Title: IEEE 802'20 Technology Selection Process
1IEEE 802.20 Technology Selection Process
- Presentation of Contribution C802.20-04-72
- Dan Gal
- Berlin, September 14, 2004
2Introduction
- This is the presentation version of contribution
C802.20-04-xx, a proposal for IEEE 802.20
technology selection process (TSP) - Purpose Start a working group discussion and
trigger follow-up contributions for an
agreed-upon technology selection procedure - Goal Adopt a TSP in the November 2004 plenary
meeting.
3Outline
- This TSP proposal includes
- Suggested process ground rules
- Selection process stages
- Form templates
- A list of open issues that require additional
contributions and working group resolutions.
4TSP Elements
- Define Technology Proposal submission rules
- Define a scoring system
- Define selection rules
- Identify decision criteria issues that require
working group resolution
5Section 1 - Introduction
- This proposal is not a complete procedure
- It is recommended that an agreed upon TSP be
adopted before the call for 802.20 proposals
6Section 2.1 Document Precedence
- In case of a conflict with the rules, the
applicable IEEE SA rules, as well as the 802.20
rules, shall have higher precedence than the TSP
7Section 2.3.1 Proposal Submission Rules
- Technology proposals shall include five parts
- Part I Technical Specifications Summary (section
2.3.2). - Part II Technology Description (section 2.3.3).
- Part III PHY/MAC specifications (section 2.3.4).
- Part IV Evaluation Criteria simulations results
(section 2.3.5). - Part V Compliance statement (section 2.3.6).
8Section 2.3.1 Proposal Submission Rules
- Proposals need not be fully compliant with the
802.20 SRD in order to be considered for the
technology selection process - Proposals shall comply with the IEEE 802 SA
patent policies
9Section 2.3.2 Tech Proposal Part ITechnical
Specifications Summary
- Use SRD as a reference, specify values and
indicate ranking
10Section 2.3.3 Tech Proposal Part IITechnology
Description
- Detailed technical description of the technology
- Use engineering white paper style
- Show how the proposal meets or exceeds the SRD
requirements
11Section 2.3.4 Tech Proposal Part IIIPHY, MAC
Specifications
- Style and level of detail -- similar to IEEE 802
standards
12Section 2.3.5 Tech Proposal Part IVPerformance
Evaluation Results
- Evaluation Criteria test results
- Use a uniform tech report template (TBD)
13Section 2.3.6 Tech Proposal Part VSRD
Compliance Statement
- A fully compliant proposal has no entries in the
P column
14Section 2.3.7 Tech ProposalsSubmission
- Comply with the call for proposals requirements
- Post on the 802.20 website, at least 30 calendar
days before a working group interim or plenary
meeting.
15Section 2.3.7 Tech ProposalsPresentation
- Presentation material shall be fully consistent
with the text of the formal proposal. - In case of inconsistencies, the formal proposal
shall prevail and a corrected presentation shall
be submitted ASAP - Presentations shall be treated like WG
contribution and shall be allowed adequate time
slots on the meeting agenda - Generate meeting minutes of all presentations and
associated QA
16Section 2.3.8 Tech ProposalsAmendment
Consolidation
- Amended proposals shall not include significant
changes (that affect performance) - Submit and post amended proposals at least 14
days prior to the next WG session - Consolidated proposals shall be considered new
proposal
17Section 2.3.9 Tech ProposalsScoring System
(slide 1)
- The scoring system shall consist of a list of the
most essential (quantitative and qualitative)
performance attributes required of a winning
proposal - A weighted average scoring system shall be
- Collect individual member scores and calculate
the group average scores (tables 3 and 4)
18Section 2.3.9 Tech ProposalsScoring System
(slide 2)
19Section 2.3.9 Tech ProposalsScoring System
(slide 3)
20Section 2.3.9 Tech ProposalsScoring System
(slide 4)
- Issues the WG needs to resolve
- Establish the most essential requirements try
to keep the list short (lt 20 items) - Assign averaging weights
21Section 2.3.9 Tech ProposalsScoring System
(slide 5)
- The scoring process shall be conducted in a
plenary session - Final scores shall be posted on the WG website
prior to the next step the voting rounds
22Section 2.3.10 Tech ProposalsSelection Rounds
- The selection of the winning proposal shall
assure that the most meritorious proposal is
chosen. - The scoring process shall be conducted in a
plenary session - Elimination rounds followed by selection among
the two finalists - Voting of the winning proposal must be consistent
with the scoring results, evaluation results and
compliance tables.
23Section 2.4 Tech ProposalsSelection Stages
- Phase 1
- Stage 1 Proposal submissions.
- Stage 2 Working-group Presentations
- Stage 3 Review proposal compliance tables and
evaluation results - Stage 4 Poll and document the member-scores
- Stage 5 Proposal elimination (round 1)
select the top-two proposals - Stage 6 If proposal consolidation is
requested, skip to Phase 2 below, otherwise,
move to round 2 and select the
winning proposal. - Stage 7 Finalize the technology selection
process. - Phase 2 (optional, follow from stage 6 of
Phase 1 above) - Stage 1 Consolidated proposals submission
- Stage 2 Working-group Presentations
- Stage 3 Review proposal compliance tables and
evaluation results - Stage 4 Poll and document new member-scores
- Stage 5 Present the proposal-scores and vote
the top-two proposals. - Stage 6 Select the winning-proposal.
- Stage 7 Finalize the technology selection
process. - At any TSP stage, the working group may decide
(by simple majority) to abort it and cycle back
to the previous stage.
24Summary
- This TSP proposal is designed to assure a
balanced and fair selection process - Additional work is needed to bring this proposal
to an agreed upon, complete TSP state (see TBD
indications and the five annexes of contribution
C802.20-04-72)