January 2012 doc IEEE 802 11 120044 r

January 2012 doc. : IEEE 802. 11 -12/0044 r 0 802. 11 WG Editor’s Meeting (Jan ‘ 12) Authors: Submission Date: 2011 -01 -12 Slide 1 Peter Ecclesine (Cisco)

January 2012 doc. : IEEE 802. 11 -12/0044 r 0 Abstract This document contains agenda/minutes/actions/status as prepared/recorded at the IEEE 802. 11 Editors’ Meeting Submission Slide 2 Peter Ecclesine (Cisco)

January 2012 doc. : IEEE 802. 11 -12/0044 r 0 Agenda for 2012 -01 -17 • • • Roll Call / Contacts / Reflector Go round table and get brief status report ANA Status / Process / What is administered Discussion with IEEE Publications staff 802. 11 Mandatory Draft Coordination before SB Numbering Alignment process / Spreadsheet Amendment Ordering / Draft Snapshots Editor succession REVmc Style Guide for 802. 11 Submission Slide 3 Peter Ecclesine (Cisco)

January 2012 doc. : IEEE 802. 11 -12/0044 r 0 Roll Call – 2012 -01 -17 • 802. 11 Editor’s Present • P 802. 11 mb Amendment (REVmb) – Adrian Stephens • P 802. 11 aa Amendment (VTS) – Alex Ashley • P 802. 11 ac Amendment (VHT L 6) – Robert Stacey • P 802. 11 ad Amendment (VHT 60) – Carlos Cordeiro • P 802. 11 af Amendment (TVWS) – Peter Ecclesine • P 802. 11 ah Amendment (S 1 G) – Minyoung Park • P 802. 11 ai Amendment (FILS) – Tom Siep • 802. 11 Editor’s Not Present • P 802. 11 ae Amendment (Qos. Man) – Henry Ptasinski • Also present: – Clint Chapman • • IEEE Staff present and always welcome! Tricia Gerdon – our staff liaison, p. gerdon@ieee. org • IEEE Staff not present and always welcome! – – – • Kim Breitfelder – manager publishing, k. breitfelder@ieee. org Michelle Turner – staff editor for 802, m. turner@ieee. org Francisco Drago – staff editor, drago. f@ieee. org Note: editors request that an IEEE staff member should be present at least during Plenary meetings Submission Slide 4 Peter Ecclesine (Cisco)

January 2012 doc. : IEEE 802. 11 -12/0044 r 0 Volunteer Editor Contacts • • • TGmb – Adrian Stephens – adrian. p. stephens@intel. com TGaa – Alex Ashley – alex. ashley@hotmail. co. uk TGac – Robert Stacey – rjstacey@gmail. com TGad – Carlos Cordeiro – carlos. cordeiro@intel. com TGae – Henry Ptasinski – henry@logout. com TGaf – Peter Ecclesine – pecclesi@cisco. com TGah – Minyoung Park – minyoung. park@intel. com TGai – Tom Siep – tom. siep@csr. com Editors Emeritus: – TGk – Joe Kwak– joekwak@sbcglobal. net – TGp – Wayne Fisher – – TGr – Bill Marshall – wtm@research. att. com – TGs – Kazuyuki Sakoda – Kazuyuki. A. Sakoda@jp. sony. com – TGu – Necati Canpolat – necati. canpolat@intel. com – TGv – Emily Qi – emily. h. qi@intel. com – TGw – Nancy Cam-Winget – ncamwing@cisco. com – TGz – Menzo Wentink – mwentink@qualcomm. com Submission Slide 5 Peter Ecclesine (Cisco)

January 2012 doc. : IEEE 802. 11 -12/0044 r 0 Round table status report • • REVmb – finished SB, to Rev. Com 11 aa – in SB comment resolution, expect to recirc out of Jan 11 ac – expect to go to WG LB out of January 11 ad – in SB Letter Ballot comment resolution 11 ae – finished SB, to Rev. Com 11 af – hope to go to WG LB after March meeting 11 ah – working on spec framework, hope to have a draft in November, 2012 • 11 ai – processing submissions, hope to start a skeleton draft in January, 2012 Submission Slide 6 Peter Ecclesine (Cisco)

