1. TGmb Agenda, January 2009 Date: 2009-01-14 Authors: January 2009
doc.: IEEE /0040r0
January 2009
TGmb Agenda, January 2009
Date:
Authors:
Matthew Gast, Trapeze Networks
Matthew Gast, Trapeze Networks

2. January 2009
doc.: IEEE /0040r0
January 2009
Abstract
Agenda for the TGmb meeting in Los Angeles, CA, USA from January 19-23, 2008.
Matthew Gast, Trapeze Networks
Matthew Gast, Trapeze Networks

3. Agenda January 2009 Call meeting to order
doc.: IEEE /0040r0
January 2009
Agenda
Call meeting to order
Agenda review
Attendance recording & meeting resources
Policies & procedures (including patent policy)
Approval of prior meeting minutes
Call for Officers (Technical Editor)
TGmb revision status & schedule
Interpretation request
Issue review & resolution
Plans for next meeting
Authorize teleconferences & ad hocs
Review timeline
AOB
Adjourn
Matthew Gast, Trapeze Networks
Matthew Gast, Trapeze Networks

4. Attendance recording Attendance Documentation
January 2009
doc.: IEEE /0040r0
January 2009
Attendance recording
Attendance
opening-network-information-attendance-and-documentation-for-january-2008-session.ppt
Must register before logging attendance
Must log attendance during each 2 hour session
Documentation
Matthew Gast, Trapeze Networks
Matthew Gast, Trapeze Networks

5. Participants, Patents, and Duty to Inform
January 2009
doc.: IEEE /0040r0
January 2009
Participants, Patents, and Duty to Inform
All participants in this meeting have certain obligations under the IEEE-SA Patent Policy. Participants:
“Shall inform the IEEE (or cause the IEEE to be informed)” of the identity of each “holder of any potential Essential Patent Claims of which they are personally aware” if the claims are owned or controlled by the participant or the entity the participant is from, employed by, or otherwise represents
“Personal awareness” means that the participant “is personally aware that the holder may have a potential Essential Patent Claim,” even if the participant is not personally aware of the specific patents or patent claims
“Should inform the IEEE (or cause the IEEE to be informed)” of the identity of “any other holders of such potential Essential Patent Claims” (that is, third parties that are not affiliated with the participant, with the participant’s employer, or with anyone else that the participant is from or otherwise represents)
The above does not apply if the patent claim is already the subject of an Accepted Letter of Assurance that applies to the proposed standard(s) under consideration by this group
Quoted text excerpted from IEEE-SA Standards Board Bylaws subclause 6.2
Early identification of holders of potential Essential Patent Claims is strongly encouraged
No duty to perform a patent search
Slide #1
Matthew Gast, Trapeze Networks
Matthew Gast, Trapeze Networks

6. Patent Related Links January 2009
doc.: IEEE /0040r0
January 2009
Patent Related Links
All participants should be familiar with their obligations under the IEEE-SA Policies & Procedures for standards development.
Patent Policy is stated in these sources:
IEEE-SA Standards Boards Bylaws
IEEE-SA Standards Board Operations Manual
Material about the patent policy is available at
If you have questions, contact the IEEE-SA Standards Board Patent Committee Administrator at or visit
This slide set is available at
Slide #2
Matthew Gast, Trapeze Networks
Matthew Gast, Trapeze Networks

7. Call for Potentially Essential Patents
January 2009
doc.: IEEE /0040r0
Call for Potentially Essential Patents
January 2009
If anyone in this meeting is personally aware of the holder of any patent claims that are potentially essential to implementation of the proposed standard(s) under consideration by this group and that are not already the subject of an Accepted Letter of Assurance:
Either speak up now or
Provide the chair of this group with the identity of the holder(s) of any and all such claims as soon as possible or
Cause an LOA to be submitted
Slide #3
Matthew Gast, Trapeze Networks
Matthew Gast, Trapeze Networks

8. Other Guidelines for IEEE WG Meetings
January 2009
doc.: IEEE /0040r0
January 2009
Other Guidelines for IEEE WG Meetings
All IEEE-SA standards meetings shall be conducted in compliance with all applicable laws, including antitrust and competition laws.
Don’t discuss the interpretation, validity, or essentiality of patents/patent claims.
Don’t discuss specific license rates, terms, or conditions.
Relative costs, including licensing costs of essential patent claims, of different technical approaches may be discussed in standards development meetings.
Technical considerations remain primary focus
Don’t discuss or engage in the fixing of product prices, allocation of customers, or division of sales markets.
Don’t discuss the status or substance of ongoing or threatened litigation.
Don’t be silent if inappropriate topics are discussed … do formally object.
See IEEE-SA Standards Board Operations Manual, clause and “Promoting Competition and Innovation: What You Need to Know about the IEEE Standards Association's Antitrust and Competition Policy” for more details.
Slide #4
Matthew Gast, Trapeze Networks
Matthew Gast, Trapeze Networks

9. Link to IEEE Disclosure of Affiliation
January 2009
doc.: IEEE /0040r0
January 2009
Resources – URLs
Link to IEEE Disclosure of Affiliation
Links to IEEE Antitrust Guidelines
Link to IEEE Code of Ethics
Link to IEEE Patent Policy
Matthew Gast, Trapeze Networks
Matthew Gast, Trapeze Networks

