Process of Moving from WG LB to SA Ballot

<Sept 2020> doc.: <15-20-0280-00-0mag> Project: IEEE P802.15 Working Group for Wireless Personal Area Networks (WPANs) Submission Title: [Moving Drafts to SA Ballots] Date Submitted: [23 Sept 2020] Source: [Patrick Kinney] Company [Kinney Consulting LLC] Address [Chicago area, IL, USA] Voice:[+1.847.960.3715], E-Mail:[pat.kinney@kinneyconsultingllc.org] Re: [Explanation of process of moving from WG LB to SA Ballot.] Abstract: [Steps and requirements to enter SA Ballot] Purpose: [] Notice: discussion and is not binding on the contributing individual(s) or organization(s). The material in this document is subject to change in form and content after further study. The contributor(s) reserve(s) the right to add, amend or withdraw material contained herein. Release: The contributor acknowledges and accepts that this contribution becomes the property of IEEE and may be made publicly available by P802.15. This document has been prepared to assist the IEEE P802.15. It is offered as a basis for Submission Slide 1 <Pat Kinney>, <Kinney Consulting LLC>

<Sept 2020> doc.: <15-20-0280-00-0mag> Instructions for the WG Chair The IEEE-SA strongly recommends that at each WG meeting the chair or a designee: Show slides #1 through #4 of this presentation Advise the WG attendees that: IEEE s patent policy is described in Clause 6 of the IEEE-SA Standards Board Bylaws; Early identification of patent claims which may be essential for the use of standards under development is strongly encouraged; There may be Essential Patent Claims of which IEEE is not aware. Additionally, neither IEEE, the WG, nor the WG Chair can ensure the accuracy or completeness of any assurance or whether any such assurance is, in fact, of a Patent Claim that is essential for the use of the standard under development. Instruct the WG Secretary to record in the minutes of the relevant WG meeting: That the foregoing information was provided and that slides 1 through 4 (and this slide 0, if applicable) were shown; That the chair or designee provided an opportunity for participants to identify patent claim(s)/patent application claim(s) and/or the holder of patent claim(s)/patent application claim(s) of which the participant is personally aware and that may be essential for the use of that standard Any responses that were given, specifically the patent claim(s)/patent application claim(s) and/or the holder of the patent claim(s)/patent application claim(s) that were identified (if any) and by whom. The WG Chair shall ensure that a request is made to any identified holders of potential essential patent claim(s) to complete and submit a Letter of Assurance. It is recommended that the WG Chair review the guidance in IEEE-SA Standards Board Operations Manual 6.3.5 and in FAQs 14 and 15 on inclusion of potential Essential Patent Claims by incorporation or by reference. Note: WG includes Working Groups, Task Groups, and other standards-developing committees with a PAR approved by the IEEE-SA Standards Board. Submission Slide 2 <Pat Kinney>, <Kinney Consulting LLC>

<Sept 2020> doc.: <15-20-0280-00-0mag> Participants have a duty to inform the IEEE Participants shall inform the IEEE (or cause the IEEE to be informed) of the identity of each holder of any potential Essential Patent Claims of which they are personally aware if the claims are owned or controlled by the participant or the entity the participant is from, employed by, or otherwise represents Participants should inform the IEEE (or cause the IEEE to be informed) of the identity of any other holders of potential Essential Patent Claims Early identification of holders of potential Essential Patent Claims is encouraged Slide #1 Submission Slide 3 <Pat Kinney>, <Kinney Consulting LLC>

<Sept 2020> doc.: <15-20-0280-00-0mag> Ways to inform IEEE Cause an LOA to be submitted to the IEEE-SA (patcom@ieee.org); or Provide the chair of this group with the identity of the holder(s) of any and all such claims as soon as possible; or Speak up now and respond to this Call for Potentially Essential Patents If anyone in this meeting is personally aware of the holder of any patent claims that are potentially essential to implementation of the proposed standard(s) under consideration by this group and that are not already the subject of an Accepted Letter of Assurance, please respond at this time by providing relevant information to the WG Chair Slide #2 Submission Slide 4 <Pat Kinney>, <Kinney Consulting LLC>

