Motions Internal for LMSC 1st Vice Chair (And supporting slides) May 19March, 2004 Motions Internal for LMSC 1st Vice Chair (And supporting slides) Matthew Sherman, BAE Systems

May 19March, 2004 EC Motion To approve payment of IEEE SA invoice in the amount of $16,129 for completed LMSC P&P support. Moved: M. Sherman For: Against: 2nd: Abstain: Matthew Sherman, BAE Systems

Motions to Approve P&P Revisions May 19March, 2004 Motions to Approve P&P Revisions Matthew Sherman, BAE Systems

Month 2000 doc.: IEEE 802.11-00/xxx May 19March, 2004 EC Motion To approve the proposed P&P revision titled “WG Membership and Meetings” as described in the document titled: 802.0-WG_Membership_&_Meetings_-_Proposed_Resolutions_051117_r0.pdf Note concern of membership loss taking effect before November force division The Term Limit document breaks out one paragraph from the original change to accommodate Bob Grow’s concern that it be voted separate (in case the entire fails. Moved: M. Sherman For: Against: 2nd: Abstain: Matthew Sherman, BAE Systems John Doe, His Company

Month 2000 doc.: IEEE 802.11-00/xxx May 19March, 2004 EC Motion To approve the proposed P&P revision titled “LMSC Organization” as described in the document titled: 802.0-WG_LMSC_Organization_-_Proposed_Resolutions_051113_r1.pdf Bob O’hara wrote: My additional comments on 7.2 have not been addressed. This clause now reads that the EC might hold some "veto" power after approval of a PAR by IEEE-SA SB. Delete "When determined appropriate by the EC". Moved: M. Sherman For: Against: 2nd: Abstain: Matthew Sherman, BAE Systems John Doe, His Company

Motions to Approve Balloting of P&P Revisions May 19March, 2004 Motions to Approve Balloting of P&P Revisions Matthew Sherman, BAE Systems

Month 2000 doc.: IEEE 802.11-00/xxx May 19March, 2004 EC Motion To approve for distribution and executive committee ballot the P&P Revision titled “WG Plenary” as described in the document titled: 802.0-WG_Plenary_-_Proposed_ballot_051118_r0.pdf Recommended changes from SA based on comments deferred to later time on last ballots Mention chair and VC - What about everyone else? Does all officers have to belong to SA? What WG Charter? Use WG/TAG rather than WG Disbanding a WG/TAG that never produced a document Moved: M. Sherman For: 2nd: Against: Abstain: Matthew Sherman, BAE Systems John Doe, His Company

Month 2000 doc.: IEEE 802.11-00/xxx May 19March, 2004 EC Motion To approve for distribution and executive committee ballot the P&P Revision titled “Editorial” as described in the document titled: 802.0-Editorial_-_Proposed_ballot_051118_r0.pdf From SA. Announce teleconferences same as WG Moved: M. Sherman For: 2nd: Against: Abstain: Matthew Sherman, BAE Systems John Doe, His Company

Review of ‘802 Process Improvement’ Meeing May 19March, 2004 Review of ‘802 Process Improvement’ Meeing Matthew Sherman, BAE Systems

Background Wanted to solicit inputs from Membership May 19March, 2004 Background Wanted to solicit inputs from Membership How to improve IEEE 802 Process? Held in tutorial slot since available Very lightly attended About 25 participants Mostly 802 leadership and SA staff The following slides summarize outcome Matthew Sherman, BAE Systems

Influences Outside the Process May 19March, 2004 Influences Outside the Process Teams form outside 802 process If people want to prevent progress, can’t stop A small organization can block progress When people stop talking tech and make personal head down hill fast Sometimes only reason a group is present is to prevent progress Companies with large markets want slow change IEEE802 not the only place to do a standard Matthew Sherman, BAE Systems

Key Issues Identified Size of groups Don’t always have necessary tools May 19March, 2004 Key Issues Identified Size of groups Don’t always have necessary tools Automation of Attendance, documents, ballots, etc Barcode reader or RFID Process drives to two hard line positions Limits opportunities for compromises Three stable states Converging, Deadlock, Giveup Want to get to one of three as soon as possible Distinction between interim and plenary slows process No ‘acquisition’ process – only consensus No impartial judge Matthew Sherman, BAE Systems

Suggested Solutions Same rules for interims as plenarys Chair training May 19March, 2004 Suggested Solutions Same rules for interims as plenarys Chair training Entity balloting Electronic tools for Attendance, Document control, electronic balloting, Calendar, Event tracking. Simplified attendance Pay fee, register, show up – Receive credit Revenue based voting Matthew Sherman, BAE Systems