January 2012 doc. : IEEE 802. 11 -12/0044 r 0 Reflector Updates • Each editor is expected to be on the reflector and current. • If you didn’t receive the meeting notice from the reflector, please send email to adrian. p. stephens@intel. com • To be updated: – None Submission Slide 7 Peter Ecclesine (Cisco)

January 2012 doc. : IEEE 802. 11 -12/0044 r 0 IEEE Publication Status • Publications completed for 802. 11 k, 802. 11 n, 802. 11 p, 802. 11 r, 802. 11 u, 802. 11 v, 802. 11 w , 802. 11 y and 802. 11 z – – – – – 11 k now available with Get 802 11 n now available with Get 802 11 p now available with Get 802 11 r now available with Get 802 11 u now available with Get 802 11 v now available with Get 802 11 w now available with Get 802 11 y now available with Get 802 11 z now available with Get 802 • Publication of 11 s announced September 10, 2011 Submission Slide 8 Peter Ecclesine (Cisco)

January 2012 doc. : IEEE 802. 11 -12/0044 r 0 Numbering Alignment Process • Update from all published standards. Posted as 1111/1149 r 13 (2011 December 19) • REVmb D 12 is numbering baseline. 11 ae is the first, then 11 aa, 11 ad, 11 af, 11 ac, 11 ah, 11 ai. • TG editor will be responsible for ensuring their column represents their latest draft • WG editor will update any “changes pending” columns and summarize status to editors • Robert to return the lock this week Submission Slide 9 Peter Ecclesine (Cisco)

January 2012 doc. : IEEE 802. 11 -12/0044 r 0 Amendment & other ordering notes • Editors define publication order independent of working group public timelines: – Since official timeline is volatile and moves around – Publication order helps provide stability in amendment numbering, figures, clauses and other numbering assignments – Editors are committed to maintain a rational publication order • Numbering spreadsheet 11/1149: – Succeeding amendments to do their respective updates – Must match the official timeline after plenaries Submission Slide 10 Peter Ecclesine (Cisco)

January 2012 doc. : IEEE 802. 11 -12/0044 r 0 Discussion with IEEE Publications staff • Current plan for publication of REVmb is – Current expectation is 120 days from Nov 29 th – late March 2012 • Reviewed the 11 s pre-Sponsor Ballot review – A learning experience for us all, no benefit was perceived from early editing – We share a reasonable expectation that drafts are published soon after approval of the draft Submission Slide 11 Peter Ecclesine (Cisco)

January 2012 doc. : IEEE 802. 11 -12/0044 r 0 MDR Status • 802. 11 Working Group MDR 11 -11/615 r 4 documents the process MDR now in the 802. 11 Operating Manual 11 -09/0002 r 8 • P 802. 11 aa D 5. 0 went through Working Group Mandatory Editorial Coordination before July 2011 • P 802. 11 ad D 4. 0 went through Working Group Mandatory Editorial Coordination before July 2011 • P 802. 11 ae D 4. 0 went through Working Group Mandatory Editorial Coordination before July 2011 Submission Slide 12 Peter Ecclesine (Cisco)

January 2012 doc. : IEEE 802. 11 -12/0044 r 0 Editors page • http: //www. ieee 802. org/11/editor_resources. html • Comments or changes? • Volunteers sought to improve this state. Submission Slide 13 Peter Ecclesine (Cisco)

January 2012 doc. : IEEE 802. 11 -12/0044 r 0 802. 11 Style Guide • See 11 -09 -1034 -03 -0000 -wg 11 -style-guide. doc • Editor’s responsibility includes checking the 2009 IEEE Standards Style Manual when creating or updating drafts. • Submissions with draft text should conform to both the WG 11 Style Guide and IEEE Standards Style Manual • Note that the Style Guide evolves with our practice Submission Slide 14 Peter Ecclesine (Cisco)