<Sept 2020> doc.: <15-20-0280-00-0mag> Other guidelines for IEEE WG meetings All IEEE-SA standards meetings shall be conducted in compliance with all applicable laws, including antitrust and competition laws. Don t discuss the interpretation, validity, or essentiality of patents/patent claims. Don t discuss specific license rates, terms, or conditions. Relative costs of different technical approaches that include relative costs of patent licensing terms may be discussed in standards development meetings. Technical considerations remain the primary focus Don t discuss or engage in the fixing of product prices, allocation of customers, or division of sales markets. Don t discuss the status or substance of ongoing or threatened litigation. Don t be silent if inappropriate topics are discussed do formally object. --------------------------------------------------------------- For more details, see IEEE-SA Standards Board Operations Manual, clause 5.3.10 and Antitrust and Competition Policy: What You Need to Know at http://standards.ieee.org/develop/policies/antitrust.pdf Slide #3 Submission Slide 5 <Pat Kinney>, <Kinney Consulting LLC>

<Sept 2020> doc.: <15-20-0280-00-0mag> Patent-related information The patent policy and the procedures used to execute that policy are documented in the: IEEE-SA Standards Board Bylaws (http://standards.ieee.org/develop/policies/bylaws/sect6-7.html#6) IEEE-SA Standards Board Operations Manual (http://standards.ieee.org/develop/policies/opman/sect6.html#6.3) http://standards.ieee.org/about/sasb/patcom/materials.html Material about the patent policy is available at If you have questions, contact the IEEE-SA Standards Board Patent Committee Administrator at patcom@ieee.org Slide #4 Submission Slide 6 <Pat Kinney>, <Kinney Consulting LLC>

<Sept 2020> doc.: <15-20-0280-00-0mag> Moving Drafts to SA Ballots Background/Overview 802.15 WG LB 802 EC Package for SA Ballot SA Ballot Pool myProject s Method of Running Ballots Comment Resolution SA Ballot Recirculation SA Ballot Conclusion Annexes Submission Slide 7 <Pat Kinney>, <Kinney Consulting LLC>

<Sept 2020> doc.: <15-20-0280-00-0mag> SA Ballot Background/Overview Used to be called Sponsor Ballot While the WG letter ballot only has voters from the WG (plus ex-officio EC voters), the Sponsor Ballot has a wider diversity of voters, consisting of any person who has expressed an interest in the subject matter and then applied for the rights to vote. The steps in going to SA Ballot are: 1. Complete WG LB 2. Submit to MEC approval 3. Open the SA Ballot pool invitations 4. WG motion to request EC for draft to go to SA Ballot 5. Verify SA Balloters are sufficiently diverse and inform P Nikolich 6. EC approval of SA Ballot 7. Upload draft and all other needed documents 8. Start SA Ballot Submission Slide 8 <Pat Kinney>, <Kinney Consulting LLC>

<Sept 2020> doc.: <15-20-0280-00-0mag> 802.15 WG Letter Ballot For a letter ballot on a draft standard to be valid and complete: The response time for a Working Group letter ballot on a draft shall be at least thirty days. However, for recirculation ballots the response time shall be at least fifteen days. A majority of all the voting members of the Working Group must have responded Approve, Do Not Approve, or Abstain. Of the voting members responding Approve and Do Not Approve, a minimum supermajority of 75% must have voted approve. Comment resolution, recirculations, etc. should be consistent with Sponsor ballot rules and 5.4.3.2 of the IEEE-SA Standards Board Operations Manual (SASB OM). Submission of a draft standard or a revised standard to the 802 EC shall be accompanied by any outstanding negative votes and a statement of why these unresolved negative votes could not be resolved. Where a voter has accepted some comment resolutions and rejected others, only the comments of which the voter has not accepted resolution should be presented. WG approval to move a draft to SA Ballot requires a 75% supermajority vote Motions requesting conditional approval to forward when the prior ballot has closed shall be accompanied by: Date the ballot closed Vote tally including Approve, Disapprove and Abstain votes Comments that support the remaining disapprove votes and Working Group responses. Schedule for recirculation ballot and resolution meeting. Submission Slide 9 <Pat Kinney>, <Kinney Consulting LLC>

