doc.: ieee 802.11-10/1316r0 submission november 2010 bruce kraemer, marvellslide 1 smart grid...
TRANSCRIPT
November 2010
Bruce Kraemer, Marvell
Slide 1
doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1316r0
Submission
Smart Grid Discussions – November 2010
Date: 2010-November-08
Abstract: NIST PAP#2 Report r6 recommended changesOther Smart Grid activities
Name Company Address Phone emailBruce Kraemer Marvell 5488 Marvell Lane,
Santa Clara, CA, 95054
+1-321-751-3988 [email protected]
Jorjeta Jetcheva Itron
November 2010
Bruce Kraemer, Marvell
Slide 2
doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1316r0
Submission
Smart Grid MeetingsMonday Agenda Item 4.1.12
Day Start Time End Time Meeting RoomTuesday 13:30 15:30 Smart Grid Cumberland CTuesday 19:30 21:30 Smart Grid Cumberland B
Thursday 08:00 10:00 Smart Grid Cumberland B
November 2010
Bruce Kraemer, Marvell
Slide 3
doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1316r0
Submission
Agenda Topics for the Week
Action Item
• Finalize change suggestions for the NIST PAP#2 Report
• Information Items
• SGIP update
• OpenSG update
• P2030 update
• ITU Focus Group
• March Tutorial topics/speakers
November 2010
Bruce Kraemer, Marvell
Slide 4
doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1316r0
Submission
NIST Timeline
Release of draft 0.6
Release of Version 1
Draft 0.5July 28, 2010
Call for Input to Section 6August 4, 2010
End of draft 0.5 review periodSeptember 15, 2010
December 3, 2010
November 4, 2010
SGIP face-to-face, ChicagoPAP 2 meeting
OpenSG meeting, MiamiTentative PAP 2 meeting
SGIP face-to-face, St LouisTentative PAP 2 meeting
September 16, 2010
End of draft 0.6 review period
September 30, 2010
October 29, 2010
November 2010
Bruce Kraemer, Marvell
Slide 5
doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1316r0
Submission
PAP#2 Report was updated Oct 1
• http://collaborate.nist.gov/twiki-sggrid/pub/SmartGrid/PAP02Wireless/NIST_Priority_Action_Plan_2_r06.pdf
November 2010
Bruce Kraemer, Marvell
Slide 6
doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1316r0
Submission
NIST PAP#2 Report v6 – Section 44.1 Technology Descriptor HeadingsTo be able to describe wireless technology a set of characteristics were identified andorganized into logical groups. The group titles are listed below.
• 1. Link Availability• 2. Data/Media Type Supported• 3. Coverage Area• 4. Mobility• 5. Data Rates• 6. RF Utilization• 7. Data Frames & Packets• 8. Link Quality Optimization• 9. Radio Performance Measurement & Management• 10. Power Management• 11. Connection Topologies• 12. Connection Management• 13. QoS & Traffic Prioritization• 14. Location Characterization• 15. Security & Security Management• 16. Radio Environment• 17. Intra-technology Coexistence• 18. Inter-technology Coexistence• 19. Unique Device Identification• 20. Technology Specification Source• 21. Deployment Domain Characterization• 22. Exclusions
November 2010
Bruce Kraemer, Marvell
Slide 7
doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1316r0
Submission
•IEEE 802 contributed a number of suggestions on how to change the NIST PAP#2 Report r6. These were contained in documents 1210 and 1209.
https://mentor.ieee.org/802.11/dcn/10/11-10-1209-00-0000-comment-set-1-on-pap-2-report-r6.doc
https://mentor.ieee.org/802.11/dcn/10/11-10-1210-01-0000-comment-set-2-on-pap-2-report-r6.ppt
November 2010
Bruce Kraemer, Marvell
Slide 8
doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1316r0
Submission
Material for this meeting
r6+change suggestions
Section 4 edited
Matrix v5+changes
Section 4 edited
November 2010
Bruce Kraemer, Marvell
Slide 9
doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1316r0
Submission
Comment #01
• Section 4.2.1.3 talks about Coverage Area. It is important to discuss coverage in conjunction with data rates and link margin for example, in order to avoid associations between inconsistent pieces of information, e.g., citing the largest coverage area achievable by a given technology along with the highest data rate achievable by the technology is incorrect – generally the two have a reverse relationship and the highest coverage is achievable at the lowest data rate.
