November 2000doc,: IEEE 802.11-00/402
IEEE P802.11
Wireless LANs
Meeting Minutes for IEEE 802.11 TGg
November 2000 Session
Tampa, FL, USA
Date:October 7, 2000
Author:Matthew B. Shoemake
IEEE 802.11g Chairperson
Unless otherwise noted for the specific meeting, minutes kept by the chairperson, Matthew B. Shoemake.
Tuesday, 8:00AM – 10:00AM
- Minutes for this meeting taken by Steven Gray of Nokia ()
- Motion: Approve the agenda for TGg, move: Jan Boer and second:TK Tan
Vote: 19-0-0
- The agenda calls for execution of steps 7 through 13 of the selection process. Step 7 calls for justification that functionsl requirements have been met. No objections were made on any of the four proposals. Step 8 was informational only concerning the merging of the proposals. Step 9 calls for presentation of the proposals. Presentation will proceed as shown below:
Document Numbers for the Proposals:
Intersil, Webster, Halford and Zyren
- 388 – 397
Supergold, O'Farrell
- 366
Texas Instruments, Heegard
- 384 – 385
3COM, TK Tan
- Document 388 was presented, TGg Regulatory Approval Plan.
- Document 389 was presented, Overview of OFDM for High Rate Extension
Tuesday, 3:30PM-5:30PM
- Tim O’Farrell has time conflict due to 802.15.3. Webster, et.al. agree to allow Tim to present at this meeting.
- Tim O’Farrell of Supergold presents document 00/366r1.
- Mark Webster presents document 00/390.
Tuesday, 6:30PM-9:30PM
- Continuing with agenda item to proceed through Selection Criteria. Current on Item 8, presentation of proposals and questioning.
- Mark Webster presents document 00/391.
- Steve Halford presents document 00/392.
- Mark Webster presents document 00/393.
- Mark Webster presents document 00/394.
- Mark Webster presents document 00/395.
- Steve Halford presents document 00/396.
- Jim Zyren presents document 00/397.
- Niels Van Erven presents document 00/418.
- Recess for break
Wednesday, 8:00AM – 10:00AM
- Motion made to approve minutes in documents 00/287 and 00/340. Motion made by Al Petrick and seconded by Sean Coffey. No discussion on motion. Motion passes 14-0-0.
- Shoemake explains steps 9-13 of the Selection Process (doc. 00/209r3).
- Chris Heegard presents document 00/384.
- Recess for break
Wednesday, 10:30AM – 12:00Noon
- Sean Coffey presents document 00/385.
- Completed Selection Procedure Item 9, presentation of proposals.
- Chair requests Comparison Criteria data to include in Comparison Criteria Matrix. Will present Comparison Criteria Matrix at next meeting.
- Meeting adjourns.
Wednesday, 4:00PM-5:30PM
- Chair presents document 00/422r1, the Comparison Criteria Matrix. Item 10 of Selection Procedure is completed.
- Task Group formed panel discussion for the purpose of executing Item 11 of the Selection Procedure. Panel included Webster, Heegard, O’Farrell and Van Erven.
Thursday Morning 8:00AM-10:00AM
- Minutes for meeting taken by: Rob Roy ()
- Mtg started 8:27 am, delayed due to room change and setup
- Chair brought mtg to order.
- There were questions for the presenters from the audience.
- Order of final presentation: same or reverse. straw poll
- Same 15, Reverse 10, Abstaining 10 – decision same order as original presentation
- Zyren, Intersil 10 min., O’Farrell, Supergold – 5 min; Tan – 5 min; Heegard, TI – 5min.
- Panel went through QA session
- Final statements
- Time to vote: 9:35 am
- Ballots were shown. One has to fill all the six items
- The voting procedure was explained thoroughly. Several questions/clarifications answered.
- Stuart Kerry came to oversee voting as impartial observer. He’ll not cast a vote.
- All voting members were asked to show their voting card or get verified on their voting status in the master database resident in Stuart’s laptop.
- Abstain is same as No
- Ballot closed at 10:03 am.
- Meeting recessed until 10:30AM for vote count
Thursday 10:30AM-12:00Noon
- Shoemake calls meeting to order
- Floor is given to Stuart Kerry to report the results of the balloting for step 13 of the selection procedure. The results are distributed in doc. 00/435. Results of voting are that Tan proposal will be removed from consideration. Webster, O’Farrell, Heegard proposal will remain.
Vote results (Percentage voting YES):Webster, Intersil – 69.23%
O’Farrell, Supergold – 34.61%
Heegard, Texas Instruments – 84.62%
Tan, 3COM – 19.23%
47. Heard doc. 00/386, Proposed Options to TI Proposal, Batra, Heegard, Shoemake, Rossin
48. Adjourned the session.
Submissionpage 1Steven Gray, Nokia