Keep 802 Together Proposal

1
Keep 802 Together Proposal
Contributors
Bob Grow, Matthew Sherman, Bill Quakenbush,
Roger Marks

• Point of Contact

Matthew Sherman 2nd Vice Chair, IEEE 802 BAE
Systems - CINR Matthew.Sherman_at_BAESystems.com
Date March 15, 2003
2
Goals

• Define reorganization within existing 802
• Address concerns expressed at Nov. 03 meeting

3
Approach

• Develop resolutions to major concerns raised
• Evolve strawman reorg proposal based on
  resolutions
• Present strawman to EC in March 04
• Address additional concerns expressed
• Refine proposal
• Solicit inputs from CS and SA
• Bring to vote in July 04

4
New Organization Highlights

• Preserves 802 as market facing and oversight
  entity
• 802 Architecture preserved
• Greater independence to WG
• Changes purely through PP
• Limit content to key topics
• Center on Pars req, Sponsor ballot req, EC
  ballots, tutorials
• Rely on Higher PP and WG PP for all else
• May need / want to move to SCC

5
Concerns and Suggested Resolutions
6
Concern Logistics problems associated with size
Resolution Allow separate WG Plenary 802
hosted plenary 3 times per year if desired For
WG who dont want treasury One full Plenary per
year Encourage cross-polinization between
groups Have every 2 years if every year too
much Short electronic EC after each
plenary Allows quick action by EC on
issues Telecom augmented with web conferencing
7
Concern Current PP are broken
Resolution Rework around Model PP Minimize
content with ref to other docs Incorporate mods
based on this doc Move to SCC format if needed
8
Concern Maintaining architectural consistency
across MACs wrt future organization
Resolution 802 still approves all PARs and
Sponsor Ballots All other issues determined by WG
9
Concern Increased friction between WGs
Resolution Reduce interactions to PARs
Sponsor Ballots New activity tutorial If
conflict with 802 tutorials WG allocates WG
time Electronic pres in non-802 Plenary 12
votes so limited impact of any one group Hard
to block unless serious problem All other issues
left to WG
10
Concern Continually at odds over operational
style and procedures
Resolution See section on increased friction
11
Concern Difficulty of coordinating technical
work across a group of this size
Resolution Dont know how to do better than
curret org
12
Concern Need to devolve power from EC to WGs
Resolution See slide on increased friction
13
Concern Operational efficiency of WGs
Resolution Up to WG to set their own pace Must
comply with SA requirements, etc.
14
Concern Large groups need faster response time,
more dynamic environment, without losing quality
Resolution See slide on increased friction
15
Detailed Reorganization Proposal

• To be added if fundamental approach approved by
  2/3s of EC
• Fully handled via PP Changes
• Move to SCC format if needed