• Agreed to text change:• Add the following text at the end of Section 4.2.1.3: When
comparing coverage areas between different technologies, it is important to take into account the link budgets used in the coverage computation. Note that the largest coverage area achievable by a specific technology typically requires transmission at the lowest data rate used by that technology.
November 2010
Bruce Kraemer, Marvell
Slide 10
doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1316r0
Submission
Comment #02a
• Section 4.2.1.4 talks about Mobility. It would be useful to mention the data rates achievable at various mobility levels to avoid assumptions that mobile devices can communicate at the highest data rates used by a specific technology.
• Agreed to text change:
• Add the following text at the end of Section 4.2.1.4: Comparisons between the capabilities of different mobile technologies have to take into account the maximum data rate achievable at each mobility level -- mobile devices may not be able to communicate at the highest available data rates when moving at high speeds.
November 2010
Bruce Kraemer, Marvell
Slide 11
doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1316r0
Submission
Comment #03• Section 4.2.1.5 talks about Data Rates. • Agreed text change: • Add the following text at the end of Section 4.2.1.5: Additional factors to
consider when discussing data rates:• Throughput must be considered in conjunction with packet size,
coverage range and rate of mobility (if any). • It is important to distinguish between unicast, multicast and broadcast
rates, as they may not be the same for a given wireless technology. • Throughput depends on medium access scheduling, including the
capability to provide block transmissions (whereby multiple data packets can be sent in succession with minimum or no individual medium access operations per packet except before the first packet is sent), and/or block acknowledgements (whereby a single acknowledgement packet can acknowledge multiple preceding data packets). The capability and flexibility to optimize block transmissions and acknowledgements can have a significant effect on GoodPut.
• The use of rate adaptation mechanisms, where the data rate on a link is modified when the quality of the link changes.
November 2010
Bruce Kraemer, Marvell
Slide 12
doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1316r0
Submission
Add these definitions to Section 2.2Broadcast• Broadcast is a form of message transmission where a message is sent
from a single source to all potential receiving nodes.
Multicast• Multicast is a form of message transmission where a message is sent
from a single source to a subset of all potential receiving nodes. (The mechanism for selecting the members of the subset is not part of this definition.)
Unicast• Unicast is a form of message transmission where a message is sent from
a single source is sent to a single receiving node.
November 2010
Bruce Kraemer, Marvell
Slide 13
doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1316r0
Submission
Comment #04
• Section 4.2.1.6 talks about RF utilization.
• Agreed text change:
• Add the following text at the end of Section 4.2.1.6: – Consider the power level regulations for the different channels
used by a particular technology.
– Consider the impact of Dynamic Frequency Selection (DFS) regulations on the channels used by a particular technology, e.g., certain UNII channels are subject to DFS regulation which requires wireless devices to change channel when they detect the use of radar on their current channel.
November 2010
Bruce Kraemer, Marvell
Slide 14
doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1316r0
Submission
Comment #05
• Section 4.2.1.7 talks about Data Frames and Packets. It is important to consider frame duration in conjunction with data rate and size of the frame. Also, we need to consider multicast and broadcast frames in addition to unicast frames.
• Agreed text change:• Modify item “a)” in Section 4.2.1.7 as follows:• What is the maximum frame duration for a unicast, multicast and
broadcast frame respectively, and what are the corresponding frame size and data rate at which each type of frame was sent?
• Modify item “b)” in Section 4.2.1.7 as follows:• What is the maximum packet size that can be sent in one unicast,
multicast and broadcast radio frame respectively?• Modify item “c)” in Section 4.2.1.7 as follows:• Does the radio system support segmentation of unicast, multicast and
broadcast packets respectively, when the payload size exceeds the capacity of one radio frame?
November 2010
Bruce Kraemer, Marvell
Slide 15
doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1316r0
Submission
Comment #06• Section 4.2.2.4 talks about Connection Topologies. The Bus and Ring
topology need to be removed, they are not wireless topologies. One way to characterize wireless topologies is as single hop and multi-hop (statically configured or mesh), and wireless links as point-to-point, point-to-multipoint, and omnidirectional. We need to add figures that correspond to the text we end up with.
