1. 802.11 TGn Editor Opening Report - March 2006
Month Year
doc.: IEEE yy/xxxxr0
March 2006
TGn Editor Opening Report - March 2006
Date:
Authors:
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 < 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 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
Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation
John Doe, Some Company

2. Summary Acknowledgements Input Documents Process (Jan-March)
Output Documents
Recommended process during March meeting
Walkthrough of Output Documents
Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

3. Acknowledgements March 2006
The following members volunteered to help assemble the TGn Draft. Their support has materially accelerated the progress of and improved the editorial quality of the draft.
Ali Raissinia
Art Astrin
Assaf Kasher
Chris Hansen
Daqing Gu
David Cypher
George Vlantis
Jeremy Gosteau
Joe Levy
John Ketchum
Krishna Pillai
Leonid Epstein
Marc de Courville
Matt Smith
Matthew Fisher
Peter Loc
Rohit Nabar
Sanjiv Nanda
Sean Coffey
Solomon Trainin
Srini Kandalas
Tom Siep
Tomoko Adachi
Vinko Erceg
Youngsoo Kim
Yuichi Morioka
Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

4. March 2006
Input Documents
In Jan 2006, the TGn session confirmed the TGn Joint Proposal.
r5, TGn Joint Proposal MAC Spec
r4, TGn Joint Proposal PHY Spec
It instructed the editor to prepare a draft based on these documents
Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

5. Process (Jan-March) Process was highlighted in Jan TGn session
Goal is to make effective use of the expertise built up in TGn members during the proposal process
Subject to the policies and procedures
Volunteer group was identified in Jan, and held an open meeting to kick off the construction of the first draft
Status of this group: informal volunteer group aiding the TGn editor working on the TGn Draft and associated documents
The process was reviewed, tuned and approved by a meeting with the leadership
Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

6. Editorial Outputs Initial Release – 10 February 2006
March 2006
Editorial Outputs
Initial Release – 10 February 2006
“P802.11n D0.01.pdf” available on members’ site
“P802.11n-D0.01 with editorial notes.doc” is word document of the draft with additional editorial notes, particularly those identifying possible omissions in the draft
Simultaneously document r0 was released and uploaded to document server collating omissions noted in the draft
Second release – 24 February 2006
D0.02 of the draft and editorial note version
Only changes are editorial r1
Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

7. March 2006
Other Outputs
The editorial work of the editor (and helpers) is to produce a draft and accompanying documentation. This draft must be technically consistent with the input documents, it cannot resolve omissions or errors in the input documents
In working with the draft, possible omissions were identified and documented. A draft has to be complete before going to letter ballot, and these possible omissions were identified as requiring possible technical resolution outside the scope of the drafting process.
Volunteer authors came forward to create technical submissions to TGn in order to address the possible omissions.
So, one output of the work by volunteer TGn members are a number of submissions to TGn. These are authored by different groups of people depending on their expertise and interest.
Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

8. March 2006
Submissions
List on next page was updated at the TGn ad-hoc on monday morning.
We show the submission reference, author, number of pages, and an estimate of the time required to present, discuss and vote on a motion related to that submission
There are 23 submissions totalling 198 pages
The time estimate totals 8.5 hours
Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

9. Submissions – 1 March 2006 Doc number Author # pages Time Est.
John Ketchum 7 15 r0
Sanjiv Nanda 5 r0 3 r0
Assaf Kasher 12 r1
Solomon Trainin 4 r0 13 20 r0
Vinko Erceg r0 r1
Adrian Stephens 25 r0
Tomoko Adachi r1 r0
Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

10. Submissions - 2 March 2006 Doc number Author # pages Time Est.
Adrian Stephens 20 r0
Daqing 5 15 r0 r0
Matt Fischer 2 10 r0 3 r0 11 r0 4 r0 r0
tbd
Assaf Kasher 65
tbd ??
Huai-Rong Shao r1
Simon Black 8 35 r1
Srini Kandala 38 25 r1
Sheung Li 30 r0
Naveen Kakani
Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

11. Recommended process during March meeting
Disclaimer - This is a personal viewpoint
Our #1 job is to get the draft into a state where we can send it to working group letter ballot
This requires that the document has no obvious omissions
TGn should prioritize its time to address omissions
Motions affecting the draft need to be made early enough for the changes to be incorporated in the draft for a TG motion
Early submission (to the document server) of the exact wording of any submissions related to motions will help this to happen
Have to avoid any procedural pitfalls regarding when submissions are available to vote, when draft is available to vote in TG, when draft is available to vote in WG and allow sufficient editing time for incorporation of any approved changes
Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

12. Walkthrough of Output Documents
March 2006
Walkthrough of Output Documents
Walk-through of [1] and [2]
Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

13. References [1] IEEE P802.11 D0.02, TGn Draft
March 2006
References
[1] IEEE P D0.02, TGn Draft
[2] r0, Omissions in TGn Draft
[3] r5, TGn Joint Proposal MAC Spec
[4] r4, TGn Joint Proposal PHY Spec
Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation