|Thread Links||Date Links|
|Thread Prev||Thread Next||Thread Index||Date Prev||Date Next||Date Index|
All, 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 misunderstanding. 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. Regards, 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. -Bob ________________________________ From: Lin, Jie Zhen SLC CT PEK [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org] 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? Thanks! 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 802.20WG. 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 again. 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 Email: email@example.com ---------- 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