• Agreed text change:
• Remove the Bus and Ring figures
• Replace the current text in Section 4.2.2.4 with the following: Wireless network topologies can be divided into single hop and multi-hop, where a multi-hop topology can be statically configured, or can be dynamic and self-forming, e.g., a mesh. A wireless link can be point-to-point, point-to-multipoint, or broadcast.
• Add the definitions on the following 4 slides to Section 2.2
November 2010
Bruce Kraemer, Marvell
Slide 16
doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1316r0
Submission
Hop Definitions
• Proposed PAP2 Guidelines Document Definitions• Hop: The term hop is used to signify a link between a
pair of devices that a frame or packet needs to traverse to reach one device from the other.
• Single-Hop Network: A single-hop network is one in which devices can only communicate with each other directly, e.g., over a single link (hop), and do not have the capability to forward traffic on each other’s behalf.
• Multi-Hop Network: A multi-hop network is one in which devices have the capability to forward traffic on each other’s behalf and can thus communicate along paths composed of multiple links (hops).
November 2010
Bruce Kraemer, Marvell
Slide 17
doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1316r0
Submission
Configuring Definition• Statically Configured Multi-Hop Network: A multi-hop
network can be statically configured, such that each node’s forwarding decisions are dictated by configuration.
• Dynamic and Self-Configuring Multi-Hop Network: A multi-hop network can be dynamic and self-configuring, such that network devices have the ability to discover (multi-hop) forwarding paths in the network and make their own forwarding decisions based on various pre-configured constraints and requirements, e.g., lowest delay or highest throughput.
November 2010
Bruce Kraemer, Marvell
Slide 18
doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1316r0
Submission
MESH Definition• Mesh Network: A mesh network is a dynamic self-
configuring network composed of devices that can forward traffic on each other’s behalf, have the ability to discover (multi-hop) forwarding paths in the network and make their own forwarding decisions based on various pre-configured constraints and requirements, e.g., lowest delay or highest throughput.
November 2010
Bruce Kraemer, Marvell
Slide 19
doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1316r0
Submission
Comment #07• Section 4.2.2.5 talks about Connection Management. The
section needs to mention what aspects of “connection management” can be used to compare different wireless technologies. For example, we can evaluate the latency to join a network, available security mechanisms employed when joining a network, and overhead to join the network (number of control packets exchanged). Perhaps section titles such as “Network Participation Mechanisms” or “Joining the Network” are more descriptive of the content of this section.
November 2010
Bruce Kraemer, Marvell
Slide 20
doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1316r0
Submission
Comment 07bAdd the following text at the end of Section 4.2.2.5:
• It is important to evaluate:
– the time it takes for a device to join a particular network, and the overhead required to do so
– the time and overhead required to rejoin the network when a device becomes disconnected from the network
– the overhead required to maintain membership in the network after the initial admission into the network
– the overhead associated with optimizing connectivity, e.g., in mesh-based topologies.
November 2010
Bruce Kraemer, Marvell
Slide 21
doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1316r0
Submission
Comment #08• Section 4.2.3.2 talks about Location Characterization. It seems like
many of the techniques applicable to this section are not technology-specific but implementation-specific and as such can be incorporated across different wireless technologies even if they are not currently incorporated into the products of a specific wireless technology. It would be helpful to make the distinction between technology-specific properties and product-specific properties in the text.
• Agreed text change:• Add the following text at the end of Section 4.2.3.2:
• It is important to distinguish between technology-specific mechanisms for location characterization and mechanisms that are applicable across technologies or communication topologies, which can easily be added to products that may not currently support them.
November 2010
Bruce Kraemer, Marvell
Slide 22
doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1316r0
Submission
Comment #09• A category that is missing from Section 4 is one that
characterizes the deployment complexity of each technology.
• Agreed text change: Add the following text after Section 4.2.4.1:
• 4.2.5 Group 22: Deployment Complexity
• It is important to evaluate the complexity of:
– installation and maintenance of a given wireless system
– integration with other, possibly existing, networks
– expansion of the wireless network coverage over time.
November 2010
Bruce Kraemer, Marvell
Slide 23
doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1316r0
Submission
General Comment #10
• It would be helpful to have some tables and text summarizing the information in Section 5, and to move a lot of the discussions/derivations to an appendix. Otherwise, the message/conclusions/recommendations get lost in the text.