<Sept 2020> doc.: <15-20-0280-00-0mag> 802.15 WG letter ballot Motions Conditional Approval Motion: 802.15 has reviewed and approves the CSD [insert the CSD doc number], and the CA document [insert CA doc number]; and requests conditional approval from the EC to submit P802.15.XY_Dxy (or current revision) to Standards Association ballot. Approval Motion: 802.15 has reviewed and approves the CSD [insert the CSD doc number], and the CA document [insert CA doc number]; and requests approval from the EC to submit P802.15.XY_Dxy to Standards Association ballot. Submission Slide 10 <Pat Kinney>, <Kinney Consulting LLC>

<Sept 2020> doc.: <15-20-0280-00-0mag> 802 EC Package for SA Ballot The 802 EC role in this process is to make sure that the WG Letter Ballot has been conducted properly. So the package presented to the 802 EC must show how the 802.15 WG LB was conducted via start and stop times of each ballot, the number of voters, the number of yes, no, and abstain ballots and their percentages. The document number for comment resolution must be present to allow any interested 802 EC member to check the comments and the responses from the 802.15 CRG. Critical comments must be shown. A critical comment is a rejected Must Be Satisfied (MBS) comment from a no voter. The 802.15 CRG response must be shown. It is appropriate to show or indicate that emails were sent to the no voter to either request further details on his/her MBS comment or to better explain the response and the reason for the response. The package must show that there were any new valid no voter MBS comments and that the last MBS comments from all no voters had been aged out , to show that all voters had an opportunity to read the 802.15 CRG response to the MBS comments and yet they chose to not change their vote. There are two types of motions in the 802 EC to send a draft to SA ballot: approval (where all conditions have been met) and conditional approval. Submission Slide 11 <Pat Kinney>, <Kinney Consulting LLC>

<Sept 2020> doc.: <15-20-0280-00-0mag> 802 EC Package for SA Ballot Conditional approval is only appropriate when ballot resolution efforts have been substantially completed and the approval ratio is sufficient. "Substantially complete" is when there is a very low likelihood of receiving valid new Disapprove comment(s)/vote(s) upon the next recirculation ballot. If the requirements for conditional approval have not been met at end of that recirculation ballot, then one subsequent recirculation ballot may be conducted in an attempt to meet the conditional approval conditions. If the conditions are not met by the subsequent recirculation ballot, the conditional approval terminates. Conditional approval expires at the opening of the next plenary. Agenda Items and motions requesting conditional approval to forward when the prior ballot has closed shall be accompanied by: Date the ballot closed Vote tally including Approve, Disapprove and Abstain votes Comments that support the remaining disapprove votes and Working Group responses. Schedule for recirculation ballot and resolution meeting. Where a voter has accepted some comment resolutions and rejected others, only the comments of which the voter has not accepted resolution should be presented. When conditional forwarding to sponsor ballot has been approved, the conditions shall be met before initiating SA ballot. Submission Slide 12 <Pat Kinney>, <Kinney Consulting LLC>