January 2012 • • doc. : IEEE 802. 11 -12/0044 r 0 Amendment numbering is editorial! No need to make ballot comments on these dynamic numbers! Editor Amendment Ordering Data as of Nov 2011 See http: //grouper. ieee. org/groups/802/11/Reports/802. 11_Timelines. htm Amendment Number Task Group REVCOM Date 802. 11 Amendment 8 TGv Feb 2011 802. 11 Amendment 9 TGu Feb 2011 802. 11 Amendment 10 TGs Sept 2011 802. 11 Revision 802. 11 mb Mar 2012*est. 802. 11 -2011 Amendment 1 TGae Jun 2012 802. 11 -2011 Amendment 2 TGaa Jun 2012 802. 11 -2011 Amendment 3 TGad Dec 2012 802. 11 -2011 Amendment 4 TGaf Sept 2013 802. 11 -2011 Amendment 5 TGac Dec 2013 802. 11 -2011 Amendment 6 TGah July 2013 802. 11 -2011 Amendment 7 TGai Sept 2013 Submission Slide 15 Peter Ecclesine (Cisco)

January 2012 doc. : IEEE 802. 11 -12/0044 r 0 Email Your Draft Status Updates • Each editor, please send update for next page via the editor’s reflector no later than Thursday am 2 to update table on next page! Submission Slide 16 Peter Ecclesine (Cisco)

January 2012 Jan 2012 doc. : IEEE 802. 11 -12/0044 r 0 Draft Development Snapshot Changes from last report shown in red. TG Published or Draft Baseline Documents Publi shed mb ae aa ad af ac mb Y 12. 0 ae Y 12. 0 8. 0 aa Y 12. 0 6. 0 8. 01 ad Y 10. 0 5. 0 6. 0 5. 1 af Y 12. 0 8. 0 5. 0 1. 05 ac Y 9. 0 4. 0 5. 0 3. 0 1. 4 ah Y 12. 0 9. 0 4. 0 5. 0 3. 0 1. 0 ah ai Submission Source MEC Style Guide Editor Snapshot Date Frame 9. 0 Yes 2009 Adrian Stephens 8 -Nov libreoffice 3. 3 Yes 2009 Henry Ptasinski 10 -Nov Word Yes 2009 Alex Ashley 9 -Nov Word Yes 2009 Carlos Cordero 10 -Nov Frame 9. 0 No 2009 Peter Ecclesine 6 -Nov Frame 9. 0 No 2009 Robert Stacey 19 -Jul No 2009 Minyoung Park 19 -Jul No 2009 Tom Siep 22 -Sep 1. 0 ai Frame 10. 0 Slide 17 Most current doc shaded green. Peter Ecclesine (Cisco)

January 2012 doc. : IEEE 802. 11 -12/0044 r 0 MIB style, Visio and Frame practices • I’m going to suggest going forward we use a single style with appropriately set tabs, and use leading Tabs to distinguish the syntax and description parts. (Adrian Stephens Feb 9, 2010) • Keep embedded figures using visio as long as possible – Near the end of sponsor ballot, turn these all into. wmf (windows meta file) format files (you can do this from visio using “save as”). Keep separate files for the. vsd source and the. wmf file that is linked to from frame. • Frame templates for 11 aa, 11 ac, 11 ad, 11 af Submission Slide 18 Peter Ecclesine (Cisco)

January 2012 doc. : IEEE 802. 11 -12/0044 r 0 Conference Calls • Are they of any value? • Next Meeting: March 11 -16, Waikoloa, HI • Any need for conference calls? Submission Slide 19 Peter Ecclesine (Cisco)

January 2012 doc. : IEEE 802. 11 -12/0044 r 0 Two Technical Editors • • Peter Ecclesine will run the face to face meetings Adrian Stephens will run the publication process Adrian Stephens is the ANA administrator All are on the Editor’s email list. Submission Slide 20 Peter Ecclesine (Cisco)

