doc.: ieee 802.15-01/055r0 submission january 2001 ian gifford, m/a-com, inc.slide 1 project: ieee...

January 2001

Ian Gifford, M/A-COM, Inc.Slide 2

doc.: IEEE 802.15-01/055r0

Submission

IEEE 802.15 Working Group for Wireless Personal Area Networks™

Balloting Tools and Comment DB Report

January 2001 Monterey, CA USA

January 2001


doc.: IEEE 802.15-01/055r0

Submission

Contents

• Summary• Overview

– Problem– Research– Solution

• Backup• More Backup

January 2001


doc.: IEEE 802.15-01/055r0

Submission

Summary

• TG1 reviewed the LB process and we believe the cycle time can be reduced by introducing a more efficient “post” LB phase Comment database to manage the LB votes, comments, and resolution as well as all the myriad of reports

• TG1 will continue to review the “Pre” LB and LB phases to see if additional cycle time can be reduced e.g., new Balloting Tool, etc.

January 2001


doc.: IEEE 802.15-01/055r0

Submission

Balloting Tools and Comment DBOverview

• Problem– The 802.15 LB Comment Resolution Phase seems to take

to long and appears to be cumbersome. TG1 wants to review the process and reduce the cycle time where possible.

• Research– TG1 reviewed various IEEE (802.3, 802.16, and IEEE-SA

Balloting Center) and Non-IEEE Working Group and Sponsor Balloting Tools and Comment DB approaches.

• Solution– TG1 will use a new Comment DB for the next LB and we

may introduce a new Balloting Tool(s) for the Voter too.Q How does 802.3 manage their ballot to draft? One (1) DB per Ballot or something else?A One DB per ballot/draft. i.e. a database for a set of comments and their resolution against a particular draft.

January 2001


doc.: IEEE 802.15-01/055r0

Submission

Problem: 802.15 WG Letter Ballot Typical Distribution Package

• Create LB Distribution Package– Ballot

• MS Word document or• E-Mail reply

– Comment Form• MS Word document or• MS Excel document

– Draft• Adobe Acrobat document

– Instructions• Adobe Acrobat document

– etc.

• Distribute LB Package to WG Membership

• Membership reviews package and returns vote and comments if any.

WG Member

LetterBallot

CommentForm

IEE

E 8

02.1

1 L

egac

yIE

EE

802

.11

Leg

acy

Bal

lotin

g T

ools

Bal

lotin

g T

ools

January 2001


doc.: IEEE 802.15-01/055r0

Submission

Problem: 802.15 WG Letter Ballot Typical LB Tally & Resolution

• Working Group– Prepare & announce LB

tally and results

• Task Group– Review LB tally and

prepare detailed analysis– Prepare LB Comment tally

and prepare detailed analysis

– Form TG Resolution Group– Resolve Comments– Prepare LB/D(x) Summary

reportsTG Worker

LetterBallot

Tally &Analysis

CommentTally &Analysis

LetterBallot/Draft

SummaryReport

January 2001


doc.: IEEE 802.15-01/055r0

Submission

Research: A Typical LB Gantt Chart and where to focus on reducing cycle time

• Enhancing the Distribution Package with a so called “Balloting Tool” e.g., MS Word, FileMaker runtime version, etc. could provide a better output from the LB Period or Voter response

• Introducing a Comment Database e.g., MS Access, FileMaker, etc. with the Voter ballot responses could provide reduction in cycle times for:

– LB Analysis & Report – RDBMS could calculate and report– LB Comment Analysis & Report – RDBMS could calculate and report– TG Comment Resolution – RDBMS could provide the Resolution Team as well as the Draft

Editing Team with an integrated tool that clearly communicates the WG commentary on the draft.

Fixed Variable

January 2001


doc.: IEEE 802.15-01/055r0

Submission

Research: Any LB Results format may be used provided the following information is included:

• A. Date of Ballot • B. Member name • C. Member affiliation (e.g., company, agency, institution) or status (e.g.,

consultant, retired) • D. Member classification or relationship to the area addressed by the standard

(user, producer, general interest, or others as appropriate, such as academia or government; this is the member's relationship to the activity, not his employer's relationship.) The IEEE-SA Standards Board Operations Manual stipulates that "Except for the general interest category, no group (classification) may constitute 50% or more of the balloting group membership."

• E. Confirmation of Standards Association Membership (IEEE or Affiliate number) • F. Ballot Information • The IEEE-SA Standards Board Operations Manual stipulates that 75% of the

ballots mailed shall have been returned (only 50% required for withdrawal of a standard). A minimum of 75% of those voting shall approve the draft in order to submit the ballot results to the IEEE-SA Standards Board.