<Sept 2020> doc.: <15-20-0280-00-0mag> SA Ballot Pool (balloting group) IEEE SA membership or payment of a per-ballot fee is required to ballot on standards (ballot or vote on the standards outside of the working group). SA membership is an extra charge on your IEEE membership fees Balloters usually fall into one of several interest categories (e.g. producers, users). No interest category can comprise over one-third of the balloting group. Given the one-third threshold, SA Ballots should have at least 6 (more if appropriate) interest categories to prevent crossing the threshold. Although the minimum number of voters in an SA Ballot is 10, pools typically range between 50 to 150. Standards Association balloting groups are formed by means of ballot invitations conducted by the IEEE Standards Balloting Center. A ballot invitation is sent to all parties known by the Standards Committee to be interested in the subject matter of the proposed standard. Ballot invitations shall remain open for a period of no less than 15 days. Those who respond affirmatively to the invitation during the period in which the ballot invitation is open and who otherwise fulfill the criteria in both subclause 5.2.2.3 of the IEEE SA Standards Board Bylaws and 5.4.1 shall become members of the Standards Association balloting group for that proposed standard. If a ballot does not open within 6 months of the invitation close date, the ballot group will be considered invalid and the Standards Committee shall conduct a new invitation. Submission Slide 13 <Pat Kinney>, <Kinney Consulting LLC>

<Sept 2020> doc.: <15-20-0280-00-0mag> myProject s Method of Running Ballots Instructions are located on page 45 of: myproject-user-guide-2020-Public-May-2020 The draft document must be submitted for the Mandatory Editorial Coordination (MEC) review, a ballot group invitation must be initiated, a ballot group formed and a ballot initiated. The first step in SA balloting is forming the ballot group. In order to form this group, a ballot group invitation must be initiated. The MEC should be initiated before the ballot invitation is sent out. SA balloting must begin within six months of the ballot group formation. If SA balloting does not begin within six months, the ballot group must be terminated and then a new ballot group invitation must be started. Choose at least 5 voter classifications Note: In order to better achieve a balanced ballot group, it is recommended to select all of the classifications offered. At a minimum the following classifications need to be selected: user, producer, academic, government, and general interest The ballot will not actually open until the Program Manager, Jonathan Goldberg, approves the uploaded draft. A cover letter is not required for the initial draft. If the ballot is an amendment or a corrigendum, the standard document must also be included to allow the voter to better understand the changes Submission Slide 14 <Pat Kinney>, <Kinney Consulting LLC>

<Sept 2020> doc.: <15-20-0280-00-0mag> SA Ballot Comment Resolution The following references are quite helpful during comment resolution: IEEE SA Balloting and Comment Resolution Process Guidelines myProject userguide 2020: subclause 6.15, page 78 All comments must be responded with a response showing that the comment was seriously considered. There is an obligation for the CRG to provide evidence of consideration of each comment via approved IEEE SA balloting tools, regardless of whether the comment is associated with a Do Not Approve, Approve, or Abstain vote. A balloter who voted Do Not Approve with comments will typically designate some portion of them as Must Be Satisfied. A subsequent vote change to Approve or Abstain allows the Must Be Satisfied designation to be removed, but does not cause the comment to be deleted or ignored. In a recirculation there can be new or continuing Do Not Approve voters with new, valid Must Be Satisfied comments and another recirculation ballot will be required. After the ballot closes, commenters may indicate to the CRG that they wish to withdraw a comment. In that case, a disposition of Rejected. Commenter has withdrawn the comment. may be used. 6.15.1 shows the steps used for responding online 6.15.2 shows the steps used for downloading comments and responding offline Submission Slide 15 <Pat Kinney>, <Kinney Consulting LLC>

<Sept 2020> doc.: <15-20-0280-00-0mag> SA Ballot Recirculation Clause 5.4.3.4 of the IEEE-SA Standards Board Operations Manual states: "All substantive changes made since the last balloted proposed standard shall be identified and recirculated to the balloting group." There are well-proven methods to provide balloters with an indication of the specific substantive changes to the Draft: 1. Provide a listing of the clauses with substantive changes to the previous draft in the recirculation ballot cover letter. The list may contain explanations of what is added, revised, or deleted. 2. Identify substantive changes in the next Draft offered for recirculation to the balloters. a) Deleted material in the Draft should be indicated using strikethrough. Any color may be used for the strikethrough. b) New material in the draft should be indicated using a consistent style such as text color, a highlight color, or an underscore. Any color is acceptable to indicate changes. c) Location of deleted and new material should be indicated using a change bar in the margin. For recirculations, a cover letter stating the reason for recirculation is required. A tracked changes PDF version of the draft, showing all changes (including updated draft number) made since the previous ballot should be uploaded for a recirculation. A recirculation cannot be initiated until all comments have a disposition status (and detail if applicable) entered. The recirculation must be approved by the Program Manager, Jonathan Goldberg. Submission Slide 16 <Pat Kinney>, <Kinney Consulting LLC>

