July 2009 doc IEEE 802 11 090753 r

July 2009 doc. : IEEE 802. 11 -09/0753 r 2 802. 11 WG Editor’s Meeting (July 09) Authors: Submission Date: 2009 -07 -12 Slide 1 Peter Ecclesine (Cisco Systems)

July 2009 doc. : IEEE 802. 11 -09/0753 r 2 Abstract This document contains a agenda/minutes/actions/status as recorded at the IEEE 802. 11 Editors’ Meeting Submission Slide 2 Peter Ecclesine (Cisco Systems)

July 2009 doc. : IEEE 802. 11 -09/0753 r 2 Agenda for 2009 -07 -14 • • • Roll Call / Contacts / Reflector Go round table and get brief status report Review action items from previous meeting Numbering Alignment process Amendment Ordering / ANA Status / Draft Snapshots MB (87% approval) discussion – 15 mins • Conference Calls Submission Slide 3 Peter Ecclesine (Cisco Systems)

July 2009 doc. : IEEE 802. 11 -09/0753 r 2 Roll Call – 2009 -07 -14 • Editor’s Present – P 802. 11 mb Amendment (REVmb) – Adrian Stephens – P 802. 11 n Amendment (HT) – Adrian Stephens – P 802. 11 p Amendment (WAVE) – Wayne Fisher – P 802. 11 u Amendment (IW) -- Necati Canpolat – P 802. 11 v Amendment (WNM) – Emily Qi – P 802. 11 w Amendment (SEC) – Nancy Cam-Winget – P 802. 11 y Amendment (CBP) – Peter Ecclesine – P 802. 11 z Amendment (TDLS) – Menzo Wentink – P 802. 11 aa Amendment (VTS) – Hang Liu • Also present: • IEEE Staff present: – Michelle Turner – staff editor for 802, m. turner@ieee. org • 802. 11 Editor’s Not Present • P 802. 11 s Amendment (MESH) –Kazuyuki Sakoda (until end ‘ 09) • IEEE Staff not present and always welcome! – Kim Breitfelder – manager publishing, k. breitfelder@ieee. org? – Michael Kipness – our staff liaison, m. kipness@ieee. org? • Note: editors request that an IEEE staff member should be present at least during Plenary meetings – – Submission Bill Marshall Michelle Turner is present at this plenary meeting Slide 4 Peter Ecclesine (Cisco Systems)

July 2009 doc. : IEEE 802. 11 -09/0753 r 2 Volunteer Editor Contacts • • • TGn – Adrian Stephens – adrian. p. stephens@intel. com TGp – Wayne Fisher – wfisher@arinc. com TGs – Temporary: 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 TGmb – Adrian Stephens – adrian. p. stephens@intel. com (TBC) TGaa – Hang Liu – hang. liu@thomson. net Editor Emeritus: – TGk – Joe Kwak– joekwak@sbcglobal. net – TGr – Bill Marshall – wtm@research. att. com – TGy – Peter Ecclesine – pecclesi@cisco. com Submission Slide 5 Peter Ecclesine (Cisco Systems)

July 2009 doc. : IEEE 802. 11 -09/0753 r 2 Round table status report • • • TGp – Current D 7. 01. Hope to go to recirc this week. Tgaa – Current D 0. 01. Internal review TGv – Current D 6. 01. Hope to go to recirc this week TGn – Sources of D 11 have gone to Michelle! TGmb – D 1. 0 has 730 comments. Bill M and Lee A will edit as well. • TGu – Current D 7. 0 and hope to receive Conditional Approval • Michelle has completed the 802. 11 MECs in a very timely manner, and Terry C will do the publication coordination Submission Slide 6 Peter Ecclesine (Cisco Systems)

July 2009 doc. : IEEE 802. 11 -09/0753 r 2 Round Table Status Report (2) • Michelle says to get the files to her as soon as possible after the final SB recirculation • TGz – Current D 5. 0, hope to recirc this week and receive Conditional Approval • TGw – Current D 11. 0, files have been sent to Michelle! Submission Slide 7 Peter Ecclesine (Cisco Systems)

July 2009 doc. : IEEE 802. 11 -09/0753 r 2 Summary of actions – 2009 -07 -14 • Necati email to Michelle list of issues with templates Submission Slide 8 Peter Ecclesine (Cisco Systems)

