1. TGn Selection Procedure Straw Polls
July 2003
TGn Selection Procedure Straw Polls
Matthew B. Shoemake, Ph.D.
July 25, 2003
Matthew B. Shoemake, TGn Chair Elect

2. Proposal for Reaching Consensus on a Selection Procedure
July 2003
Proposal for Reaching Consensus on a Selection Procedure
July 2003 session:
Beginning discussion of selection procedure
Take straw polls to determine member thinking
Based on straw polls, direct IEEE n Chair Elect to draft procedure
Conference calls:
Hold two conference calls just before the September 2003 session to review and refine the draft selection procedure
Confirmed meetings:
August 27, 2003 at 8am PT/11am ET
September 3, 2003 at 8am PT/11am ET
September 2003 Session:
IEEE n Chair to provide report on status of draft selection procedure
IEEE n Task Group to review, modify and consider adoption of official selection procedure
Matthew B. Shoemake, TGn Chair Elect

3. July 2003
Straw Polls (1/5)
Results of the straw polls to be used to draft the IEEE n Selection Procedure.
Should n define Functional Requirements that must be met for proposal consideration:
YES/NO Result: 101/3
Should n define Comparison Criteria that must be addressed/answered for a proposal to be considered:
YES/NO Result: 94/5
Shall the selection procedure call for all proposals to be strictly classified as MAC proposals or PHY proposals?
YES/NO Result: 2/119
Matthew B. Shoemake, TGn Chair Elect

4. Straw Polls (2/5) Assuming the following definitions:
July 2003
Straw Polls (2/5)
Results of the straw polls to be used to draft the IEEE n Selection Procedure.
Assuming the following definitions:
Complete Proposal - a proposal that meets all the requirements of the PAR and the Functional Requirements
Partial Proposal - a proposal that does not contradict the functional requirements or requirements of the PAR but alone does not meet all of the Functional Requirements and requirements of the PAR. Example: A packet aggregation proposal alone would not meet the 100 Mbps PAR requirements, but likewise may not violate any requirement of the PAR.
Should the Selection Procedure:
Allow for only introduction of “complete proposals” - 6
Allow for only introduction of “partial proposals” - 1
Allow for introduction of “complete proposals” and “partial proposals” - 120
Matthew B. Shoemake, TGn Chair Elect

5. July 2003
Straw Polls (3/5)
Results of the straw polls to be used to draft the IEEE n Selection Procedure.
What should be used as a baseline for the n Selection Procedure?
802.11g Selection Procedure - 3
a Selection Procedure - 36
Indifferent - 36
Other - 9
Matthew B. Shoemake, TGn Chair Elect

6. July 2003
Straw Polls (4/5)
Results of the straw polls to be used to draft the IEEE n Selection Procedure.
Should the n Selection Procedure incorporate a “low hurdle” vote:
YES/NO Results: 87/1
If so, what should the low hurdle level be?
Greater than 20 %
Greater than 25 %
Other
Should the procedure include a Panel Q&A session?
YES/NO Results: 101/8
Should the procedure timeline target be:
Initial presentations made in January 2004 with low hurdle vote in March 2004 and subsequent procedure steps continuing in May
Other
Matthew B. Shoemake, TGn Chair Elect

7. Straw Poll (5/5) When shall the group be able to change the procedure?
July 2003
Straw Poll (5/5)
Results of the straw polls to be used to draft the IEEE n Selection Procedure.
When shall the group be able to change the procedure?
Shall require a vote of at least 75% of the members to change the selection procedure
Shall require a vote of at least 50% of the members to change the selection procedure
Other - 8
Matthew B. Shoemake, TGn Chair Elect

8. July 2003
Background
Matthew B. Shoemake, TGn Chair Elect

9. Previously Used Selection Procedures: 802.11g
July 2003
Previously Used Selection Procedures: g
802.11g procedure drew from the b procedure
802.11g procedure has been leveraged by h and a
Selection Procedure ( r3):
Functional Requirements ( r4) must be met to be considered by the TGg
Comparison Criteria ( r9) are questions that must be answered by each proposer to be considered by TGg
No scoring system and members free to vote at will
Issue with g procedure:
Step 19 was not very clear, and at a critical stage of the process, there were varying interpretations of the process
a attempted to fix this problem
Matthew B. Shoemake, TGn Chair Elect

10. Previously Used Selection Procedures: 802.15.3a
July 2003
Previously Used Selection Procedures: a
IEEE a built on g procedure and has attempted to plug holes and remove any ambiguities
Selection Procedure (doc ):
Added very clear flow chart for procedure
IEEE a procedure includes:
“Technical Requirements” (doc )
“Selection Criteria” (doc )
Low hurdle vote: > 20%
Matthew B. Shoemake, TGn Chair Elect