<Sept 2020> doc.: <15-20-0280-00-0mag> SA Ballot Conclusion The final recirculation ballot has been held when: When the response rate is 75% or greater AND The draft has achieved 75% or greater approval AND There are no comments OR There are no new "must be satisfied" comments that have not been resolved in previous ballots; AND The CRG decides to reject all the new technical comments, so that there are no new substantive changes to be made in the document. There may be editorial comments that are Accepted or Revised on the final ballot. The comments response is something like "this change will be passed to the IEEE staff editor for consideration during final editing." The final comments resolution should be uploaded into myProject and all balloters with a Disapprove vote who commented should be notified (e.g. by email) of the response to their comment and that no further recirculations are planned. IEEE editors may make other editorial changes during final editing and RevCom may point out other changes requiring editing. However, no substantive changes can be made after the final ballot. (If substantive changes are needed, another recirculation is required). At this point, the balloting and comments resolution processes are complete, and the standard should be ready to submit to RevCom using myProject. Submission Slide 17 <Pat Kinney>, <Kinney Consulting LLC>

<Sept 2020> doc.: <15-20-0280-00-0mag> Annexes Annex A: Excerpt from 802 EC Motion Template Doc ec-16-0170-04-00ec Annex B: Conditional Approval to Start SA Ballot Annex C: IEEE P802.22.3 Spectrum Characterization and Occupancy to SA Ballot Submission Slide 18 <Pat Kinney>, <Kinney Consulting LLC>

<Sept 2020> doc.: <15-20-0280-00-0mag> Annex A: Excerpt from 802 EC Motion Template Doc ec-16-0170-04-00ec Templates for: 1. approval to start SA Ballot, 2. conditional approval to start SA Ballot, 3. approval to send draft to RevCom, 4. conditional approval to send draft to RevCom Submission Slide 19 <Pat Kinney>, <Kinney Consulting LLC>

<Sept 2020> doc.: <15-20-0280-00-0mag> Excerpt from 802 EC Motion Template Doc ec-16-0170-04-00ec Linguistic style of motion templates A motion is an agreement by the EC to perform some action. There is no need to include fluff words that do not describe this action. The words motion , or move , need never appear in the motion itself. The word approve is only appropriate when that is the only action being performed. For example: Motion: the EC moves to approve sending should be written Send Submission Slide 20 <Pat Kinney>, <Kinney Consulting LLC>

<Sept 2020> doc.: <15-20-0280-00-0mag> Tabular style of motion templates Each type of motion is described by a table, illustrated on the next slide. Only the shaded part is shown to the EC (once shading is removed) . The rest of the material provides information that may be helpful as to when to use the motion, the applicable rules, and the definitions of the placeholders ( tags ) used in the motion. Note that the < and > are removed when the tags are filled in . Note also text between [ and ] needs attention. Either delete the delimiters or delete the entire delimited text as appropriate to your context. Submission Slide 21 <Pat Kinney>, <Kinney Consulting LLC>

<Sept 2020> doc.: <15-20-0280-00-0mag> Format of a these motion template slides Only the yellow shaded part is shown to the EC (without shading). The rest of the slide is there for your information. Motion Text (include) (Insert contents of this cell into your presentation) Motion to be used with fields to be filled in as necessary Other Info (include) Supporting information, not part of motion, but required to be shown to EC. May be included on motion slide or the accompanying presentation. Background information regarding motion. Do not include with motion. Background Rules Reference Reference to appropriate rules. Do not include with motion. Field Definitions Fields noted in motion field are defined here. Submission Slide 22 <Pat Kinney>, <Kinney Consulting LLC>

