1. doc.: 21-11-0193-00-0000 Submission1 IEEE 802.21 Motions in November Plenary DCN: 21-11-0193-00-0000 Title: Request for EC Conditional Approval Date Submitted: Nov 10, 2011 Presented at EC Closing Plenary, November 2011 Authors or Source(s): Subir Das, Telcordia Technologies Inc Abstract: This document contains Sponsor Ballots summary and motions for EC conditional approval to forward the IEEE P802.21a Draft to the IEEE SA RevCom Nov 2011 Subir Das, Chair IEEE 802.21

2. doc.: 21-11-0193-00-0000 Submission Motion for a Conditional Approval to forward the IEEE P802.21a Draft to the IEEE SA RevCom Rules Motions requesting conditional approval to forward when the prior ballot has closed shall be accompanied by: Date the ballot closed Vote tally including Approve, Disapprove and Abstain votes Comments that support the remaining disapprove votes and Working Group responses. Schedule for confirmation ballot and resolution meeting. Nov 2011 Slide 2Subir Das, Chair IEEE 802.21

3. doc.: 21-11-0193-00-0000 Submission Sponsor Ballot Statistics Slide 3 IEEE Sponsor / Re-circ Ballot Respon se Ratio Approval Ratio Negative VotesNumber of Negative Comments Received Comment Resolution Status Draft Status Sponsor Ballot #1 Open 02-Aug-2011, Closed 31-Aug-2011 81% (4% Abstain) 96% 2 negative votes with comments, 1 negative vote without comment 27 Comments addressed & resolved 21-11-148- 07 P802.2 1/D 5.0 prepare d Sponsor Ballot Re-circ #1 Open 25-Oct-2011, Closed 04-Nov-2011 85% (5% Abstain) 96% 2 negative votes with comments, 1 invalid vote (comment is not on changed text) 2 Comments addressed & resolved 21-11- 175-02 P802.2 1/D6.0 being prepare d Number of People in the Sponsor Ballot Pool = 80 Nov 2011 Slide 3Subir Das, Chair IEEE 802.21

4. doc.: 21-11-0193-00-0000 Submission Voters with Negative Votes Slide 4 CommenterNumber of TR/ ER/GR Comments during SB #1 and SB Re-circ #1 Status After Sponsor Ballot Re- circ #1 Clint ChaplinSB#1: 1/12/0 SB Re-circ#1: 1/0/0 Disapprove Yoshihiro OhbaSB#1: 9/7/0 SB Re-circ#1: 1/0/0 Approve Subir DasSB#1: 0/0/0 SB Re-Circ #1: 0/0/0 Approve Paul LambertSB#1: 0/0/0 SB Re-circ#1: 0/0/1 Disapprove (Note: Did not vote during initial ballot) Nov 2011 Slide 4Subir Das, Chair IEEE 802.21

5. doc.: 21-11-0193-00-0000 Submission Links to Sponsor Ballot Comments and Resolutions Slide 5 SB #1: https://mentor.ieee.org/802.21/dcn/11/21-11-0148-07-0sec- 802-21a-sb-comments.xls https://mentor.ieee.org/802.21/dcn/11/21-11-0148-07-0sec- 802-21a-sb-comments.xls SB re-circ #1: https://mentor.ieee.org/802.21/dcn/11/21-11-0175-02-0sec- 802-21a-sbr1-comments.xls https://mentor.ieee.org/802.21/dcn/11/21-11-0175-02-0sec- 802-21a-sbr1-comments.xls Nov 2011 Slide 5Subir Das, Chair IEEE 802.21

6. doc.: 21-11-0193-00-0000 Submission Negative Comments and Resolution Details (SB Re-Circ#1)(1/2) Slide 6 Nov 2011 Comment #r01-16 – Document 21-11-0175-02 Commenter: Clint Chaplin Comment:“ AUTH" Suggested remedy: "AUTH-TLV" Resolution Status: Accepted Resolution Detail: Replaced “AUTH” with “AUTH-TLV” Slide 6Subir Das, Chair IEEE 802.21

7. doc.: 21-11-0193-00-0000 Submission Negative Comments and Resolution Details (SB Re-Circ#1)( (2/2) Slide 7 Nov 2011 Comment #r01-2 – Document 21-11-0175-02 Commenter: Paul Lambert Comment: The text describes the use of TLS and certificates for authentication but does not show how the certificates would be correctly bound to their usage. The use of TLS without further qualification of how it is to be used may also allow attacks on the TLS confidentiality. Suggested remedy: Add text describing how the certificates used by TLS would provide security and show explicit bindings and checks used to determine if the certificate is appropriate. Resolution Status: Revised Resolution Detail: This new comment refers to a section that has not been modified in the latest version of the draft and therefore it is an Invalid Comment. However, BRC discussed with the commenter and decided to add the following text (in colors) as shown below: Change the 1st paragraph of 9.1 as follows: "In this option, a mobile node, the client, and a PoS, the server, execute a TLS, specified in IETF RFC 5246, or DTLS, specified in IETF RFC 4347, to establish MIH protection. When the MIH protocol transport is reliable, TLS is used. Otherwise, DTLS is used. In the rest of this standard, (D)TLS is used to denote TLS or DTLS. In a (D)TLS handshake, the mutual authentication is executed through either a pre-shared key or a public key certified by a trusted third party such as a certificate authority. It should be noted that all certificates are required to be validated. The TLS certificate used by the PoS is expected to be provided to the mobile node in a secure manner, e.g., during provisioning process. In this option, the authentication may or may not be related to access control. It can be an access authentication for MIH service if a PoS holds service credentials for the mobile nodes." Slide 7Subir Das, Chair IEEE 802.21

8. doc.: 21-11-0193-00-0000 Submission Time Line Subir Das, Chair IEEE 802.21Slide 8 Tentative time-line for the Launch of Sponsor Ballot Re-circ #2 November 28, 2011 - Issue IEEE P802.21a/D6.0 December 02 – December 11, 2011 – Re-circulation #2 Nov 2011 Slide 8

9. doc.: 21-11-0193-00-0000 SubmissionSlide 9 P802.21 WG Motion To authorize the P802.21 WG Chair to make a motion to the IEEE 802 Executive Committee for conditional approval to forward the IEEE 802.21a Draft to the IEEE-SA RevCom Move: Yoshihiro Ohba Second: Antony Chan For: 10 Against: 0 Abstain: 0 Motion Passes Nov 2011 Slide 9Subir Das, Chair IEEE 802.21

10. doc.: 21-11-0193-00-0000 Submission Motion: EC Conditional Approval to forward the IEEE P802.21a Draft to the IEEE SA RevCom Move: Subir Das Second: Apurva Mody For: Against: Abstain: Motion Slide 10 EC Motion Nov 2011 Slide 10Subir Das, Chair IEEE 802.21