1 / 46

TGn Meeting Report - Vancouver, BC March 09-13 '09

Attend the TGn meeting in Vancouver, BC from March 09-13 '09 at Fairmont Hyatt Regency Hotel. Ensure proper meeting protocol, attendance, and voting guidelines. Familiarize with IEEE policies and procedures including patent and ethics policies.

ritadawson
Download Presentation

TGn Meeting Report - Vancouver, BC March 09-13 '09

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Date: 2009-March-09 Name Company Address Phone email bkraemer@ marvell .com Bruce Kraemer Marvell +1 - 321 - 4 27 - 4098 TGn Meeting Report - March 09 ‘09 Authors: 5488 Marvell Lane, Santa Clara, CA, 95054 Bruce Kraemer, Marvell

  2. Welcome to Vancouver, BC, CAMarch 09-13FairmontHyatt Regency Hotel Meetings Room = Regency B - 3rd floor and Balmoral - 3rd floor One room – no parallel sessions Bruce Kraemer, Marvell

  3. Meeting Protocol Please announce your affiliation when you first address the group during a meeting slot Slide 3 Bruce Kraemer, Marvell Bruce Kraemer, Marvell

  4. Attendance https://murphy.events.ieee.org/imat/attendance/index Register Indicate attendance See document 11-08-1247r0 for more details Slide 4 Bruce Kraemer, Marvell Bruce Kraemer, Marvell

  5. Attendance, Voting & Document Status Make sure your badges are correct If you plan to make a submission be sure it does not contain company logos or advertising Questions on Voting status, Ballot pool, Access to Reflector, Documentation, member’s area see Adrian Stephens – adrian.p.stephens@intel.com Cell Phones Silent or Off Slide 5 Bruce Kraemer, Marvell Bruce Kraemer, Marvell

  6. Policies • Policies and Procedures: • IEEE Patent Policy - http://standards.ieee.org/board/pat/pat-slideset.ppt • Are there any patent claim(s)/patent application claim(s) and/or the holder of patent claim(s)/patent application claim(s) that the participant believes may be essential for the use of that standard? Minute any responses that were given, specifically the patent claim(s)/patent application claim(s) and/or the holder of the patent claim(s)/patent application claim(s) that were identified (if any) and by whom. • Affiliation FAQ - http://standards.ieee.org/faqs/affiliationFAQ.html • Anti-Trust FAQ - http://standards.ieee.org/resources/antitrust-guidelines.pdf • Ethics - http://www.ieee.org/portal/cms_docs/about/CoE_poster.pdf • IEEE 802.11 Policies and Procedures - http://www.ieee802.org/11/DocFiles/06/11-06-0812-03-0000-802-11-policies-and-proceedures.htm • IEEE 802 Policies and Procedures - http://standards.ieee.org/board/aud/LMSC.pdf Bruce Kraemer, Marvell

  7. 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 - March 08 Bruce Kraemer, Marvell

  8. 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 http://standards.ieee.org/guides/bylaws/sect6-7.html#6 IEEE-SA Standards Board Operations Manual http://standards.ieee.org/guides/opman/sect6.html#6.3 Material about the patent policy is available at http://standards.ieee.org/board/pat/pat-material.html If you have questions, contact the IEEE-SA Standards Board Patent Committee Administrator at patcom@ieee.org or visit http://standards.ieee.org/board/pat/index.html This slide set is available at http://standards.ieee.org/board/pat/pat-slideset.ppt Slide #2 – March 08 Bruce Kraemer, Marvell

  9. Call for Potentially Essential Patents • 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 – March 08 Bruce Kraemer, Marvell

  10. 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 5.3.10 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 – March 08 Bruce Kraemer, Marvell

