March 2010doc.: IEEE 802.11-19/0473r0

IEEE P802.11
Wireless LANs

Minutes of JTC1 ad hoc in Orlando in March 2010
Date: 20100316
Author(s):
Name / Affiliation / email
Andrew Myles / Cisco /

Minutes of JTC1 Ad Hoc Meeting Tuesday, 16 March10, PM2

  • The Chair opened the meeting at 1600.
  • B. Kramer noted that Dr Kim is scheduled to address the 802.11 plenary session
  • The Chair noted that there were no items submitted to the agenda and the second session may not be needed.
  • The running order for the meeting is in 802.11-10/0355r1
  • Slide 11: The agenda in 802.11-10/0355r1 was approved unanimously
  • Slide 12: The minutes of the previous meeting in Los Angeles were approved unanimously with two abstentions.
  • Slide 13: The general goals of the JTC 1 Ad Hoc were reviewed.
  • Slide 14: The process for dealing with SB comments from SC6 was discussed
  • Slide 15: It was noted that 4 drafts have been forwarded to ISO/IEC JTC/SC6.
  • It was noted that the forwarding the documents was delayed and the timing resulted in limiting time in which the SC6 members could respond.
  • It was also noted that the action cycle in 802.11 is much too rapid compared to the time needed for the JTC1/SC6 National Bodies to send the documents to their technical experts for response. Adjustmentss will have to made.
  • Slide 16: The WG’s liaison to SC6 regarding intended use of the IEEE Partner Standards Developing Organization (PSDO) Cooperative Agreement was discussed
  • It was noted that there were no replies from SC6 as a resut of the liaison.
  • Slide 17: It was noted that WAPI is a major topic of interest for the JTC1 ad hoc.
  • Slide 18: The status of WAPI in ISO/IEC JTC 1 SC6 was noted.
  • IEEE 802 submitted a liaison to SC6 in November 2009 in relation to the WAPI project (see document 11-09-1254r1) but no reply was received.
  • The WAPI ballot passed for the new project but it is uncertain as to when it will be started.
  • Slide 19: It was noted that 802.11 has an on-going interest in the WAPI project
  • There ae outstanding unresolved copyright issues that are being dealt with by IEEE staf
  • It was noted that WAPI uses an IE identifier that conflicts with an IE identifier already allocated to amendment 802.11k by IEEE 802. It was noted that there are other potential conflict with values used in the WAPI draft.
  • It was suggested that the WG should wait until a WD is established in SC6 before submiting any further comments.
  • Slide 20-24: The plans for a tutorial in Beijing in May 2010 on Chinese standards development process as related to the “LAN/MAN/PAN networking technologies” were discussed.
  • The presentation is scheduled for Tuesday afternoon, invitation has been sent with assistance from IEEE staff.
  • Duration of the tutorial was intended to be high level, however, the feedback indicated that there may be some engineers who were interested in technical exchange. The details are still being worked out.
  • Other 802 groups expressed interest in the interchange planned for the May meeting.
  • Scheduling, Monday may be dedicated to opening ceremonies and Tuesday may need to be devoted to the technical and high level exchange and not do the regular business of 802.11. There may be TG meetings in parallel with the Monday and Tuesday sessions or not depending on the feedback from the hosts.
  • Slide 22 notes the invitation addressees in China
  • Slide 23 notes a number of companies, some of whom are IEEE SA corporate members.
  • Slide 24 notes the SIMIT website details that show the planned IEEE 802 meeting.
  • It was noted that the JTC 1 Ad Hoc might benefit by scheduling teleconferences to continue the planning for the Beijing meeting. ACTION. The Chair will prepare motions for teleconferences for consideration at the plenary.
  • The Chair opened the floor for additional items
  • Discussion about the response to the approach taken by the China NB took place among the attendees. Proposal made that when the WAPI material is circulated, that would be the right time to prepare a response, update the security analysis, and submit for approval for sending to SC6.
  • Discussion about a “merge” approach ensued. It was noted that there was no interest in merge expressed previously by the China NB. However, there may be an opportunity to make specific suggestions when a draft is circulated.
  • Move to adjourn and give up the Thursday slot. Lack objection, the meeting was adjourned at 1709.

Submissionpage 1Andrew Myles (Cisco)