Re: [802SEC] +++EC Ballot+++IEEE802.20.2 Draft 1.0 forwarding to sponsor ballot - CLOSES MAY 9th 2009
Approve...
Matthew Sherman, Ph.D.
Engineering Fellow
BAE Systems - Electronics, Intelligence, & Support (EI&S)
Office: +1 973.633.6344
Cell: +1 973.229.9520
email: matthew.sherman@baesystems.com
-----Original Message-----
From: ***** IEEE 802 Executive Committee List *****
[mailto:STDS-802-SEC@ieee.org] On Behalf Of Klerer, Mark
Sent: Friday, May 08, 2009 8:54 AM
To: STDS-802-SEC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [802SEC] +++EC Ballot+++IEEE802.20.2 Draft 1.0 forwarding to
sponsor ballot - CLOSES MAY 9th 2009
Importance: High
Dear EC Members,
This is an update on the current vote count on the above ballot. If you
have not yet voted I would appreciate your doing that at this time. If
you have any questions feel free to contact me.
The current vote count is as follows:
Vote categories: APP DIS ABS DNV
--------------------------------------------------
VC Mat Sherman. DNV
VC Pat Thaler. DNV
ES Buzz Rigsbee. DNV
RS James Gilb. DNV
TR John Hawkins. DNV
01 Tony Jeffree. DNV
03 David Law. DNV
11 Bruce Kraemer. DNV
15 Bob Heile. DNV
16 Roger Marks. APP
17 John Lemon. DNV
18 Mike Lynch. DNV
19 Steve Shellhammer. DNV
20 Mark Klerer. APP
21 Vivek Gupta. DNV
22 Carl Stevenson. APP
ME Geoff Thompson. non-voting
---------------------------------------------------
TOTALS 3
0 0 13
Best regards,
Mark Klerer
-------------------------------------------------
Dear EC members
As a follow-up to my previous e-mail (attached) concerning the approval
to advance 802.20.2 to sponsor ballot, Paul has authorized me to
initiate a 10-day ballot for the following motion:
"The EC approves forwarding Draft 1.0 of IEEE802.20.2 to Sponsor
Ballot."
Moved: Mark Klerer
Seconded: Steve Shellhammer
Start of ballot: 29 April, 2009
End of ballot: 9 May or 24 hours after the last EC member votes.
By way of background and recapitulation of the previous e-mail, on the
WG Letter Ballot of 802.20.2 there was 1 no voter with 2 editorial
comments and 1 technical comment. The two editorial comments, were
accepted in principal (i.e. accommodated) and the technical comment was
rejected. Details can be found in the attached spreadsheet. None of
the resolutions to these comments required any changes to the draft and
none were made. The resolution to the comments that were accommodated,
were done to the satisfaction of the commenter who was present during
the discussions. Given that no changes were made to the draft, the
comment resolutions were all recirculated in a 15 day WG Letter Ballot
for approval and for forwarding the draft to Sponsor Ballot. The result
of the recirculation was 16-1-0. The one remaining no vote was by the
original commenter on the basis of the original technical comment.
Best regards,
Mark Klerer
----------
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.