Proposal for TGad Selection Procedure and Timeline April 2007 doc.: IEEE 802.11-07/0570r0 July 2009 Proposal for TGad Selection Procedure and Timeline Date: 2009-07-16 Authors: Eldad Perahia, Intel Corporation Eldad Perahia, Intel Corporation

July 2009 Introduction In VHT there was discussion on the selection procedures previously used call for proposal / down selection procedure used in 11n SDD procedure used in 16m TGac chose to use SDD procedure as in 16m Not yet proven whether with SDD procedure that requires additional documents and ad hocs actually reduces the work time and shortens the TG duration Best to only experiment with new selection procedure in one 802.11 task group Proposal for TGad is to take lessons learned from 11n and improve upon that selection procedure Eldad Perahia, Intel Corporation

Lessons Learned and New Selection Procedure Steps (1/2) July 2009 Lessons Learned and New Selection Procedure Steps (1/2) Lesson 1: Provide opportunity to present novel design techniques, concepts, and algorithms prior to call for complete proposals Allows for new techniques from multiple sources to be incorporated into complete proposals, similar to SDD approach In 11n partial proposals were presented simultaneously Step 1 of selection procedure: Call for new techniques (in power point form) Lesson 2: Complete proposals required to be in draft amendment text format As in 11n, complete proposals must address all the functional requirements and evaluation methodology requirements Many of the initial 12000 comments in 11n were due to the quick conversion from proposal language to draft text First letter ballot comment resolution period will be significantly reduced Step 2 of selection procedure : Call for complete proposals in draft amendment text format Lesson 3: No special scheduled oral Q & A In 11n very few meaningful questions were asked during special scheduled Q&A, it was merely used to attack other proposals Only hold normal question period after presentation Eldad Perahia, Intel Corporation

Lessons Learned and New Selection Procedure Steps (2/2) July 2009 Lessons Learned and New Selection Procedure Steps (2/2) Lesson 4: No formal down selection votes In 11n there were several down selection votes, and the same proposal won each down selection vote In the end, the proposal still failed the confirmation vote Step 3: Strawpoll vote on complete proposals to gauge support of proposals Lesson 5: Merge proposals early in process The down selection process in 11n took many sessions In the end, it was necessary to merge the top proposals into a joint proposal to pass the confirmation vote Step 4: Merger of proposals If one proposal achieves 75%, hold confirmation vote If no proposal achieves 75%, “break” for TBD (2-4?) months to allow participants time to work out merger of top proposals If no merger, go to step 2 Else, step 5 Step 5: confirmation vote If >= 75%, create draft spec from proposal If < 75%, go to Step 2 Eldad Perahia, Intel Corporation

Timeline July 2009 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Prepare task Jan Mar May Sep Nov Selection Procedure begins Complete TG docs New Techniques complete proposals TGad Formed Confirmation Vote D1.0 spec available D2.0 spec available Start Sponsor ballot RevCom Standard Published 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Prepare task group documents Call for proposals and down selection / merger Comment resolution Comment resolution & recirculation ballots Comment resolution & recirculation ballots Eldad Perahia, Intel Corporation