As with the Sponsor Balloting Phase the WG can use any LB reporting format but TG1 suggests the 802.15 use theminimum reporting information to be better prepared for the Sponsor Balloting Phase.

January 2001


doc.: IEEE 802.15-01/055r0

Submission

Research: Any LB Results format may be used provided the following info is included: (cont)

• The following is an example of how to properly calculate returned ballots from eligible voters:

– Draft: 5.3 Date Closed: 18 June 1998 – Ballots Sent 100 – Ballots Returned:

• Affirmatives 60 • Negatives 13 • Abstentions 15 • Total 88 • No Response 12 • Total Ballots 100

– Percent Returned (60 + 13 + 15) / 100 = 88% – Percent Affirmative 60 / (60 + 13) = 82% – Percent Abstentions 15 / 88 = 17%

• List of All Voters and their response

The results of LB6 were reported to the Task Group 1 based on the format above.

January 2001


doc.: IEEE 802.15-01/055r0

Submission

Solution: TG1 is creating a Comment DB to assist in post LB7 processing

• Goal– Have a Master DB to capture the LB7 Votes,

Comments, and possibly the actual Draft 8.0.

• Software being considered– MS Access 2000 – Michael Camp

• In process will be ready in Feb01

– FileMaker 5.0v3 – Ian Gifford• In process will be ready in Feb01; thanks to source from

802.3

– QuickBase – Ian Gifford• In process could be ready in Mar01. Reviewing an on-line

vs. off-line process. There are other DBs e.g., 2D

January 2001


doc.: IEEE 802.15-01/055r0

Submission


Backup

January 2001


doc.: IEEE 802.15-01/055r0

Submission

All the files researched are here:http://ieee802.org/15/private/Ballot-Tools/Research/

• IEEE (source files archived)– 802.3ae (GeoffT)

• 10GigBallot.ZIP [10GigBallot-a Solution.EXE, plus 20 DLLs]

• 10GigBallot.txt

– 802.3z (HowardF, etc.)• D5.0.mdb

• db.txt

– 802.16 (RogerM)• 80216-00_22.doc

• r4MAC_Comments.mdb

• r4PHY_Comments.mdb

• IEEE-SA (TBC)– 2D, XML, etc.

• Non-IEEE– QuickBase

• Free WWW based DB• https://www.quickbase.com

– Village Software• Pay for use Consultancy to

create a Balloting Tool, Comment DB, etc.

• http://www.villagesoftware.com

Access to the /private/ sub directory can be achieved – please contact the author orWG Chair for password access.

January 2001


doc.: IEEE 802.15-01/055r0

Submission

Summary of findings - 802.3ae

• 802.3ae provides two Balloting Tools e.g., ASCII and DB– 10GigBallot.txt

• This balloting tool is provided for those that do not want to use the runtime tool.

– 10GigBallot-a Solution.EXE• This balloting tool is a DB created via FileMaker Pro and the FileMaker

Developer; it is a runtime version of Geoff Thompson’s own tool. Great Balloting Tool but in addition to requiring a DB it requires 17 DLLs and when zipped it is 2.2MB.

• In speaking with Roger Marks not all the DLLs are distributed and if the Voter does not use MSIEv5 e.g., NN, Opera, etc. then additional DLLs are required. Not confirmed.

• 802.3ae uses a Comment DB based on MS Access and/or FileMaker to accept the Balloting Tool *.CSV outputs

We also received a clone Attendance DB from 802.3 [802-3AttDB-Clone.fp5] for trial;the legacy 802.15 Member DB was written in 1997 MS Access but is not supported.

January 2001


doc.: IEEE 802.15-01/055r0

Submission

Summary of findings - 802.3z

• 802.3z provides two Balloting Tools e.g., Online and ASCII– “It was a wonderful tool but had what I considered to be a

major drawback. It accepted comments from a web page (preferred) or a file submitted as text or an e-mail body. The text mode depended on rigid adherence to an ASCII template for the comments to get vacuumed into the master database. The web page method was a pain if you had lots of comments. It only worked on-line. The ASCII method worked well off-line but was problematical in pulling things into the master database.” GeoffT

• 802.3z uses a Comment DB based on MS Access [D5.0.mdb] to accept the Balloting Tool online outputs

We submitted a request for info; we are still waiting for a response from Colin Mick.

