Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Doc.: IEEE 802.11-03/227r1 Submission March 2003 John Kowalski, Sharp LabsSlide 1 Addressing the controversial comments in 9.10.2.4.2 and Annex A John.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Doc.: IEEE 802.11-03/227r1 Submission March 2003 John Kowalski, Sharp LabsSlide 1 Addressing the controversial comments in 9.10.2.4.2 and Annex A John."— Presentation transcript:

1 doc.: IEEE /227r1 Submission March 2003 John Kowalski, Sharp LabsSlide 1 Addressing the controversial comments in and Annex A John M. Kowalski Sharp Labs

2 doc.: IEEE /227r1 Submission March 2003 John Kowalski, Sharp LabsSlide 2 Summary e is supposed to direct the & Annex A ad hoc groups as to what kind of response we should have to the comments. This presentation reflects an analysis of those comments related to the mandatory/optional issue (as well as General comments on the issue). There are still other comments in & Annex A- some of which are, IMO, easy to resolve & some I need help on- but arent in the above area. –This is not that story.

3 doc.: IEEE /227r1 Submission March 2003 John Kowalski, Sharp LabsSlide 3 Voting totals (from memory) There were about 34 No voters - 17% Meaning, there were approximately 200 Yes voters- 83% There was 285 responses meaning the rest were Abstains. The result of resolving these comments must be first, create no new No voters- do no harm! –Note: at this point any E regular should be able to address this issue technically from any position.

4 doc.: IEEE /227r1 Submission March 2003 John Kowalski, Sharp LabsSlide 4 Ive got a little list… No Voters wanting mandatory HCF polling: 7 (1 of which maybe persuaded to change their vote based on their comment). No Voters wanting the ambiguity cleaned up: 2 No Voters wanting explicit optionality in the PICs: 2 No Voters who want any TSPEC may be rejected removed since its a policy issue.: 1 (but voted No on lots of other things.) Total: 12.

5 doc.: IEEE /227r1 Submission March 2003 John Kowalski, Sharp LabsSlide 5 My recommendation Whereas: –We may be changing many more Yes votes to No votes by changing the nature of the text, AND –The current text describes a standard that provides the best tradeoff of cost, performance and ease of implementation, that the task group has found. Furthermore, we believe the text accurately reflects this tradeoff, and therefore this standard meets a broad spectrum of market needs for QoS and guarantees interoperability among all implementations I recommend declining the comments above using bullet item in blue as our proposed resolution.

6 doc.: IEEE /227r1 Submission March 2003 John Kowalski, Sharp LabsSlide 6 Other in & Annex A Comment 564 (Recommend declining). Comment 1064 – I recommend accepting this one. Comment 763- Need discussion Comment 877- Need discussion Comment 913– I recommend accepting this one. Comment 81 I recommend declining.


Download ppt "Doc.: IEEE 802.11-03/227r1 Submission March 2003 John Kowalski, Sharp LabsSlide 1 Addressing the controversial comments in 9.10.2.4.2 and Annex A John."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google