  11. Secretary • Candidates: Jon Rosdahl • Other? Bruce Kraemer, Marvell

  12. TGn Minutes Slide 12 Bruce Kraemer, Marvell Bruce Kraemer, Marvell

  13. TGn Minutes of January ’09 11-09-0106r0 • Executive Summary (see also Chairs’ meeting doc 11-08-1460 and closing report doc 11-09-0107): • Draft 7.0 passed recirculation ballot LB138 with 281 approve, 14 not approve, 95.25% affirmative. This was a recirculation ballot on an unchanged draft leading to a sponsor ballot. • The first sponsor ballot for TGn completed on January 10, 2009. 277 were eligible to vote. 224 votes were received, and the vote passed with 158 approve, 45 not approve, 17 abstain, 77.8% affirmative. • 241 comments were submitted on the sponsor ballot. Resolution of these comments will continue into teleconferences after this meeting. • There were no changes to the timeline anticipating publication in March 2010. Slide 13 Bruce Kraemer, Marvell Bruce Kraemer, Marvell

  14. Approve Minutes Motion to approve January ‘09 (Los Angeles) TGn minutes as contained in 11-08-0106r0 Move: Sheung Second: Jon Slide 14 Bruce Kraemer, Marvell Bruce Kraemer, Marvell

  15. TGn Quick Reviewof Events prior to this meeting Slide 15 Bruce Kraemer, Marvell Bruce Kraemer, Marvell

  16. TGn Ad Hoc Organization Bruce Kraemer, Marvell

  17. One Page History of TGn HTSG formed – First meeting (Sep-11-’02 Monterey) TGn formed – First meeting (Sep-15-’03 Singapore) Began call for proposals (May 17 ’04 Garden Grove) 32 First round presentations (Sep 13 ’04 Berlin) Down selected to one proposal (Mar ’05 Atlanta) –first confirm vote failed. Confirmation vote #2 failed - reset to 3 proposals -left the May ‘05 meeting with a serious deadlock. (Cairns) 3 proposal groups agreed to a joint proposal activity (Jul ’05 San Francisco) JP proposal accepted by vote of 184/0/4, editor instructed to create draft (Jan ’06 Waikoloa) Baseline specification converted into Draft 1.0 (335p). Letter ballot issued (LB84) March 20, ’06 (Denver) and closed on April 29, ‘06 (failed) Draft 1.0 Comment resolution begins (May ’06 Jacksonville) Approved 6711 editorial and 1041 technical resolutions; Created Draft 1.03 (Jul ’06 San Diego) Approved 568 technical resolutions (Sep ’06 Melbourne); Created Draft 1.06 (388p) Approved 703 technical resolutions (Nov ’06 Dallas); Created Draft 1.09 (444p) Approved 496 technical resolutions (Jan ’07 London); created D 1.10 (500p); went to WG letter ballot Feb 7, ’07 with D 2.0; closed March 9, ’07 LB97 on TGn D2.0 passed with 83.4% approval. (Mar ’07 Orlando) Began comment resolution on with target of Draft 3.0 completion and release to ballot in Sep ’07. Approved 1470 editorial resolutions and approved TGn draft 2.02. Also approved 450 technical comment resolutions. (May 07 Montreal) Cumulative insertion of resolutions contained in TGn draft 2.04. (494p) Approved 750 technical resolutions and approved TGn draft 2.05. (July 07 San Francisco) Cumulative insertion of resolutions now contained in TGn draft 2.07. (498p) Approved 507 technical resolutions and approved recirculation ballot for TGn draft 3.0 (544p). (Sep 07 Waikoloa) Recirculation passed. Approved 282 editorial resolutions and approved TGn draft 3.01. Approved 97 technical resolutions. (Nov 07 Atlanta) Cumulative insertion of resolutions now contained in TGn draft 3.02. (558p) Approved 313 technical comment resolutions (Jan ‘08 Taipei). Cumulative approved comments now in D3.03. Additional ad hoc comment resolutions contained in speculative edits D3.04, D3.05, D3.06. Approved 190 technical comment resolutions (Mar ’08 Orlando). Approved recirculation ballot for TGn draft 4.0 (547p). Approved 349 comment resolutions (May ’08 Jacksonville). Approved recirculation ballot (LB129) for TGn draft 5.0 (547p). Ballot closed June 12 with 1112 comments. Approved 1112 comment resolutions (July ’08 Denver). Approved recirculation ballot (LB134) for TGn draft 6.0 (557p). Ballot closed August 12 with 195 comments. Approved 195 comment resolutions (Sep ’08 Waikoloa). Approved recirculation ballot (LB136) for TGn draft 7.0 (557p). Ballot closed Sep 30 with 48 comments. Approved 48 comment resolutions resulting from LB136 (Nov ’08 Dallas). Approved recirculation ballot (LB138). Granted conditional approval to move to Sponsor ballot. Zero no votes received. Moved ahead with Sponsor ballot. Sponsor Ballot closed Jan 10 ’09. 241 comments received, 77.8 % affirmative. TGn CRC began Sponsor ballot comment resolution (Jan ’09 Los Angeles). Completed comment resolution, prepared D8.0 and began 1st SB recirc 19 Feb 09 which closed 06 Mar 09. 77 Comments received. 80.1 % affirmative. Slide 17 Bruce Kraemer, Marvell Bruce Kraemer, Marvell