January 2001


doc.: IEEE 802.15-01/055r0

Submission

Summary of findings - 802.16

• 802.16 uses a single MS Word “form” Balloting Tool– 80216-00_22.doc

• This balloting tool works very well but has some drawbacks e.g., if ““ or ,” are used a script has to be used to remove inline characters that confuse the *.CSV import

• Occasional Voter errors are encounter when they use the tool

• 802.16 uses a uses a Comment DB based on MS Access – r4PHY_Comments.mdb & r4MAC_Comments.mdb

• This MS Access DB seemingly appears to be easily ported over to TG1.

January 2001


doc.: IEEE 802.15-01/055r0

Submission

Summary of findings – Sponsor Ballot/The Balloting Center

• We are not fully clear on the Sponsor Balloting process – that is one of the reason we are reviewing this process too

• The Balloting Center uses an online Balloting Tool• The Balloting Center uses a Comment DB based on

4D– Using a print program from 4D; they either fax or save to

HTML and send as a email attachment.– The Balloting Center, Walter Pienciak, is very willing to work

with the various WGs and if we supply ordered list of the fields we track, he can work a program up to send us a "something"-delimited file – this allows for better efficientcies on Comment DB import.

January 2001


doc.: IEEE 802.15-01/055r0

Submission


More Backup

January 2001


doc.: IEEE 802.15-01/055r0

Submission

Sponsor Ballot Comments "something"-delimited file or e-mail script?

• Hi, Ian,

• Sorry for the delay in responding: I was out on vacation.• As each ballot/comment is received by the system, the balloter/commenter and the

working-group chair receive a copy of the ballot/comment by e-mail. There is a CC option that can be enabled, allowing copies to be sent to others (or to a list) as well. This should allow you to get a quick jump on issues.

• Once the ballot starts, you'll see what data is being sent. If, during the balloting period, you can send me an ordered list of the fields you track, I can work a program up to send you a "something"-delimited file at the end of the balloting period with all the comments or ballots included. Or, ideally, whoever maintains the database at your end could write the script that takes the desired info from each e-mail and imports it into the database as the ballot proceeds.

• Walter• __• Walter Pienciak• Manager of Electronic Information, IEEE Standards Association• [email protected] http://standards.ieee.org/people/w.pienciak/• +1 303 527 0934 P.O. Box 3780, Boulder, CO 80307-3780

January 2001


doc.: IEEE 802.15-01/055r0

Submission

TG1 Summary - Baseline

• ~Jun97 - Idea for standard• Mar98 - Find Sponsor• Feb99 - Submit PAR• Mar99 - Approve PAR• Jul99 - Organize working

group• Sep99 - Develop draft

standard• Nov99 - Ballot draft standard• Mar00 - Approve draft

standard• Dec00 - Publish approved

standard (or sooner)

January 2001


doc.: IEEE 802.15-01/055r0

Submission

Overview of IEEE Stds Process

• Project Approval• Develop Draft

Standards• Ballot Draft• IEEE-SA Standards

Board Approval• Publish Standard• Related Programs• Resources

.

Standards Development Flow Chart

Maxim

um of

5 years

Project Approval Process

Reaffirm, revise,or withdrawstandards

Develop Draft Standard(Working Group)

BallotDraft

IEEEStandards BoardApproval Process

Publish Standard

Idea!

Maxim

um of

4 years

January 2001


doc.: IEEE 802.15-01/055r0

Submission

PAR Process

• Identify a Sponsor• Request Information Kit• Complete PAR• Submit to NesCom• PAR Complete• Reviewed by NesCom• Approved?• Draft Std Dev.

Continues

.

Project Approval Process Chart

PARComplete?

Approved?

No

Yes

Yes

No

Identify a Sponsor

Submit toNesCom Secretary

Reviewed by NesCom & Stds Board

Min

imu

m o

f 4

0 d

ays

Complete PAR*

RequestInformation Kit (Staff Liaison)

IEEE Standards Board

DraftStandard

DevelopmentContinues

January 2001


doc.: IEEE 802.15-01/055r0

Submission

Draft Process

• Chair Appointed by Sponsor

• PAR Approved• Form WG• Establish Deadline

& Schedule• Draft Doc Reviewed• Changes?• Ballot

Develop Draft Standard

Establish Goals, Deadline & Schedule

Changes?Yes

PARApproved

Form Working Group

DraftDocument

DocumentRe-viewed by

Working Group Technical Editor

ReviseDocument

Ballot

Input of IEEEProject Editor

ChairAppointedby Sponsor

No

January 2001


doc.: IEEE 802.15-01/055r0

Submission

WG Balloting Process - oldProject

Authorization

MakeChanges toObtain WG

Appoval

WGLetterBallot

WGConfirmationLetter Ballot

WGReviewsReturned

Ballots

TechnicalChanges?

SponsorBallot

ResolvableNegatives?

