1. TGs Process, May Date: 2006-05-14 Authors: May 2007 March 2007
doc.: IEEE P /0677r0
May 2007
TGs Process, May
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
Donald Eastlake 3rd, Motorola
Donald Eastlake 3rd, Motorola

2. March 2007
doc.: IEEE P /0677r0
May 2007
Abstract
Slides for discussion of the IEEE TGs process in getting through Working Group Letter Ballot and Beyond.
Donald Eastlake 3rd, Motorola
Donald Eastlake 3rd, Motorola

3. Mesh Networking Task Group Process
March 2007
doc.: IEEE P /0677r0
May 2007
Mesh Networking Task Group Process
TGs Motto: “Perfection is achieved not when there is nothing left to add but when there is nothing left to take away.”
Donald E. Eastlake 3rd, Motorola
Donald Eastlake 3rd, Motorola
Donald Eastlake 3rd, Motorola

4. Process of Getting to Letter Ballot and Beyond
March 2007
doc.: IEEE P /0677r0
May 2007
Process of Getting to Letter Ballot and Beyond
Completed Steps | Future Steps
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 from Submitted Complete Proposals to Produce a Draft
Refine Draft
1st Letter Ballot – November 2006 – Fails
Revise Draft – Resolve comments
2nd Letter Ballot – July 2007(?)
Recirculation
Sponsor Ballot – May 2008(?)
Final WG/EC Approval
IEEE SB REVCOM Approval
Donald Eastlake 3rd, Motorola
Donald Eastlake 3rd, Motorola

5. Process for Developing Submissions and Comment Resolutions
May 2007
Process for Developing Submissions and Comment Resolutions
You can not have a half way official body in While it is hard to cover all contingencies in a concise statement, there are generally two choices for work:
TGs can have regular sessions at meetings and can have ad hoc meetings and teleconferences in accordance with the rules with the required prior notice to all members and minutes published afterwards. It can also break into subgroups during such official meetings, the notice and minutes requirements generally being met by the notice and minutes of the TGs meeting.
One or more individual members can develop submissions or comment resolutions. TGs can not, in general, direct how they meet or communicate. They can not claim their submission / group has any special status. Participation in specific informal efforts of this sort should not be solicited at official meetings or on official teleconferences or mailing lists.
Donald Eastlake 3rd, Motorola

6. Process for Refining Draft
May 2007
Process for Refining Draft
Letter Ballot on Draft D1.0 authorized at November 2006 meeting.
Approval rate on Letter Ballot #93 was 48.12% so it failed. (This is not unusual. Most Drafts fail the first Letter Ballot and some fail two or three times before they pass.)
5,703 comments received (including 192 on apparently invalid ballots). 10 more comments added at January meeting.
Task group voted to proceed based on Draft D1.0 and to consider all comments for resolution.
Donald Eastlake 3rd, Motorola

7. Advantages/Disadvantages of Passing/Failing Letter Ballot
May 2007
Advantages/Disadvantages of Passing/Failing Letter Ballot
Advantages
Disadvantages
Passing Letter Ballot
You enter “re-circulation” so subsequent votes are 15 days and voters can only add comment each time on parts of the Draft that have changed or been affected by changes.
The voting pool is fixed and no new people joining can vote.
You must resolve every comment by a ¾ vote.
You can only change the draft through the resolution of comments.
Failing Letter Ballot
You are free to make whatever changes in the Draft the task group wants.
Your next Letter Ballot must be at least 30 days and will include everyone in the Working Group at that time and they can comment on any part of the Draft.
Donald Eastlake 3rd, Motorola

8. 3 Cycles of Comments and Resolution
May 2007
3 Cycles of Comments and Resolution
Call for Informal Comments
Comment Resolution
Comment Resolution
WG Letter Ballot / Recirculation
Sponsor Ballot / Recirculation
Comment Resolution
Donald Eastlake 3rd, Motorola

9. Comments Resolved at the London Meeting (January)
May 2007
Comments Resolved at the London Meeting (January)
Overall Summary
Total
Open
Closed
%Closed
Editorial Comments:
2,841
646
2,195
77.26%
Technical Comments:
2,872
2,066
806
28.06%
Total Comments:
5,713
2,712
3,001
52.53%
Donald Eastlake 3rd, Motorola

10. Comments Resolved at the Orlando Meeting (March)
May 2007
Comments Resolved at the Orlando Meeting (March)
Overall Summary
Total
Open
Closed
%Closed
Editorial Comments:
2,475 7
2,468
99.72%
Technical Comments:
3,284
1,410
1,828
56.45%
Total Comments:
5,713
1,417
4,296
75.20%
Donald Eastlake 3rd, Motorola

