Sept 2005

Tom Siep, Cambridge Silicon Radio Plc

Slide 1

doc.: IEEE 802.19-05/0036r0

Submission

Matthew Sherman’s Comments to 802.19 P&P

Notice: This document has been prepared to assist IEEE 802.19. It is offered as a basis for discussion and is not binding on the contributing individual(s) or organization(s). The material in this document is subject to change in form and content after further study. The contributor(s) reserve(s) the right to add, amend or withdraw material contained herein.

Release: The contributor grants a free, irrevocable license to the IEEE to incorporate material contained in this contribution, and any modifications thereof, in the creation of an IEEE Standards publication; to copyright in the IEEE’s name any IEEE Standards publication even though it may include portions of this contribution; and at the IEEE’s sole discretion to permit others to reproduce in whole or in part the resulting IEEE Standards publication. The contributor also acknowledges and accepts that this contribution may be made public by IEEE 802.19.

Patent Policy and Procedures: The contributor is familiar with the IEEE 802 Patent Policy and Procedures <http:// ieee802.org/guides/bylaws/sb-bylaws.pdf>, including the statement "IEEE standards may include the known use of patent(s), including patent applications, provided the IEEE receives assurance from the patent holder or applicant with respect to patents essential for compliance with both mandatory and optional portions of the standard." Early disclosure to the TAG of patent information that might be relevant to the standard is essential to reduce the possibility for delays in the development process and increase the likelihood that the draft publication will be approved for publication. Please notify the Chair <shellhammer@ieee.org> as early as possible, in written or electronic form, if patented technology (or technology under patent application) might be incorporated into a draft standard being developed within the IEEE 802.19 TAG. If you have questions, contact the IEEE Patent Committee Administrator at <patcom@ieee.org>.

Date: 2005-Sept-20

Name Company Address Phone email Tom Siep CSR 2425 N. Central

Expressway, Richardson, TX 75040

+214 558 4358

tom.siep@csr.com

Authors:

Sept 2005

Tom Siep, Cambridge Silicon Radio Plc

Slide 2

doc.: IEEE 802.19-05/0036r0

Submission

Summary • Comment 1 – Section 2 – The P&P must have a procedure for electing officers.

• Comment 2 – General – State that a membership list will be maintained by the TAG.

• Comment 3 – General – The P&P needs a section on rules for an appeal.

• Comment 4 – Section 2.2 – Mat recommended that the vice chair be elected instead of being appointed.

• Comment 5 – General – The P&P needs to include an order of precedence of other documents (802 P&P, Roberts Rules).

• Comment 6 – Section 1 – The section on the functions of the TAG is not necessary. Check other WG P&P.

• Comment 7 – Section 5.1.2 – In section on interim sessions always say "interim sessions" not just "sessions."

• Comment 8 – Section 5.2 – Under maintenance of the P&P say it has to be at a plenary or electronic ballot.

• Comment 9 – Section 6 – Reference voting rules in 802 (in a meeting and electronically).

• Comment 10 – Section 5.2 – Drop the rule that says the SEC needs to approve a revised P&P.

• Comment 11 – Section 6.2 – What is a "Charter?"

• Comment 12 – Section 6 – Clarify that the TAG comments on aspects of the draft that affect coexistence and the CA document.

• Comment 13 – Section 6.2.3 and 6.2.4 – Why do individuals mark comments as binding or non-binding since the algorithm does not utilize that information?

• Comment 14 – Section 6.2.3 – Clarify what to do with the comments that receive support of over 25% and less than 2/3.

Sept 2005

Tom Siep, Cambridge Silicon Radio Plc

Slide 3

doc.: IEEE 802.19-05/0036r0

Submission

Comment 1 – Section 2

• Comment: The P&P must have a procedure for electing officers.

• Resolution: Add: Chair and vice chair shall be elected by majority vote at a Plenary session.

Sept 2005

Tom Siep, Cambridge Silicon Radio Plc

Slide 4

doc.: IEEE 802.19-05/0036r0

Submission

Comment 2 – General

• State that a membership list will be maintained by the TAG.

• Add: Chair is responsible for maintenance of the TAG membership list.