November 2010
Bruce Kraemer, Marvell
Slide 24
doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1316r0
Submission
General Comment #11Section 4.2.1.2 (p. 24) talks about voice and video traffic over the smart
grid. We need more use cases motivating why we would want to have voice and
video traffic over the smart grid network. The current set of use cases supplied by OpenSG does not currently contain this service.
The only video example given in the text is one of surveillance of affected outage areas. It would seem that voice and video might be of lower priority during outages, e.g., caused by disasters or weather-related events, since the network would require a high degree of availability for its regular functions. In addition, surveillance is generally part of the public safety infrastructure and there is spectrum allocated for such use so I am not convinced that we should be discussing this kind of application in the context of the smart grid.
• Applications such as voice and video have requirements that even broadband network providers are struggling with (wireless and landline) and making them part of the smart grid infrastructure requires significant justification.
November 2010
Bruce Kraemer, Marvell
Slide 25
doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1316r0
Submission
General Comment #12
• Link Availability in Section 4.2.1.1 does not appear to be consistently calculated for the various candidate various radio technologies, nor did majority of the technology candidates describe the method used to calculate availability.
• The current description of the characteristic does not match the calculation.
• Both of these issues need to be resolved before progressing to completion of Sections 6 & 7.
• “The technology “Operating Point” chosen is presumably chosen recognizing that achieving a low failure rate is desirable.”
• Agreed text change: Change this sentence to• “The technology “Operating Point” is chosen to achieve a low failure rate and is an
outcome of deployment flexibility & strategy.”
November 2010
Bruce Kraemer, Marvell
Slide 26
doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1316r0
Submission
Comment #13 Para 2 Recommended change
• Reword the preface to incorporate the idea that SG application requirements evolve over time, yielding to experience rather than remain locked in 1989 or 1999 or 2009 economics.
• Smart Grid application requirements must be defined with enough specificity to quantitatively define communications traffic and levels of performance over the lifetime of the applications. Applications requirements must be combined with as complete a set of management and security requirements for the life-cycle of the equipment. The decisions to apply wireless for any given set of applications can then be based on expected performance and costs over the projected useful lifetimes of the spectrum and equipment.
November 2010
Bruce Kraemer, Marvell
Slide 27
doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1316r0
Submission
Agenda Topics for the Week
Action Item
• Finalize change suggestions for the NIST PAP#2 Report
• Information Items
• SGIP update
• OpenSG update
• P2030 update
• ITU Focus Group
• March Tutorial topics/speakers
286/8/2010 Footer for this presentation
CATALOG OF STANDARDSCATALOG OF STANDARDS
04/19/23
Mark KlererSGIP Plenary Vice Chair
2929
CATALOG OF STANDARDS (STATUS OF WORK IN CATALOG OF STANDARDS (STATUS OF WORK IN PROGRESS)PROGRESS)
3030
• Process– NIST Framework and Roadmap for SG Interoperability v1.0 identifies many standards to consider– Additional standards can be identified to the SGIP Administrator by any SGIP member for potential
inclusion in catalog– Relevance and importance evaluated by appropriate SGIP working group (e.g. DEWG, PAP, etc) and
consensus developed– 75% approval by SGIP membership required prior to SGIPGB approval for inclusion in the catalog– Standards included in the catalog may be deprecated from further use to changes in technology or
needs by following the same process.
• Catalog Structure– Entries in catalog to be structured based on application domain defined in the Framework and
further classified by GWAC stack
• Relationship to NIST and FERC lists– Standards Catalog strives for accurate characterization and relevance to the smart grid community,
and avoids recommendation– Standards Catalog expected to be a larger compilation which can inform NIST and FERC in their
decision processes
CATALOG OF STANDARDS: PROCESS & CATALOG OF STANDARDS: PROCESS & STRUCTURESTRUCTURE
316/8/2010 Footer for this presentation
TESTING & CERTIFICATION COMMITTEETESTING & CERTIFICATION COMMITTEE
04/19/23
Rik DrummondSGTCC Chair
32November 2010 32
PURPOSEPURPOSE• Establish a Testing and Certification Framework for the Smart Grid• Establish a brand called ‘Interoperability’ that has a consistent meaning across
the Smart Grid for the buyers of interoperable products.– At this time a set of products deemed interoperable may be interoperable with a 80%,
95%, 99%, or 100% confidence level. Thus to say a product is interoperable has little current meaning in the market place as many purchasing organizations have found.