Proceed toStandards Board

Approval

Yes

Yes

No No

Yes

No

PerpareDraft for

Circulation

EstablishCriteria forStandard

NewNegativeVotes?

January 2001


doc.: IEEE 802.15-01/055r0

Submission

WG Balloting Process - new

• Complete Draft• Circulate Draft to obtain WG

LB approval• LB• TG Meets to resolve all

comments & Written confirmation to change vote

• New unresolved Nays– Yes, WG Confirmation LB

– No, Technicals?

• Proceed to Sponsor Ballot

January 2001


doc.: IEEE 802.15-01/055r0

Submission

Sponsor Balloting Process

• Complete WG Draft• Circulate Draft to obtain WG

approval for Sponsor Ballot• SB• TG Meets to resolve all

comments & Written confirmation to change vote

• New unresolved Nays– Yes, WG Confirmation LB

– No, Technicals?

• Proceed to Stds Board Approval

January 2001


doc.: IEEE 802.15-01/055r0

Submission

Sponsor Balloting Process (cont)

• Form the Balloting Group

• Ballot the doc• Obtain 75%• Resolve/Rebuttal

Nays• Maintain Min 75%?• Draft Std Approval

Process

.

Ballot Draft Chart

Obtain 75% Affirmative to Pass

No

Yes

Maintain Minimum 75% Affirmative?

Yes

No

3 0 d a y s

Recirculate Revi-sions, Unresolved Neg. Comments,

& Rebuttal

Resolve/ Rebut Negative Comments

Obtain 75%Response toClose Ballot

Ballotthe

Document

Form the Balloting

Group

Ballot FailsStart Over

No 6 0 d a y s

6 0 d a y s

2 w

eeks to

9 m

on

ths

Draft Standard ApprovalProcess

January 2001


doc.: IEEE 802.15-01/055r0

Submission

Sponsor Forms a Balloting Group

• May issue invitation to ballot– Specifies responsibilities of balloters– Requests classifications (P, U, G)

• Sponsor approves balance– Only general interest can be 50% or more– Avoid tricks (subdividing a category)

• Once balloting begins, the balloting group remains static– IEEE-SA membership is required– Exception: experts and organization representatives,

with the approval of Standards Board

January 2001


doc.: IEEE 802.15-01/055r0

Submission

Response and Results of Balloting• Response

– Need 75% return– Ballot fails with less than 75% return

• Results– Need 75% approval – Attempt to resolve negative ballots

• No mandate to resolve all ballots• After consensus (75% approval) is reached, establish 60-

or 90-day deadline for resolution of comments– Recirculate revised draft and comments– Prepare report for RevCom

• Show evidence of attempts to resolve each negative ballot

• Show evidence and results of recirculation

January 2001


doc.: IEEE 802.15-01/055r0

Submission

Draft Approval Process

• Complete Submittal Form

• Received by RevCom

• Submittal Complete?

• Approved?• Publish Std

.

Draft Standard Approval Process Chart

CompleteSubmittal Form

Received byRevCom

Secretary

Submittal Complete?

Review ed by RevCom &Standards Board

Approved

PublishStandard

No

Yes

Yes

No

Min

imu

m o

f

40

days

January 2001


doc.: IEEE 802.15-01/055r0

Submission

How to Complete a Successful RevCom Submission

CONTACT: RevCom Secretary, +1 (732) 562-3806– Review Committee (RevCom) recommends action

to the Standards Board• Submittal must match information on PAR• When is a revised PAR necessary?

– Any substantive change, i.e., scope, title, patented material, or change of working group chair

• Proof of coordination needed• Explanation for

– Change of name of coordinating body– Additional coordination

January 2001


doc.: IEEE 802.15-01/055r0

Submission

Post-Approval and Publication

• Draft Std Approved• Final Edit• Prepare for Printing• Electronic Form?• Print• Distribute

.

Publish Standard

Prepare for Printing

Yes

Final Edit

DraftStandardApproved

Electronic Form Also

PrepareDisk, etc.

No

Print

Distribute

ManufactureDisk, etc.

3- 9

mo

nth

s

January 2001


doc.: IEEE 802.15-01/055r0

Submission

Post-Approval and Publication

• IEEE Project Editor

– Does final copy edit of text

– Ensures that technical integrity of document is maintained

• Formats electronic text into proofs

– Committee review

– Correction

– Publication

• Complimentary copies and awards

• Some families of standards published as collections

doc.: ieee 802.15-01/055r0 submission january 2001 ian gifford, m/a-com, inc.slide 1 project: ieee...

Documents

backup slide

various ieee

property of ieee

new comment db

wg balloting

01055r0 submission

possible comment db

comment db approaches