1. doc.: IEEE 802.11-04/xxxr0 Date: Jan. 5, 2005
May 2004
doc.: IEEE /xxxr0
JAN 2005
Alternatives on s Proposals Presentation Procedure and Voting Process
Date: Jan. 5, 2005
Author:
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
D. J. Shyy, MITRE

2. May 2004
doc.: IEEE /xxxr0
JAN 2005
Introduction
Contribution 11/1539r1 outlined possible presentation procedures and voting processes for 11s proposals.
This contribution provide alternatives on these procedures and processes
D. J. Shyy, MITRE

3. Presentation Procedures for 2005 March and May Meetings
doc.: IEEE /xxxr0
JAN 2005
Presentation Procedures for 2005 March and May Meetings
The full presentation for each 11s proposal will not occur until July 2005.
Now the question what 11s should do at the 2005 March and May meetings?
D. J. Shyy, MITRE

4. Presentation Procedures for 2005 March and May Meetings
doc.: IEEE /xxxr0
JAN 2005
Presentation Procedures for 2005 March and May Meetings
Alternative 1: Optional; it is up to each proposer to decide if they are willing to present and what the contents are
Pros: Do not place burden on the proposers since some proposers may not be ready.
Cons: We may not know the design methodologies of some proposals until July 2005.
Alternative 2: Mandatory; each proposer must be on stage to make a presentation, but it is up to the proposer to decide what the contents are
Pros: Even if some proposers are not ready, by showing their faces at the stage and present preliminary ideas, proposers can start talking to each other about possible merge.
Alternative 3: Mandatory: each proposer must make a presentation, and the contents of the presentation must follow certain formats (e.g. providing a check list on comparison criteria)
Pros: Get a preview of each proposal.
Cons: If some proposers are not ready, their presentation will not be precise and subject to change at the July meeting anyway.
D. J. Shyy, MITRE

5. Voting Process at 2005 July, September and November Meetings
May 2004
doc.: IEEE /xxxr0
JAN 2005
Voting Process at 2005 July, September and November Meetings
Based on the 11r experience, no one would get eliminated from the first round of presentations
We propose to have an immediate vote for each presentation at 2005 July meeting, but there is no elimination for the first round (no threshold for the voting results).
All proposals will be ranked based on the voting results
All proposals enter the second round
This allows the proposals to have time to start the process of merging
The bottom 25% are encouraged to be merged with the top 75% for the first round
A formal roll call vote for the second round (Sep. 2005). The bottom 50% are required to be merged with the top 50%.
A formal roll call vote for the third round (Nov. 2005), and the highest-rank proposal becomes the skeleton of the draft 11s standards and the rest is required to be merged.
D. J. Shyy, MITRE

6. May 2004
doc.: IEEE /xxxr0
JAN 2005
Conclusion
If agreed by the 11s members, we propose to make changes on contribution 11/1539r1 and contribution 11/1430r7 (call for proposals) to include these proposed alternatives
D. J. Shyy, MITRE