6/8/2010 Footer for this presentation 3333
Deliverables D3 – Interoperability Process Reference Manual
(IPRM) is being finalized for SGIP review. Interoperability Maturity Assessment Tool
completed
Activities and Accomplishments D3 – Interoperability Process Reference Manual
(IPRM) completed 1st review and comment period during St. Louis meetings; comment resolution and final editing remains in progress
Began piloting IPRM with several Interoperability Testing and Certification Authorities (ITCA) who have expressed willingness to cooperate and participate in assessing their organizations against the IPRM recommendations.
Prepared draft ITCA audit process document and checklist in preparation for ITCA reviews
Launched discussion with accreditation bodies for future independent ITCA reviews
Upcoming Key Milestones and Activities Presentation on SGTCC framework and plan to
the SGIP on October 29 to build awareness and support for the process
Completing 2-3 ITCA reviews by late November Updates to the IPRM based on experience
gathered during the ITCA review process, and revision/release in early January
Engaging with the CSWG testing sub-team to coordinate security related testing issues
Issues, Concerns, and Help Needed Obtaining timely cooperation from the ITCAs to
participate in the review process with the TCC, and accelerating their commitment to adopt and enact the SGTCC recommendations in their operations
Engaging end users to gain their commitment towards requiring IPRM conformance for ITCAs certifying the products that they purchase
October 2010 Activities - PMO Monthly Report
SGTCC MONTHLY QUAD CHARTSGTCC MONTHLY QUAD CHART
34November 2010 34
DEFINITIONSDEFINITIONS• ITCA – Interoperability Testing and Certification Authority • Framework Manual - IPRM – Interoperability Program Reference Manual• ISO 65 - General Requirements for Bodies Operating Product Certification
Systems• ISO 17025 – General Requirements for the Competence of Testing and Calibration
Laboratories • SGTCC Interoperability Test Construction Best Practices – Lists of best practices
not covered in ISO 65 and ISO 17025• SGTCC/CSWG Cyber Security Testing Best/Standard Practices –List of best
practices not covered in ISO 65 and ISO 17025• Interoperability Maturity Assessment Model – looking for IOP products based on
standards NOW.
6/8/2010 Footer for this presentation 3535
GENERAL STRUCTURE OF THE FRAMEWORK GENERAL STRUCTURE OF THE FRAMEWORK MANUALMANUAL
ISO Guide 17025 ISO Guide 65
Best Practices for IOP Test Construction Best/Standard Practices for Cyber Security Test Construction
Introduction, Responsibilities, Rationale, Usage and Checklists
2011 Transition Bootstrap Support Plan for ITCAs
Evaluation Checklist for ITCA Delta to Manual
Framework Manual
36November 2010 36
• ISO Guide 65 contains the requirements necessary for an organization to demonstrate competence to perform certification activities related to the standards or specifications stated in the certification
• ISO Guide 65 criteria include:– Technical competence
• Certifying personnel criteria; accessibility of certification test processes; assessment fairness and integrity and others
– Management systems• Quality management processes, technical dispute resolution processes• Lab qualification criteria, lists of certified products, record control, ongoing certification
maintenance and withdrawal process
• ISO Guide 65 conformance demonstrates a robust, thorough and meaningful certification program
• Implements a monitoring program for IOP products in the field to ensure IOP remains
ISO GUIDE 65 OVERVIEWISO GUIDE 65 OVERVIEW
3737
• ISO 17025 contains all requirements that laboratories need to demonstrate that they – operate a management system, – are technically competent, – are able to generate technically valid results.
• ISO 17025 is the most widely accepted and used standard for the operation of test laboratories
• ISO 17025 applies to any testing laboratory operation (1st, 2nd or 3rd party), with many 3rd party labs formally accredited
• It facilitates acceptance of test results from accredited laboratories and serves as the requirements that formal accreditation bodies apply in assessing laboratories.
ISO 17025 OVERVIEWISO 17025 OVERVIEW
38November 2010 38
– Test Suite Specification of a standard used for interoperability or conformance testing shall be managed in the same way as the standard they are derived from.