July 2009 doc. : IEEE 802. 11 -09/0753 r 2 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 9 Peter Ecclesine (Cisco Systems)

July 2009 doc. : IEEE 802. 11 -09/0753 r 2 IEEE Publication Status • IEEE 802. 11 -2007 published and for free download with Get 802 – Published in June 2007 – Combines all existing amendments and includes maintenance work by TGma • Publications completed for 802. 11 k, 802. 11 r and 802. 11 y, – 11 k now available with Get 802 – 11 r now available with Get 802 – 11 y now available with Get 802 Submission Slide 10 Peter Ecclesine (Cisco Systems)

July 2009 doc. : IEEE 802. 11 -09/0753 r 2 MEC Status • P 802. 11 p D 7. 0 has gone through Mandatory Editorial Coordination in June 2009 • See 11 -09 -0659 -00 -000 p-P 802 -11 p D 7 Mandatory Editorial Coordination MEC. doc • P 802. 11 u D 6. 0 has gone through Mandatory Editorial Coordination in July 2009 See 11 -09 -0788 -00 -000 u-P 802 -11 u D 7 Mandatory Editorial Coordination MEC. doc • P 802. 11 v D 6. 0 has gone through Mandatory Editorial Coordination in July 2009 See 11 -09 -0801 -00 -000 u-P 802 -11 v D 6 Mandatory Editorial Coordination MEC. doc • P 802. 11 z D 5. 0 has gone through Mandatory Editorial Coordination in July 2009 See 11 -09 -0810 -00 -000 u-P 802 -11 z D 5 Mandatory Editorial Coordination MEC. doc Submission Slide 11 Peter Ecclesine (Cisco Systems)

July 2009 doc. : IEEE 802. 11 -09/0753 r 2 Alignment Process for 802. 11/p/v • The 08/0644 r 8 Numbering Spreadsheet has all changes from publication of 11 k and 11 r and 11 y (and 11 n D 7. 03, 11 p D 7. 0, 11 v. D 6. 01 and 11 w D 7. 0) • 11 w and 11 n have to be updated, Adrian and Nancy to check. • Next will be 11 u Submission Slide 12 Peter Ecclesine (Cisco Systems)

July 2009 doc. : IEEE 802. 11 -09/0753 r 2 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 08/0644: – Succeeding amendments to do their respective updates – Must match the official timeline after plenaries Submission Slide 13 Peter Ecclesine (Cisco Systems)

July 2009 doc. : IEEE 802. 11 -09/0753 r 2 ANA Announcements • Current ANA announced to group is 802. 11 -09 -0031 r 5. (6/6/2009) – See https: //mentor. ieee. org/802. 11/file/08/11 -09 -0031 -05 -0000 -ana-database-assigned-numbers. xls – All new requests received by end of meeting will be uploaded announced via 802. 11 WG reflector • Procedure for ANA is contained in 07/0827 r 0. – See http: //mentor. ieee. org/802. 11/public/07/11 -07 -0827 -00 -0000 -assigned-number-authority-ana-mechanisms. ppt • Editorial Guidance – ANA assignments should be done before the time of moving from WG LB to Sponsor ballot. – If a resource number is not in the ANA Database, please use <ANA> in drafts! – Editors to replace any ANA controlled resources numbers with <ANA> upon incorporation of material into drafts. Submission Slide 14 Peter Ecclesine (Cisco Systems)

July 2009 • • doc. : IEEE 802. 11 -09/0753 r 2 Amendment Ordering Data as of July 2009 See http: //grouper. ieee. org/groups/802/11/Reports/802. 11_Timelines. htm Amendment numbering is editorial! No need to make ballot comments on these dynamic numbers! Amendment Number Task Group REVCOM Date 802. 11 Amendment 4 TGw Sept 2009 802. 11 Amendment 5 TGn Jan 2010 802. 11 Amendment 6 TGz Jan 2010 802. 11 Amendment 7 TGp June 2010 802. 11 Amendment 8 TGv June 2010 802. 11 Amendment 9 TGu Sept 2010 – was May 2010 802. 11 Amendment 10 TGs Sept 2010 802. 11 Revision 802. 11 mb June 2011 802. 11 -2011 Amendment 1 TGaa June 2011 802. 11 -2011 Amendment 2 TGac Dec 2012 802. 11 -2011 Amendment 3 TGad Dec 2012 Submission Slide 15 Peter Ecclesine (Cisco Systems)

