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

Re: [802SEC] Issue of openness in 802.20 WG

To clarify the discussions and actions in the 802.20 session this week 
related to the PAR Extension, I am attaching the initial draft minutes of the 
session that relate to the topic.
I am also looking for Ms. Lin, if she is still in the IEEE meetings this 
week, and sending her an email to meet with her to hopefully explain the 
The key point that, as Chair, I cannot ask the group for a revote of a 
previously approved motion. No member made a Motion to Reconsider or a Motion to 
Rescind the approval of the PAR extension including having the Chair complete the 
form and forward it. The actual motion from January session is below.
The Chair did ask for editorial inputs on the text in section 5 or others 
sections. Minor editorial changes were brought back to group to ensure the Chair 
correctly make the editorial changes as the last agenda before adjournment. A 
motion was made then to approve the editorial changes and they were approved.
Jerry Upton

The Following Motion was approved the 802.20 Working Group at the January 
Interim with Quorum in attendance (66 of 79 Voters)
The 802.20 Working Group approves the request for a two year extension of the 
current PAR. The chair will forward the completed PAR Extension Form to the 
802 Executive Committee for approval. If approved, the request will be sent to 
NesCom for its approval. Two years is the customarily granted extension; 
however a one year extension shall also be acceptable if that is deemed appropriate 
by the 802 EC and NesCom.
Vote on the motion: 51 Yes, 8 No, 1 Abstain. Motion passes with 86.4%.  

In a message dated 3/9/2006 12:33:44 AM Central Standard Time, 
boohara@CISCO.COM writes:
Forwarding this to the EC reflector as requested below.


From: Lin, Jie Zhen SLC CT PEK [] 
Sent: Wednesday, March 08, 2006 8:53 PM
To: Bob O'Hara (boohara)
Subject: Issue of openness in 802.20 WG

Dear Paul, 

Would you please forward my following statement to the 802 EC reflector?

BR/ Jiezhen Lin


Statement from Jiezhen Lin:

Dear 802 EC members,

I'd like to state the fact that happened in the Mar. 6 (Monday)
afternoon session and the Mar. 7(Tuesday) afternoon session of IEEE

I expressed my intention to move for amendment the 802.20 PAR Extension
Form in the Mar. 6 (Monday) afternoon session, while the WG Chair Jerry
Upton rejected my motion. And when I express my intention to move for
approve the revised 802.20 PAR Extension Form, the WG Chair rejected
However, the same motion moved by Mark Klerer was granted by the Chair
in the Mar. 7(Tuesday) afternoon session.

Actually, the 802.20 PAR Extension Form had not ever been reviewed by
the 20WG before the Mar. meeting, and no related item listed in the
original agenda of Mar. Meeting, though there had a motion for PAR
extension in the Jan. Meeting. Further more, the PAR Extension Form
hadn't been posted to the WG until it was sent to EC and be asked to
post by EC member. Thereby I would like the PAR Extension Form be
reviewed and approved by the whole WG. 

In the Mar. 6 (Monday) afternoon session, by my suggestion to revise the
agenda to add a new agenda item for PAR Extension Form discussion and
information sharing, the PAR Extension Form was reviewed by the WG. In
the reviewing for the PAR Extension Form, I found some inappropriate
words and sentences in the clause 5. So after the reviewing, I expressed
my intent to move to amend the 802.20 PAR Extension Form, while the
Chair rejected my motion. 

The Chair revised the PAR Extension Form directly in the meeting. Then
when I suggested a motion to approve the revised PAR Extension Form, The
Chair rejected again. Jose Puthenkulam also argued that there should be
a motion and he would like to second it. But finally, the motion was
still rejected by the Chair.

However in the Mar. 7(Tuesday) afternoon session, the Chair granted the
same motion to approve the revised PAR Extension Form moved by Mark
Klerer and also second by Jose Puthenkulam, and got the result of  69 Y
: 31 N : 9 O.

By the facts what I stated previously, I'd like to request the 802 EC to
investigate whether openness is being followed as per IEEE-SA bylaws in
the 802.20 WG. 

Best Regards,

Lin, Jiezhen

Corporate Technology
Mobile Network Standardization

Siemens Ltd China
Tel: +86 10 6476 6914
Fax: +86 10 6475 9216
GSM: +86 135 0108 1309

This email is sent from the 802 Executive Committee email reflector.  This 
list is maintained by Listserv.

This email is sent from the 802 Executive Committee email reflector.  This list is maintained by Listserv.

Draft Minutes from March 2006 Plenary- PAR Extension.doc