Sept 2005

Tom Siep, Cambridge Silicon Radio Plc

Slide 5

doc.: IEEE 802.19-05/0036r0

Submission

Comment 3 – General

• The P&P needs a section on rules for an appeal.

• Add: – The membership may override a decision by the chair with a 75%

of members who vote “yes” or “no” on the appeal.– An individual not satisfied by TAG resolution of an appeal shall

be referred to the Executive Committee of the LSMC.

Sept 2005

Tom Siep, Cambridge Silicon Radio Plc

Slide 6

doc.: IEEE 802.19-05/0036r0

Submission

Comment 4 – Section 2.2

• Mat recommended that the vice chair be elected instead of being appointed.

• Done

Sept 2005

Tom Siep, Cambridge Silicon Radio Plc

Slide 7

doc.: IEEE 802.19-05/0036r0

Submission

Comment 5 – General

• The P&P needs to include an order of precedence of other documents (802 P&P, Roberts Rules).

• Declined: this is specified by our chartering organization pp5, section 1 of March 2005 802 P&P.

Sept 2005

Tom Siep, Cambridge Silicon Radio Plc

Slide 8

doc.: IEEE 802.19-05/0036r0

Submission

Comment 6 – Section 1

• The section on the functions of the TAG is not necessary. Check other WG P&P.

• Declined, this describes the scope of the group. It is informative and helps the reader to set context. This is just like section 2 of the 802 P&P that describes the LMSC scope.

Sept 2005

Tom Siep, Cambridge Silicon Radio Plc

Slide 9

doc.: IEEE 802.19-05/0036r0

Submission

Comment 7 – Section 5.1.2

• In section on interim sessions always say "interim sessions" not just "sessions.“

• OK

Sept 2005

Tom Siep, Cambridge Silicon Radio Plc

Slide 10

doc.: IEEE 802.19-05/0036r0

Submission

Comment 8 – Section 5.2

• Under maintenance of the P&P say it has to be at a plenary or electronic ballot.

• Add: (3) Votes must be taken either at plenary meetings or by electronic ballot.

Sept 2005

Tom Siep, Cambridge Silicon Radio Plc

Slide 11

doc.: IEEE 802.19-05/0036r0

Submission

Comment 9 – Section 6

• Reference voting rules in 802 (in a meeting and electronically).

• Declined: not clear what need there is for a reference to LMSC rules when they have precedence.

Sept 2005

Tom Siep, Cambridge Silicon Radio Plc

Slide 12

doc.: IEEE 802.19-05/0036r0

Submission

Comment 10 – Section 5.2

• Drop the rule that says the SEC needs to approve a revised P&P.

• Accepted

Sept 2005

Tom Siep, Cambridge Silicon Radio Plc

Slide 13

doc.: IEEE 802.19-05/0036r0

Submission

Comment 11 – Section 6.2

• What is a "Charter?“

• Accepted reworded:

– The TAG supports the creation…

Sept 2005

Tom Siep, Cambridge Silicon Radio Plc

Slide 14

doc.: IEEE 802.19-05/0036r0

Submission

Comment 12 – Section 6

• Clarify that the TAG comments on aspects of the draft that affect coexistence and the CA document.

• Declined: Section 1 states: “The TAG also votes as a body on coexistence issues in wireless working group letter ballots that are accompanied by coexistence assurance (CA) documents.” Also, section 6.2.2 states: “TAG members evaluate the CA document and draft to determine the correctness or completeness of the CA document.”

Sept 2005

Tom Siep, Cambridge Silicon Radio Plc

Slide 15

doc.: IEEE 802.19-05/0036r0

Submission

Comment 13 – Section 6.2.3 and 6.2.4

• Why do individuals mark comments as binding or non-binding since the algorithm does not utilize that information?

• Declined: The TAG does use the attribute to determine if the lack of satisfaction of the comment will prevent TAG approval of a CA document.

Sept 2005

Tom Siep, Cambridge Silicon Radio Plc

Slide 16

doc.: IEEE 802.19-05/0036r0

Submission

Comment 14 – Section 6.2.3

• Clarify what to do with the comments that receive support of over 25% and less than 2/3.

• Accepted: will reword to make it clearer: “…it shall be identified as a binding comment”