July 2009 doc. : IEEE 802. 11 -09/0753 r 2 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 Systems)

July 2009 doc. : IEEE 802. 11 -09/0753 r 2 Draft Development Snapshot Changes from last report shown in red. T G Published or Draft Baseline Documents n p s mb aa Editor Snapsho t Date r y w w 2007 200 8 9. 0 Frame 7. 2 Yes 2007 Nancy Cam -Winget 10 -Mar n 2007 200 8 9. 0 11. 0 Frame 7. 2 Yes 2009 Adrian Stephens 16 -July z 2007 200 8 10. 11. 0 5. 0 0 Word Yes 2007 Menzo Wentink 17 -July p 2007 200 8 10. 11. 0 5. 0 7. 02 0 Frame 7. 2 Yes 2009 Wayne Fisher 16 -July v 2007 200 8 6. 0 Frame 7. 2 No 2007 Emily Qi Nov u 2007 200 8 11. 0 6. 04 s 2007 200 8 m b 2007 Inc 200 200 8 Inc 2. 0 4. 01 2. 0 - - 4. 02 Frame 7. 2 No 2007 Necati Canpolat Nov 5. 01 6. 01 3. 02 Frame 8. 0 No 2007 Kazuyuki Sakoda , pro-tem 16 -July Frame 7. 2 No 2009 Adrian Stephens 12 -May 9. 0 10. 0 4. 0 6. 01 - u Style Guide k - v MEC 802. 11 7. 0 z Sourc e Most current doc shaded green. - - 2. 0 - 0. 05 a a 0. 01 Submission Slide 17 No Hang Lui Peter Ecclesine (Cisco Systems)

July 2009 doc. : IEEE 802. 11 -09/0753 r 2 MB discussion • Document 11 -09 -0706 -00 -000 m-revmb-wg-ballotcomments. xls – the comments themselves • MIB comments • Annex removal comments • PHY removal comments • Late renumbering allows voters to track folding in recent amendments • Renumbering before Sponsor means SB voters only see one numbering throughout time • Wednesday PM 2 of REVmb comment resolution Editors discussion Submission Slide 18 Peter Ecclesine (Cisco Systems)

July 2009 doc. : IEEE 802. 11 -09/0753 r 2 Conference Calls • • Are they of any value? Next Meeting: September 20 -25, Waikoloa Cancel a week in advance if no agenda items. 7 September noon EDT (t-2 weeks), three editors of eight will go to Waikoloa Submission Slide 19 Peter Ecclesine (Cisco Systems)

July 2009 doc. : IEEE 802. 11 -09/0753 r 2 Reference Material Submission Slide 20 Peter Ecclesine (Cisco Systems)

July 2009 • doc. : IEEE 802. 11 -09/0753 r 2 Editorial Streamlining Focus is on consistency across all TGs: – Completed • • Streamlined ANA processes – 07/0827 r 0 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. 6. Revise the editor’s guideline Mentoring program – Name a mentor for each new editor Request in future Plenary sessions Mondays 7: 30 pm Frame surgery 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 7. Guidelines for primitives – ARC to consider Submission Slide 21 Peter Ecclesine (Cisco Systems)

July 2009 doc. : IEEE 802. 11 -09/0753 r 2 Numbering of Annexes and Clauses • Proposal: TGMb will fix the ordering of annexes – Ample bad precedent set by 11 k – Bibliography should be the 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. Submission Slide 22 Peter Ecclesine (Cisco Systems)

July 2009 doc. : IEEE 802. 11 -09/0753 r 2 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 23 Peter Ecclesine (Cisco Systems)

July 2009 doc. : IEEE 802. 11 -09/0753 r 2 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 24 Peter Ecclesine (Cisco Systems)

July 2009 doc. : IEEE 802. 11 -09/0753 r 2 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 25 Peter Ecclesine (Cisco Systems)

July 2009 doc. : IEEE 802. 11 -09/0753 r 2 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 26 Peter Ecclesine (Cisco Systems)

July 2009 doc. : IEEE 802. 11 -09/0753 r 2 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 27 Peter Ecclesine (Cisco Systems)