– IOP Certification test reports shall fully describe the test methodology used including the justification for statistical or deterministic testing.
– A certified interoperable product set shall also be conformant to the standard or profile of the standard.
– The only means to ensure interoperability among products is to perform a full matrix test.
BEST PRACTICES FOR IOP TEST CONSTRUCTION BEST PRACTICES FOR IOP TEST CONSTRUCTION EXAMPLESEXAMPLES
39November 2010 39
2011 TRANSITION BOOTSTRAP YEAR2011 TRANSITION BOOTSTRAP YEAR• SGTCC, with NIST will help bootstrap the process by offering tutorial help in 2011
to the first few committed ITCAs.– Preliminary review of implementation of ISO 65 and ISO 17025 implemented
processes.– Review and analysis of interoperability test construction best practices.– Other general guidance.
• Maintain a list for the industry showing ITCAs in the process of implementing the Manual.
40November 2010 40
2011 TRANSITION BOOTSTRAP YEAR2011 TRANSITION BOOTSTRAP YEAR• SGTCC, with NIST will help bootstrap the process by offering tutorial help in 2011
to the first few committed ITCAs.– Preliminary review of implementation of ISO 65 and ISO 17025 implemented
processes.– Review and analysis of interoperability test construction best practices.– Other general guidance.
• Maintain a list for the industry showing ITCAs in the process of implementing the Manual.
41November 2010 41
2012 AND BEYOND2012 AND BEYOND• ITCAs will be using Test Labs using ISO 17025, and ISO 65 standards and be
accredited by the existing formal accreditation organizations. • SGTCC will maintain lists of SGIP Approved ITCAs (those implementing the
Manual) for a standard and demonstrating the production of interoperable products. The products of the standard will be monitored for interoperability in the field by ITCA and secondarily by SGTCC
• Accreditation Bodies (e.g., NVLAP and ANSI) will periodically audit test labs and certification bodies using the Manual as guidance and re-accredit them. SGTCC will subsequently update the ‘SGIP ITCA Approved List ’.
Note many Test lab now use ISO 17025, but not the IOP best practices. Also many ITCAs do not use ISO 65.
42November 2010 42
NEXT STEPS AND YOUR RESPONSENEXT STEPS AND YOUR RESPONSE• Receive SGIP consensus for Manual / Framework• Each SGIP member MUST REQUIRE the purchase of interoperable products to
initiate the monetary incentive for many of the ITCAs to upgrade to the Manual / Framework.
– Note: this is an issue about wide scale interoperability across the smart grid. Having only a percentage requiring interop products will in many ways leave us in our current state.
• SGTCC will offer two Webinars in late November and early December to address questions and concerns. To be announced.
43November 2010 43
GB Election Timeline – Even Stakeholders, 2010
44November 2010 44
UPCOMING 2010 PLENARY EVENTSUPCOMING 2010 PLENARY EVENTS• 30 Nov – 3 Dec: Grid-Interop, Chicago
– See http://www.grid-interop.com/2010/#agenda for detailed agenda
Mon.11/29
Tue.11/30
Wed.12/1
Thu.12/2
Fri.12/3
8.00 am GB Meeting
10.30 am PAPs & WGs PAPs & WGs
12.00 pm
LUNCH
1.00 pmOptional Meetings
Opening Plenary
Closing Plenary
3.30 pmDEWGs &
CommitteesPAPs & WGs PAPs & WGs
Optional Meetings
5.00 pm Candidate Interviews
andOptional Meetings
7.00 pm PAPs & WGs
9.00 pm
45November 2010 45
2011 Plenary Meeting Schedule
Month Date Time Detail
Jan 21 1 – 3 p.m. Virtual Meeting/Conf. Call
Feb
Mar 29-31 All Day F2F: Nashville likely
Apr
May 26 1 – 3 p.m. Virtual Meeting/Conf. Call hosted @ ConnectivityWeek
Jun
Jul 12-14 All Day F2F: Montreal, Canada – International theme
Aug
Sep 15 1 – 3 p.m. Virtual Meeting/Conf. Call hosted @ GridWeek
Oct
Nov
Dec 5-8 All Day F2F: Grid-Interop, Phoenix