January 2012 doc. : IEEE 802. 11 -12/0044 r 0 Reference Material Submission Slide 21 Peter Ecclesine (Cisco)

January 2012 • doc. : IEEE 802. 11 -12/0044 r 0 Editorial Streamlining Focus is on consistency across all TGs: – Completed • • Streamlined ANA processes – 07/0827 r 0 and 11/270 r 7 Consistent format for REDLINE contributions across TGs – 07/0788 r 0 Consistent process for editorial comment resolution across TGs (WG & Sponsor) – 07/2050 r 0 – Guideline for technical vs. editorial, sample editorial comment responses Format for comment reporting across TGs (WG & Sponsor) – 07/1990 r 0 (tool in 07/2116 r 0) Stable numbering method (See 07/2810 r 0) Consistent naming of redlines (See 07/2810 r 0) Draft templates for FRAME (no Word) to help train new editors more rapidly – Under Construction (in priority order) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Revise the editor’s guideline – comments on 09/1034? Mentoring program – Name a mentor for each new editor MIB element numbering and compiling – publish a rolled-up MIB of k/r/y Guideline on non-technical front matter Guideline describing expected editorial development and maturity of draft through stages in 802. 11 for consistency across TGs 6. Guidelines for primitives – ARC to consider Submission Slide 22 Peter Ecclesine (Cisco)

January 2012 doc. : IEEE 802. 11 -12/0044 r 0 Numbering of Annexes and Clauses • Proposal: TGMb will fix the ordering of annexes – Ample bad precedent set by 11 k – Bibliography should be the first or final annex per IEEE Standards Style Guide • Clause numbering has similar issue during rollup – TGn clause 3 a, 11 r clause 11 a, 11 y clause 11. 9 a • REVmb numbering will stay using “Amendment style” numbering until the very last possible moment before going to Sponsor Ballot. Submission Slide 23 Peter Ecclesine (Cisco)

January 2012 doc. : IEEE 802. 11 -12/0044 r 0 Draft naming convention • Drafts and redlines are. pdf files • Syntax: Draft <project>_<draft> [Redline [Compared to <project>_<draft>]]. pdf • Examples: • Draft P 802. 11 n_D 8. 0. pdf • Draft P 802. 11 n_D 8. 0 Redline. pdf • Draft P 802. 11 n_D 7. 04 Redline Compared to P 802. 11 n_D 7. 03. pdf Please use this convention for all drafts posted on the 802. 11 website. Submission Slide 24 Peter Ecclesine (Cisco)

January 2012 doc. : IEEE 802. 11 -12/0044 r 0 Lessons Learned from Rev. Com During Sponsor ballot… (see 09/1058 r 1) • Minimise cross references (“disagree – see CID 1234”) – Because not all CIDs are included in the “unsatisfied comments” listing, so this may end up a dangling reference. – Copy resolution + add (“same as resoution for CID 1234”) • Provide full URLs for doc references – Because some members of Rev. Com and the Sponsor Pool may not be familiar with how to get to Mentor • Minimise use of doc references – Cut and paste from reference doc, where-ever possible. This minimises work for sponsor ballot members getting reference documents. – Easier to audit process Submission Slide 25 Peter Ecclesine (Cisco)