10. IEEE 802 is a world-wide professional technical organization
January 2009
doc.: IEEE /0040r0
January 2009
Meeting Etiquette
IEEE 802 is a world-wide professional technical organization
Meetings are to be conducted in an orderly and professional manner in accordance with the policies and procedures governed by the organization.
Individuals are to address the “Technical” content of the subject under consideration and refrain from making “personal” comments to or about the presenter.
The Copyright Act of 1976 made a dramatic change to U.S. copyright law. Copyright was now deemed to exist from the moment of creation. Thus anything that is created is deemed to be owned by its creator. Additionally, a work no longer needs to be published in order to be protected. Therefore, even your scribbles on a piece of note paper constitute copyrighted material that you own and control.
The NII (National Information Infrastructure) and the GII (Global Information Infrastructure) are causing lawmakers and copyright owners to assess the ability of current copyright law to protect owners rights in a digital environment. While at this point the changes being talked about are not significant, they will make it clear that copyright protection is afforded to owners in the digital environment making it a requirement to honor the rights accorded to owners.
It is a requirement under the IEEE Bylaws that copyright ownership of all material published by the IEEE resides with the IEEE. The Standards Department accomplishes the transfer of copyright ownership from the volunteer authors to the Institute via the Project Authorization Request (PAR) form.
Matthew Gast, Trapeze Networks
Matthew Gast, Trapeze Networks

11. Approval of prior meeting minutes
January 2009
doc.: IEEE /0040r0
January 2009
Approval of prior meeting minutes
November 2008 (Dallas, Texas, USA): 11-08/1366r0
Teleconferences
Matthew Gast, Trapeze Networks
Matthew Gast, Trapeze Networks

12. January 2009
doc.: IEEE /0040r0
January 2009
Call for Officers
Still seeking a technical editor. The glory could be yours!
Matthew Gast, Trapeze Networks
Matthew Gast, Trapeze Networks

13. TGmb Plan of Record May 2008 – Issue Call for Comment/Input
January 2009
doc.: IEEE /0040r0
January 2009
TGmb Plan of Record
May 2008 – Issue Call for Comment/Input
July 2008 – begin process input and old Interpretation requests
Acknowledge previous Task Group referrals
Sept 2008 – PAR revision process started
Nov 2008 – close receipt of new input
Nov 2008 – WG/EC approval of PAR Revision
Dec 2008 – NesCom/SASB approval PAR Revision
Mar 2009 first WG Letter ballot
(includes All published Amendments as of Mar 2009)
July/Sept 2009 Recirc start
Sept 2009 – Form Sponsor Pool
Nov 2009 – Sponsor Ballot Start
(Include all published amendments as of Nov 2009)
Mar 2010 – Sponsor Recirc
Nov 2010 – WG/EC Final Approval
Mar 2011 – RevCom/SASB Approval
Matthew Gast, Trapeze Networks
Matthew Gast, Trapeze Networks

14. Amendment Ordering January 2009 Amendment Number Task Group
July 2007
doc.: IEEE /0040r0
January 2009
Amendment reordering was discussed by editors Nov 11 based on current timeline estimates and resulted announced herein.
Amendment Ordering
Taken from 11-08/1345r0, which is as of Nov 11 from web.
See
Amendment Number
Task Group
REVCOM Date
Amendment 1
TGk
May 2008 (actual)
Amendment 2
TGr
Amendment 3
TGy
Sept 2008 (actual)
Amendment 4
TGw
Sept 2009
Amendment 5
TGn
June 2009 (was TBA)
Amendment 6
TGz
Amendment 7
TGp
Dec 2009
Amendment 8 (was 9)
TGv
Amendment 9 (was 10)
TGu
Mar 2010
Amendment 10 (was 8)
TGs
May 2010 (was Dec 2009)
Revision
802.11mb
Mar 2011
TGaa
May 2011 (new)
TGT
Dec 2009 (plan to withdraw)
Slide 14
Matthew Gast, Trapeze Networks
Page 14
Terry Cole (AMD)
Matthew Gast, Trapeze Networks

15. Interpretation Request #1
January 2009
doc.: IEEE /0040r0
January 2009
Interpretation Request #1
Request received from Christian Skupin on regarding (FCS field) and Annex G, specifically tables G.1 and G.14: “During the evaluation process of my PHY/MAC implementation I got in doubt with the accuracy of the given FCS (bytes ) in Table G.1. This FCS in Table G.1 corresponds to bits in Table G With respect to the FCS calculation instructions in chapter and the given message (bytes 1-96) in Table G.1 my calculations result in the FCS { } (msb-left), whereas the given FCS is { } (bits in Table G.14). In consideration of the fact that my FCS-implementation works with other reference data which I collected by recording a signals, I assume that the given FCS in Table G.1 is not appropriate.”
Matthew Gast, Trapeze Networks
Matthew Gast, Trapeze Networks

16. Issue Review & Resolution
January 2009
doc.: IEEE /0040r0
January 2009
Issue Review & Resolution
Responses to initial call for comments are consolidated as 11-08/1127r7
After adding approved amendments (see timeline on next slide) to , editor should incorporate resolutions to these initial issues
Matthew Gast, Trapeze Networks
Matthew Gast, Trapeze Networks

17. Closing tasks Need for teleconferences? Review timeline
January 2009
doc.: IEEE /0040r0
January 2009
Closing tasks
Need for teleconferences?
Review timeline
Preparation for March 2009 plenary meeting
AOB
Adjourn
Matthew Gast, Trapeze Networks
Matthew Gast, Trapeze Networks