This email is sent from the 802 Executive Committee email reflector.
This list is maintained by Listserv.
That’s fine – I vote
approve with those changes.
text shown below I have suggested removing “end of session.” Here is
the proposed text again. If you are good with this, I will revise the
document and post it on Mentor.
I’ll approve if you
change the title as you suggested below and clarify what “end of
session” means and fix the structure of the sentence. Do you mean the
last 2 hour block of a session, the last day you meet,
something else? I don’t care how you clarify it or if you remove “end
of” to allow approving liaisons in accordance with your meeting agenda
for the session. I just don’t want to be dealing with a future
disagreement later on whether the approval was legitimate
because people have different ideas on what it means.
Approval in 802.19
requires a vote at the final 802.19 meeting of a session with a 75%
approval rate. Or
Approval in 802.19
requires a vote with 75% approval taken during the announced meeting
block for the topic.
The latter wording ties
in with the notification in the second bullet and leaves you some
flexibility on when these votes fall on the agenda rather than tying it
to the end of the session. I think that’s better
for the long run but either is acceptable or something else as long as
it doesn’t depend on people agreeing on what undefined words mean.
for your comments. I will consider revising the document to R1 with the
following on Slide 3, if you will change your vote from a No to a Yes,
and it will not cause any other voter to change
from a Yes to a No. Below is the suggested text for Slide 3.
that the title should be more specific and would change that to “3GPP
LAA Liaison Approval Process.”
conference calls would be announced on the email reflector. The other
interested WG chairs can forward that to their reflector. I did not
intend to notify on all email reflectors since not
actions would be taken on the calls.
there was no intention to draft liaisons between meetings. On the other
hand, an individual could prepare a contribution with the material they
think should go into a liaison and request
a call from the chair. Then those on the call could discus that
contribution. But we would only draft official liaisons during
tell me what you think. If we can converge to text that would allow you
to vote Yes, I can revise the document and post it on Mentor.
The title of the document is very broad “Liaison
Approval Process” as is the process defined on slide 3– please make the
title and the process more reflective of the scope in the abstract. For
example “3GPP LAA Liaison Approval Process”
Also, the text is confusing on the status of
working on contributions at a teleconference call.
The first bullet says Contributions are brought into 802.19
session but then a sub-bullet says that the chair can schedule
conference calls between sessions to discuss contributions. Does that
mean teleconferences are only to discuss contributions that
were brought into a session but not acted on in a session or is the
intent that contributions can also be brought into an conference call?
The second bullet says that they chair will notify other WG
chairs at the beginning of the session that 802.19 will be working on a
liaison, but there is nothing about notifying WG chairs of the
conference calls mentioned under the first bullet. Please
Third bullet – is it the intent to exclude drafting a liaison on
“At the end of the session” - Why at the end of a session and
what time counts as at the end of the session? – does 802.19 have a
specific time window when it addresses motions during a session. Also,
the way the text is drafted now, it could be read
as “When a liaison is approved at the end of a session, this rules
apply” (which implies that the group’s normal rules apply if the liaison
is approved at some other time) rather than “Liaisons can only be
approved at the end of the session and this is the
rule that applies.” If you intend the latter, please reword and define
what counts as the “end of the session”. I assume you didn’t mean the
former. If you mean something else, revise the text so it says that.
Dear EC Members,
Paul has delegated the conduct of the EC electronic ballot on the
following motion to me. To ensure this liaison letter is sent as soon as
practical I'm announcing the possibility of an 'early close' to this
ballot (see below).
The process document was reviewed twice in 802.19 this week and there
were no changes requested during those reviews. It was suggested that
the process be approved by the EC. Paul was in the room at the time and
agreed that it was a good idea.
Approve the 3GPP LAA liaison process on Slide 3 of the attached document
(document: 19-14-0089-00-0000-Liaison-Approval-Process) for approval of
liaisons from IEEE 802 to 3GPP TSG RAN on the topic of coexistence of
Licensed Assisted Access (LAA) with IEEE 802
Move: Steve Shellhammer
Second: Bob Heile
Start of ballot: Friday January 16, 2015
Close of ballot: Monday January 26, 2015, 11:59PM AOE
Early close: As required in subclause 4.1.2 'Voting rules' of the IEEE
802 LAN/MAN Standards Committee (LMSC) Operations Manual, this is notice
that, to ensure the release is provided in a timely manner, this ballot
may close early once sufficient responses
are received to clearly decide a matter.
---------- This email is sent from the
802 Executive Committee email reflector. This list is maintained by