RE: [802SEC] +++ LMSC P&P Revision Ballot +++ Ballot on WG Membership - Ballot Closed
Matt, I still think you are treading in very dangerous waters by attempting CHANGE the way the rules for initial group membership are to be interpreted from what has historically been done in the past. I think doing so will essentially "pour gasoline on the fire" of opinion, which claims that 802.20 is being unfairly singled-out for special voting/membership restrictions in a post-facto manner to serve some political agenda. If we need to change our rules with regard to gaining & retaining WG/TAG membership, let's do it with plenty of up front disclosure and opportunity for discussion, but we can't go back and disenfranchise legitimate 802.20 members by changing the way the rules are to be interpreted. That smacks of Gerrymandering and should be avoided at all costs.
Thanx, Buzz
Dr. Everett O. (Buzz) Rigsbee
Boeing - SSG
PO Box 3707, M/S: 7M-FM
Seattle, WA 98124-2207
(425) 865-2443 Fx: (425) 865-6721
everett.o.rigsbee@boeing.com
-----Original Message-----
From: mjsherman@research.att.com [mailto:mjsherman@research.att.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 29, 2003 12:16 PM
To: tak@cisco.com
Cc: stds-802-sec@ieee.org
Subject: RE: [802SEC] +++ LMSC P&P Revision Ballot +++ Ballot on WG Membership - Ballot Closed
Mike,
This is a difficult ballot, not just because it is controversial, but
because there is the potential to try to address many problems with the
same rules change. The basic thrust of my proposed change was to allow
initial membership to be based on SG membership. Based on comments
received, the only three people who fundamentally objected to this were:
Roger, Bob O'Hara, and Buzz. I think some of the issues (particularly
in Roger's comments) are probably semantics. I will respond to Roger's
comments shortly in this regard. However for these three voters, I
think their comments may be irresolvable.
Then there are a whole bunch of what I would call editorials, and the
potential to address additional issues such as membership roll off. I
think the editorial issues are resolvable. The additional issues such
as membership roll off may or may not be resolvable, but they should be
separable. We have tried to address membership roll off before and
failed I believe. I see nothing wrong with trying again. But, I would
not like the resolution of the initial membership problem be contingent
on the roll off or other problem.
So, what I plan to do is categorize the comments. I will try to fully
resolve all of them. Some are in conflict with the basic premise of
basing initial membership on SG membership, but do not provide an
alternative (other than to leave things alone). I don't consider these
resolvable. The editorials will be another category which should be
doable. And then I will break out additional categories as needed which
are side issues such as membership roll off. If these cannot be
resolved, I will ask the voters involved to consider deferring the issue
to a future ballot, and support what can be agreed.
Hopefully this will allow some revision on initial WG membership to be
passed.
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: Mike Takefman [mailto:tak@cisco.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 29, 2003 12:44 PM
To: Sherman,Matthew J (Matthew)
Cc: stds-802-sec@ieee.org
Subject: Re: [802SEC] +++ LMSC P&P Revision Ballot +++ Ballot on WG
Membership - Ballot Closed
Matt,
based on the comments, is it likely the ballot will
pass on revision?
mike
--
Michael Takefman tak@cisco.com
Manager of Engineering, Cisco Systems
Chair IEEE 802.17 Stds WG
2000 Innovation Dr, Ottawa, Canada, K2K 3E8
voice: 613-254-3399 cell:613-220-6991