, 2003 7:36 PM
> To: IEEE 802 SEC
> Subject: [802SEC] Deadbeat rule change proposal
>
> All,
>
> Attached is my first draft of the proposed deadbeat rule changes.
>
> I have put the new material in a new section so that it applies equally
> to any LMSC standards development group meeting.
>
> Your comments are encouraged.
>
> Thanks,
>
> wlq