11. Schedule Projected at Orlando, Florida (March) Meeting
doc.: IEEE P /0677r0
May 2007
Schedule Projected at Orlando, Florida (March) Meeting
March 2007 (Orlando, Florida)
Comment Resolution
May 2007 (Montreal, Quebec)
July 2007 (San Francisco, California)
Comment Resolution, Second Letter Ballot authorized
September 2007 (Waikoloa, Hawai‘i)
November 2007 (Atlanta, Georgia)
First Letter Ballot Re-circulation
January 2008 (Sydney, New South Wales)
Second Letter Ballot Re-circulation
March 2008 (tbd)
Third Letter Ballot Re-circulation
May 2008 (Jacksonville, Florida)
Sponsor Ballot Authorization by WG
Donald Eastlake 3rd, Motorola
Donald Eastlake 3rd, Motorola

12. Possible Multi-Meeting Process Flow
March 2007
doc.: IEEE P /0677r0
May 2007
Possible Multi-Meeting Process Flow
Mar. Meeting Orlando, Florida
May Meeting Montreal, Quebec
July Meeting SanFranciscoCalifornia
Eindhoven Ad Hoc Meeting
Hillsboro Ad Hoc Meeting
Complete Comment Resolution?
Comment Resolution
Comment Resolution
Comment Resolution and Agenda Telecons
Comment Resolution and Agenda Telecons
Drafts D1.02+
Drafts D1.04+
Draft D2.0?
Donald Eastlake 3rd, Motorola
Donald Eastlake 3rd, Motorola

13. July – San Francisco Meeting Schedule
March 2007
doc.: IEEE P /0677r0
May 2007
July – San Francisco Meeting Schedule
Hours based on the 13 hours (5 regular sessions and 2 (90 minute) ad hoc sessions) we will probably get:
1 hr Opening Session: Administrivia, Minutes, Agenda, Process
11 hr Comment Resolution
1 hr Closing Session: Process, Teleconferences /Ad Hocs
Donald Eastlake 3rd, Motorola
Donald Eastlake 3rd, Motorola

14. TGs Activity Between Meetings
March 2007
doc.: IEEE P /0677r0
May 2007
TGs Activity Between Meetings
TGs Activities Between Meetings Requiring Notice:
One or more face to face ad hoc meetings, requires 30 days notice (P&P clause 3.6.2).
One or multiple Teleconferences, requires 10 days notice, not more often than weekly (P&P clause 3.6.3).
Donald Eastlake 3rd, Motorola
Donald Eastlake 3rd, Motorola

15. TGs Activity Between Meetings, Previously Decided
March 2007
doc.: IEEE P /0677r0
May 2007
TGs Activity Between Meetings, Previously Decided
Pre-approved ad hoc April in Eindhoven, Netherlands, to work on comment resolution.
Pre-approved ad hoc June in Hillsboro, Oregon, to work on comment resolution.
Teleconferences 10am Wednesdays Eastern US time for up to 1 ½ hours with the following primary topics:
28 March – comment resolution and Eindhoven meeting planning
4 April – comment resolution and Eindhoven meeting planning
18 April – General Area comments
25 April – Security Area comments
2 May – MAC Area comments and May meeting Agenda
9 May – RFI Area comments and May meeting Agenda
23 May – topic?
Donald Eastlake 3rd, Motorola
Donald Eastlake 3rd, Motorola

16. TGs Activity Between Meetings, New
May 2007
TGs Activity Between Meetings, New
Schedule a July ad hoc in case we do not go to Letter Ballot from the May meeting. Usually Tuesday through Thursday.
Schedule weekly teleconferences between May and July meetings, starting 30 May through 25 July, Wednesdays, except during the Hillsboro ad hoc and San Francisco meetings.
Most of our teleconferences have been at 5pm US Eastern time on Wednesdays but the current sequence is at 10am.
Donald Eastlake 3rd, Motorola

17. References Earlier TGs Process Submissions
March 2007
doc.: IEEE P /0677r0
May 2007
References
Earlier TGs Process Submissions
March 2007, 11-07/380r1, Orlando, Florida
February 2007, 11-07/235r1, Hillsboro, Oregon (ad hoc)
January 2007, 11-07/0059r2, London, England
November 2006, 11-06/1753r2, Dallas Texas
September 2006, 11-06/1386, Melbourne, Australia
July 2006, 11-06/1028r2, San Diego, California
June 2006, 11-06/840r2, Hillsboro, Oregon (ad hoc)
March 2006, 11-06/340r1, Denver, Colorado
January 2006, 11-06/130r1, Waikoloa, Hawai‘i
November 2005, 11-05/1137r1, Vancouver, British Columbia
September 2005, 11-05/878r1, Garden Grove, California
11-06/328r0, 11-06/329r3, Confirmed Proposal
Draft P802.11s D1.03
11-07/23r30, LB#93 Comments Resolution Spreadsheet
Donald Eastlake 3rd, Motorola
Donald Eastlake 3rd, Motorola