[802SEC] Fwd: P802.16g Disapproval Notification
To: 802.16 Reflector
cc: 802 EC Reflector
I have unfortunate news to report on P802.16g.
On 26 April, after three Sponsor Ballot recirculations and a 99%
approval ratio (136 Approve, 2 Disapprove), I submitted P802.16g/D9
to RevCom:
<http://ieee802.org/16/docs/07/80216-07_028.pdf>
Yesterday, the approval request was rejected by the IEEE-SA Standards
Board, upon RevCom's advice.
To the best of my understanding, the core reason for the rejection
was that some of voters submitted comments directly to the Working
Group instead of using the IEEE-SA's myBallot system. This was partly
related to the unresolved comments of the two disapprove voters:
<http://ieee802.org/16/docs/07/80216-07_027.pdf>.
This issue was raised by several RevCom members prior to the meeting.
Phillip Barber (the Task Group Chair) and I prepared responses to
those comments for RevCom consideration, arguing that the WG did
follow documented procedures and, because it was required to address
all comments, had little choice in how to proceed:
<http://ieee802.org/16/docs/07/80216-07_032.pdf>.
I participated by telephone in the RevCom meeting of 6 June to
discuss these issues but was unable to reverse the opinion.
[I would like to add that the RevCom administrator responded to the
research in our response by indicating that 802.16-07/012r4 seems to
have not been included in the second recirculation; if so, it was
likely due to an accidental omission on my part, for which I assume
responsibility. However, RevCom at no time raised this issue in its
deliberations, so it does not appear to have directly affected the
decision.]
During the RevCom meeting, I requested advice as to what kind of
approach we could follow to assure that we satisfy RevCom's concerns.
When no clear answer arose, I requested assignment of a RevCom
"mentor" to provide feedback and assurance that our future steps will
be satisfactory. Geoff Thompson volunteered.
The formal notice of disapproval is below, and at:
<http://ieee802.org/16/docs/07/80216-07_033.pdf>.
I am pleased to see that it provides some explicit directions on how
we can proceed: "The Sponsor must conduct a recirculation ballot to
show all unresolved comments associated with negative votes, and
their responses, to the ballot group. The Sponsor is encouraged to
input all comments and responses into the myBallot system for ease of
submittal package review by RevCom. The Sponsor shall inform the
ballot group that the myBallot system must be used as the mechanism
for ballot comment submission."
The middle sentence may be the most challenging. Based on my
understanding of the software, I am not currently aware of any way to
input comments and responses into the myBallot system prior to a
recirc. I have inquired with IEEE-SA staff as to whether they can
arrange a way to do so.
RevCom does not hold conference call meetings during the summer, so
the next chance for RevCom review of this draft is 26 September. This
delay will cause pain to the interesting parties. Since the base
standard will by then be more than three years old, it appears that
we may need to address the rule prohibiting amendments after three
years. There are some exceptions to the rule, but I don't fully
understand the language in the IEEE-SA Standards Board Operations
Manual, so further research will be required.
I'm copying the IEEE 802 EC so that other Working Groups will be
aware of this problem. Working Groups receiving comments outside the
myBallot system will need to decide whether to address those comments
or to ignore them. I am concerned that they will face risk either
way. In any case, it would certainly be wise to make an effort, in
your Sponsor Ballot cover letters, to steer your voters toward the
use of myBallot.
Regards,
Roger
Roger B. Marks <r.b.marks@ieee.org>
NextWave Broadband Inc.
Chair, IEEE 802.16 Working Group on Broadband Wireless Access <http://
WirelessMAN.org>
Begin forwarded message:
> From: d.ringle@ieee.org
> Date: June 8, 2007 09:59:57 AM MDT
> To: r.b.marks@ieee.org
> Subject: P802.16g Disapproval Notification
>
>
> 8 June 2007
>
> Roger Marks
> NextWave Broadband, Inc.
> 4040 Montview Blvd
> Denver, CO 80207
>
> cc: Paul Nikolich, C/LM Liaison
> Richard Snyder, MTT Liaison
> Michael Kipness, Program Manager
> William Ash, Program Manager
> Kim Breitfelder, Manager-Standards Editing and Production
> Geoff Thompson, RevCom mentor
>
> RE: NEW P802.16g/D9 (C/LM + MTT) IEEE Standard for Local and
> Metropolitan
> Area Networks - Part 16: Air Interface for Fixed and Mobile Broadband
> Wireless Access Systems - Amendment 3: Management Plane Procedures and
> Services
>
> Dear Roger,
>
> I must inform you that P802.16g was disapproved as a new amendment
> to IEEE
> Std 802.16-2004 by the IEEE-SA Standards Board on 7 June 2007.
>
> The Sponsor must conduct a recirculation ballot to show all unresolved
> comments associated with negative votes, and their responses, to
> the ballot
> group. The Sponsor is encouraged to input all comments and
> responses into
> the myBallot system for ease of submittal package review by RevCom.
> The
> Sponsor shall inform the ballot group that the myBallot system must
> be used
> as the mechanism for ballot comment submission. Geoff Thompson will
> be the
> RevCom mentor to the Sponsor.
>
> Sincerely,
> ****************************************************************
> David L. Ringle
> Manager - IEEE-SA Governance, Policy & Procedures
> IEEE Standards Activities Department
> 445 Hoes Lane
> Piscataway, NJ 08854
> TEL: +1 732 562 3806
> FAX: +1 732 875 0524
> d.ringle@ieee.org
> ****************************************************************
>
----------
This email is sent from the 802 Executive Committee email reflector. This list is maintained by Listserv.