January 2012 doc. : IEEE 802. 11 -12/0044 r 0 Publication Work Plan Note: to be included in the editor’s operations manual Here is the workflow we have used for a number of years with IEEE staff on publication of 802. 11 publications: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. Editors provide FRAME source and any freestanding graphics (Powerpoint, Visio. TIF) to staff at time of REVCOM submission. Editors provide a list of requests editorial corrections no later than REVCOM approval date. Staff prepares a publication draft and highlights changes they have made and questions they need addressed or confirmed. This draft is sent to Task Group Editor and the Working Group Technical Editor (me). This typically occurs about 2 -3 weeks after approval for publication, since the preparation work is usually (but not always) begun ahead of approval. This is also typically the draft peer reviewed by IEEE staff. The Task Group Editor responds to all questions on domain specific questions, with copy to Working Group editor (me). This typically takes about 3 -5 days. The Working Group Technical Editor reviews responses from the Task Group editor, completes any responses, and provides a list of WG officers and voting members valid for the document as of the opening day of the Sponsor ballot. This typically only takes one additional day from the prior step as most of the work is done in parallel by the two editors. Final draft is submitted by the IEEE staff to Working Group Technical Editor and Task Group Editor for sign-off. Any changes from the responses or IEEE peer review are highlighted and explained. This typically takes only one or two days more after the responses are received from the editors. Task Group Editor gives final approval. No changes are expected. This usually occurs within 24 hours. Working Group Technical Editor signs off and provides draft to Working Group Chair. No changes are expected. This usually occurs within 24 hours and in parallel with the previous step. Working Group Chair sends email to sponsor and IEEE staff letting them know the Working Group has signed off on the publication process. Submission Slide 26 Peter Ecclesine (Cisco)

January 2012 doc. : IEEE 802. 11 -12/0044 r 0 Terry Cole on Changes to MIB elements • You can incrementally add to a MIB element without deprecation at any level. That is, add new values and meaning pairs. • • You can change the description of a MIB element without deprecation at any level. That is add new text clarifying or even changing the meaning of the element to keep up with the standard. • • I would advise deprecation when changing the definition of some value of a MIB from one thing to another. However, I don't know of any rules requiring this. Submission Slide 27 Peter Ecclesine (Cisco)

January 2012 doc. : IEEE 802. 11 -12/0044 r 0 Publications: lessons learned • When quoting baseline text inaccurately, the baseline text is changed whether or not the changes were marked. The IEEE staff will actually do the appropriate changes as if the task group had actually intended to change the baseline. – Drafts can minimally quote baseline text to minimize such changes – Should revisit the decision to include full context during insertion • Full Annex titles have to be shown in the amendment; more importantly included “normative” vs. “informative” – TGk inadvertently changed Annex A to be fully informative – TGr battled to fix Annex A but caused ripples – TGy 08 -1215 r 1 has brief review of significant things changed for publication – In editor’s operations manual and during balloting, should comment that Annexes should be fully titled with good reason to vote “No” in balloting Submission Slide 28 Peter Ecclesine (Cisco)

January 2012 doc. : IEEE 802. 11 -12/0044 r 0 Publications: lessons learned (cont’d) • Acronym rules are inconsistent – Styleguide doesn’t include definitions – Every document is treated as standalone, thus first acronym reference must be spelled out. Even though, other amendments or baseline may have defined and used the acronym earlier. – Goal should be to have as few changes between the final balloted amendment and final published amendment. • How do we deal with subjective decisions made by the IEEE copy editors as their styles vary? • Booleans should be capitalized: TRUE and FALSE – when “set to” • Booleans should be lower case: is true and is false (raise the issue with Style Guide update) Submission Slide 29 Peter Ecclesine (Cisco)

January 2012 doc. : IEEE 802. 11 -12/0044 r 0 Pre-Rev. Com IEEE-SA Review • Adrian: not sure we need this slide • Possibly near the end of Working Group Letter Ballot (3 rd recirc or 4 th recirc) , we will offer the draft to the publications editor for review. This allows ambiguities and errors to be addressed in Sponsor Ballot by comments, rather than discover the ambiguities and errors after Rev. Com. It appears that during MEC is the least risky time for a publication editor’s review. • TGs Draft 7. 0 went to LB 166 out of July plenary, and by agreement with Ex. Com and IEEE SA staff, went for professional editing for ~50 days, after which Draft 8. 0 will be available for recirculation Sponsor Ballot. • Our experience with this process led us to have an 802. 11 MEC by our 802. 11 Technical Editor Submission Slide 30 Peter Ecclesine (Cisco)