doc.: IEEE /207r0 Submission March 2005 Donald Eastlake 3rd, MotorolaSlide 1 TGs Process Notice: This document has been prepared to assist IEEE 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 Patent Policy and Procedures: The contributor is familiar with the IEEE 802 Patent Policy and Procedures, 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 Working Group 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 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 Working Group. If you have questions, contact the IEEE Patent Committee Administrator at. Date: Authors:

doc.: IEEE /207r0 Submission March 2005 Donald Eastlake 3rd, MotorolaSlide 2 Abstract Slides for discussion of the IEEE TGs process in getting to a Draft.

doc.: IEEE /207r0 Submission March 2005 Donald Eastlake 3rd, MotorolaSlide 3 Mesh Networking Task Group Process Donald E. Eastlake 3 rd

doc.: IEEE /207r0 Submission March 2005 Donald Eastlake 3rd, MotorolaSlide 4 Generic Process of Getting to Letter Ballot Adoption of PAR and 5 Criteria Technical Presentations and Discussions Specify Any Additional Requirements, Comparison Criteria, or Other Documents Call For Proposals Presentation of Proposals Select/Combine from Submitted Complete/Partial Proposals to Produce a Draft Refine Draft Letter Ballot

doc.: IEEE /207r0 Submission March 2005 Donald Eastlake 3rd, MotorolaSlide Task Group Timelines Time from PAR approval to first Letter Ballot – average of 6.6 meetings / 13 months –TGe-7, TGf-7, TGg-9, TGh-4, TGi-6 Time from first Letter Ballot to first Sponsor Ballot – average of 9 meetings / 18 months –TGe-12, TGf-9, TGg-6, TGh-8, TGi-10 (above data compiled by Bruce Kraemer)

doc.: IEEE /207r0 Submission March 2005 Donald Eastlake 3rd, MotorolaSlide 6 Our Timeline Our PAR approval was 24 June 2004 –At the average pace for the above Task Groups, our first Letter Ballot would open in July 2005 and our first Sponsor Ballot in January We are now behind the average pace for our first Letter Ballot. –We publicly announced January 2005 for a call for proposals to be submitted in July It will be some number of meeting beyond that before we can even try for our first WG Letter Ballot. Things will usually happen slower than what we aim for.

doc.: IEEE /207r0 Submission March 2005 Donald Eastlake 3rd, MotorolaSlide 7 Schedule Projected at Monterey (January) Meeting March 2005 (Atlanta, Georgia) –Brief proposal presentations, refinement of proposal process May 2005 (TBD) –Brief proposal presentations, refinement of proposal process July 2005 (San Francisco, California) –Presentation of proposals and initial selection actions September 2005 (Orange County, California) –Down selection November 2005 (Vancouver, British Columbia) –Derivation of Draft January 2006 (TBD) –Further Refinement of Draft March 2006 (New Orleans, Louisiana) –Letter Ballot Authorized by WG?

doc.: IEEE /207r0 Submission March 2005 Donald Eastlake 3rd, MotorolaSlide 8 Schedule Projected at Atlanta (March) Meeting May 2005 (Cairns, Australia) –Brief proposal presentations, refinement of proposal process July 2005 (San Francisco, California) –Presentation of proposals and initial selection actions September 2005 (Orange County, California) –Down selection November 2005 (Vancouver, British Columbia) –Derivation of Draft January 2006 (Waikoloa, Hawaii) –Further Refinement of Draft March 2006 (New Orleans, Louisiana) –Letter Ballot Authorized by WG? May 2006 (TDB) July 2006 (San Diego, California) –First Letter Ballot Re-circulation

doc.: IEEE /207r0 Submission March 2005 Donald Eastlake 3rd, MotorolaSlide 9 Possible TGs Activity Between Future Meeting Possibilities for TGs Activity Between –March 2005 and May 2005 Meetings –May 2005 and July 2005 Meetings –July 2005 and September 2005 Meetings to accelerate action : –One or more official face to face meetings, requires 30 days notice (P&P clause 3.6.2) –One or multiple Teleconferences (require 10 days notice, cannot be held more often than weekly (P&P clause 3.6.3))

doc.: IEEE /207r0 Submission March 2005 Donald Eastlake 3rd, MotorolaSlide 10 References Earlier TGs Process Submissions –January 2005, 11-05/26r1, Monterey, California –November 2004, 11-04/1384r3, San Antonio, Texas –September 2004, 11-04/1058r1, Berlin, Germany –July 2004, 11-04/800r3, Portland, Oregon