  18. TGn – Sponsor Ballot Recirc #1 • IEEE 802.11 Recirculation Sponsor Ballot #1 asked the question “Should P802.11N Draft 8.0 be forwarded to RevCom?” • The official results for the 15 day Recirculation Sponsor Ballot #1 follow: • Ballot Opening Date:   Thursday February 19 , 2009 - 23:59 ETBallot Closing Date:   Friday March 06, 2009 - 23:59 ET  • RESPONSE RATE:This ballot has met the 50% returned ballot ratio requirement • This ballot has met the <30% abstention ratio requirement277 eligible people are in this ballot group.169 affirmative votes   42 negative votes   • 17 abstention votes • ======= • 232 votes received  =  83 % valid returns                                  =  7 % valid abstentionsAPPROVAL RATE:169  affirmative votes       =   80.1 % affirmative  42  total negative votes  =     19.9 % negative Bruce Kraemer, Marvell

  19. SB Recirc #1 – Comments (77 Total) Bruce Kraemer, Marvell

  20. Primary Vancouver Meeting Documents • SB #1 Comment Composite 11-09- 0024 r5 • Meeting Report 11-09- 0219 r0 • Editors Report 11-09- 0251 r0 • Closing Report 11-09- 0291 r0 • Meeting Minutes 11-09- 0226 r2 • TGn Draft 8.0 Bruce Kraemer, Marvell

  21. SB Recirc #1 Ad hoc Documents Bruce Kraemer, Marvell

  22. March TGn CRC Agenda Slide 22 Bruce Kraemer, Marvell Bruce Kraemer, Marvell

  23. Master Schedule Plan • Nov ’08 - Requested (conditional) approval for sponsor ballot • Sponsor ballot pool formed during July/August ‘08 • Released Draft 7.0 to SB #0 in November ’08 • Released Draft 8.0 to SB #1 recirc in Feb ‘09 • Begin & Complete SB #1 comment resolution in March • Release Draft 9.0 for SB #2 before April 1 • Conduct subsequent activities with target of EC Request for unconditional approval in July Bruce Kraemer, Marvell

  24. March WG11 Agenda am1 am2 lunch pm1 pm2 dinner eve Bruce Kraemer, Marvell

  25. Agenda Plan and Topics Primary topic: Comment Resolution General Order – TGn Full with topics introduced by ad hoc where appropriate, consider reverting to ad hoc when full business complete Monday – TGn summary, ad hoc status and comment resolution planning Tuesday – Discussion and Votes Wednesday – Discussion and Votes Thursday - Discussion and Votes CRC Plans from March to May to July Extend Teleconferences? Timeline review Any other Business for the agenda? Slide 25 Bruce Kraemer, Marvell Bruce Kraemer, Marvell

