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

Re: [802SEC] PARs under consideration at the NOV09 plenary

Hi Pat, Paul and all,
It has always been that the chair/WG decides whether to have one vote for all or separate it. I think it would be something to look at while you are changing the rules to the WG P and P and the EC P and P, but think to do so at this time so close to the Plenary would be better left alone lest we get into politics. I can only assume that the WG's will of course strive to make all parts of the Par/5c the best it can be, and as a package or separate, should be. Just an opinion of not changing rules in the middle of so many groups bringing forth Pars, 5c's and doing it based on the current rules, until those rules change. 

Respectfully, Nancy


On Nov 2, 2009, at 1:18 PM, Pat Thaler wrote:


Paul,
I also did a check of the rules. I thought that at one point we had put in a requirement for numerical votes from the Working Group on motions to progress projects (i.e. PAR to NesCom, initiate sponsor ballot, project to RevCom) but I couldn't find any such rule. It may have been in a previous version or only discussed but not implemented. There is no requirement for how the 5 criteria are approved - one motion along with the PAR or separate motions.
I support you in having a chair's guideline that votes on those items should be numerical. It does help in evaluating the readiness of the project for progression - especially in the case of PAR approval. 

Regards,
Pat

-----Original Message-----
From: ***** IEEE 802 Executive Committee List ***** [mailto:STDS-802- SEC@ieee.org] On Behalf Of Shellhammer, Steve 
Sent: Friday, October 30, 2009 4:34 PM
To: STDS-802-SEC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [802SEC] PARs under consideration at the NOV09 plenary

Paul,

	Thanks.

Steve

-----Original Message-----
From: ***** IEEE 802 Executive Committee List ***** [mailto:STDS-802- SEC@ieee.org] On Behalf Of Paul Nikolich 
Sent: Friday, October 30, 2009 3:50 PM
To: STDS-802-SEC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [802SEC] PARs under consideration at the NOV09 plenary

Steve,
Good questions--I need to check our rules and attempt to recollect precedents. Based on that check/recollection my answers are as follows--but I may have missed something, so please double check my review: 

1) After looking through the current rules, here is what I found:
a) 802 OM 3.2.3.1.1 WG Voting at Meeting ...Any matter regarding the establishment or modification of a PAR or that would make a noneditorial change to a draft standard shall be a technical issue. b) 802 OM 3.3.2 Voting at Study Group Meetings Any person attending a Study Group meeting may vote on all motions (including recommending approval of a PAR). A vote is carried by 75% of those present and voting "Approve" or "Disapprove." c) 802 OM 11.3 Procedure for PARs Plenary Review Prior to the start of the IEEE 802 session, draft PARs and 5 criteria under consideration for approval by the Sponsor shall be available at a publicly accessible URL and an email sent to the Sponsor reflector should contain the URLs required for viewing the PAR and associated documentation..
Note--in 1c above the requirement for 'associated documentation' is called out. In my view one of the key elements of 'associated documentation' is the the WG vote which approved the PAR and 5C.
2) At some point in the past, (I don't remember exactly when--its in the minutes I'm sure) I asked the EC members to supply the numercial results of the WG vote on the draft PAR and 5C. I continue to believe this information is of value to the EC in evaluating and making decisions on draft PARs. To be clear, I am asking for only the WG vote on the PAR and 5C--it can be as a whole or it can be individually--it is up to each WG to determine how they conduct the PAR and 5C decision. 

Regards,

--Paul



----- Original Message -----
From: "Shellhammer, Steve" <sshellha@QUALCOMM.COM>
To: <STDS-802-SEC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG>
Sent: Friday, October 30, 2009 4:34 PM
Subject: Re: [802SEC] PARs under consideration at the NOV09 plenary



Paul,
To avoid confusion for some of us who will be having votes in Atlanta confirming a PAR/5C can you please provide precise answers to the following two questions?
1. What is the rule regarding how the WG shall approve a PAR/5C and what information needs to be provided to the EC? 2. What additional information beyond #1 you are requesting that we provide? 

Thanks,
Steve


----------
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. 

----------
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.