  26. TGn CRC – Mar ‘09 Schedule Mar 09 Mar 10 Mar 11 Mar 12 Bruce Kraemer, Marvell

  27. TGn CRC – Mar ‘09 Schedule – Topics Mar 09 Mar 10 Mar 11 Mar 12 Bruce Kraemer, Marvell

  28. Further details on CRC Topic plans • The composite comment data base 11-09-0024 r5 allocates comments to topic categories: COEX, PHY, MAC, EDITOR • For the first 3 comment resolution meetings we will have single subjects • On Tuesday AM2 only PHY comments will be discussed • On Tuesday pm1 only COEX will be discussed • Time block will begin with presentations by John Barr (11-08-0281) and Peter Loc • On Wednesday am1 only MAC will be discussed • Allocation of topics to subsequent time slots are expected to be as shown on slide 27 but may change after reviewing progress made in the above 3 sessions. Bruce Kraemer, Marvell

  29. Approve Work Plan Agenda Motion to approve March ’09 TGn agenda as contained on slide 23 - 26 (with any minuted amendments as contained in 0219 r2 ). Move: Second: Slide 29 Bruce Kraemer, Marvell Bruce Kraemer, Marvell

  30. TGn Newly Approved Timeline Jan ‘09 Bruce Kraemer, Marvell

  31. TGn Timeline – January 19, 2009 Bruce Kraemer, Marvell

  32. Mar ’09 to May ‘09 TGn Teleconference Plan Call number: 916-356-2663 Call time: 10:00 – 14:00 ET Bruce Kraemer, Marvell

  33. End of Chair's Opening Report Slide 33 Bruce Kraemer, Marvell Bruce Kraemer, Marvell

  34. Technical Editor Report 11-09-0251 r0 Slide 34 Bruce Kraemer, Marvell Bruce Kraemer, Marvell

  35. ad hoc Reports Slide 35 Bruce Kraemer, Marvell Bruce Kraemer, Marvell

  36. SB Recirc #1 Ad hoc Documents Bruce Kraemer, Marvell

  37. Any other business? Slide 37 Bruce Kraemer, Marvell Bruce Kraemer, Marvell

  38. Recess Slide 38 Bruce Kraemer, Marvell Bruce Kraemer, Marvell

  39. TGn Tuesday am2 & pm1 update Slide 39 Bruce Kraemer, Marvell Bruce Kraemer, Marvell

  40. TGn CRC – Mar ‘09 Schedule – Topics Mar 09 Mar 10 Mar 11 Mar 12 Bruce Kraemer, Marvell

  41. Further details on CRC Topic plans • The composite comment data base 11-09-0024 r5 allocates comments to topic categories: COEX, PHY, MAC, EDITOR • For the first 3 comment resolution meetings we will have single subjects • On Tuesday AM2 only PHY comments will be discussed • On Tuesday pm1 only COEX will be discussed • Time block will begin with presentations by John Barr (11-08-0281) and Peter Loc • On Wednesday am1 only MAC will be discussed • Allocation of topics to subsequent time slots are expected to be as shown on slide 27 but may change after reviewing progress made in the above 3 sessions. Bruce Kraemer, Marvell

  42. Recess Slide 42 Bruce Kraemer, Marvell Bruce Kraemer, Marvell

  43. TGn Wednesday am1 update Slide 43 Bruce Kraemer, Marvell Bruce Kraemer, Marvell

  44. TGn CRC – Mar ‘09 Schedule – Topics Mar 09 Mar 10 Mar 11 Mar 12 Balmoral Balmoral Balmoral Balmoral Bruce Kraemer, Marvell

  45. Further details on CRC Topic plans • The composite comment data base 11-09-0024 r5 allocates comments to topic categories: COEX, PHY, MAC, EDITOR • For the first 3 comment resolution meetings we will have single subjects • On Tuesday AM2 only PHY comments will be discussed • On Tuesday pm1 only COEX will be discussed • Time block will begin with presentations by John Barr (11-08-0281) and Peter Loc • On Wednesday am1 only MAC will be discussed • With 20 minutes at end of slot to review public action frame treatment within TGw amendment. • During Wednesday pm1 MAC & COEX will be discussed • The session will begin with remaining MAC comments and when complete we will take up COEX comments. • Allocation of topics to subsequent agenda time slots are expected to be as shown on slide 44 but may change with agreement of 2/3 of the members. Bruce Kraemer, Marvell

  46. Recess Slide 46 Bruce Kraemer, Marvell Bruce Kraemer, Marvell

More Related