<Sept 2020> doc.: <15-20-0280-00-0mag> Example Motion Template: Motion Text (include) Approve submission of the following project(s) to ISO/IEC JTC/SC6 for adoption under the PSDO agreement <project> [conditional on approval by the IEEE SASB] [conditional on publication of approved standard] Other Info (include) Background Applies to: A draft standard that has received [conditional] approval to proceed to RevCom, or A standard that has been approved by the IEEE-SA standards board LMSC OM: IEEE 802 LMSC communications with other standards bodies <project> : The name of the project, or (in the case of a PAR) the anticipated name of the project. E.g. P802.11ba Rules Reference Field Definitions Submission Slide 23 <Pat Kinney>, <Kinney Consulting LLC>

<Sept 2020> doc.: <15-20-0280-00-0mag> Motion: Approval to start Standards Association ballot Motion Text (include) (Insert contents of this cell into your presentation) Approve sending <project> <draft> to Sponsor Ballot [Confirm the CSD for <project> in <doc-url>] Other Info (include) See <doc-url> for supporting documentation, Date the ballot closed Ballot vote tally including Approve, Disapprove and Abstain votes Comments that support the remaining disapprove votes and WG responses. Schedule for recirculation ballot and resolution meeting. In the WG, PAR (y/n/a): <y>,<n>,<a>; [CSD (y/n/a): <y>,<n>,<a>] Background Applies to: a project that has passed WG letter ballot with at least 75% approval and has completed any necessary recirculation ballots. Confirmation of the CSD is required for non-maintenance projects. Rules Reference LMSC P&P Approval of moving a draft standard to Sponsor ballot LMSC OM The IEEE 802 LMSC EC Field Definitions <project> The name of the project, or (in the case of a PAR) the anticipated name of the project, e.g. P802.11ba <draft> The identifying revision of the draft, e.g. D1.2 <doc URL> An URL to a permanent unambiguous location of the document Return Return Submission Slide 24 <Pat Kinney>, <Kinney Consulting LLC>

<Sept 2020> doc.: <15-20-0280-00-0mag> Motion: Conditional approval to start Standards Association ballot Motion Text (include) (Insert contents of this cell into your presentation) Conditionally approve sending <project> <draft> to Sponsor Ballot [Confirm the CSD for <project> in <doc-ref>] See <doc-url> for supporting documentation, Date the ballot closed Ballot vote tally including Approve, Disapprove and Abstain votes Comments that support the remaining disapprove votes and WG responses. Schedule for recirculation ballot and resolution meeting. In the WG, PAR (y/n/a): <y>,<n>,<a>; [CSD (y/n/a): <y>,<n>,<a>] Other Info (include) Background Applies to: a project that has passed WG letter ballot with at least 75% approval and ballot resolution efforts have been substantially completed. Rules Reference SBOM - Standards ballot by the Sponsor OM - Procedure for conditional approval to forward a draft standard Field Definitions <project> The name of the project, or (in the case of a PAR) the anticipated name of the project, e.g. P802.11ba <draft> The identifying revision of the draft, e.g. D1.2 <doc URL> An URL to a permanent unambiguous location of the document Return Return Submission Slide 25 <Pat Kinney>, <Kinney Consulting LLC>

<Sept 2020> doc.: <15-20-0280-00-0mag> Motion: Approval to send a draft to RevCom Motion Text (include) (Insert contents of this cell into your presentation) Approve sending <project> <draft> to RevCom. [Approve CSD [modification] documentation in <doc-url>] Other Info (include) <project> <draft> had <number>% approval at the end of the last sponsor recirculation ballot. [Subsequently <number> of the no voters changed their vote to yes resulting in an approval of <number>%.] See <doc-url> for supporting documentation In the WG, forwarding draft to RevCom (y/n/a): <y>,<n>,<a>; [CSD (y/n/a): <y>,<n>,<a>] Background Applies to: a project that has passed sponsor ballot with at least 75% approval and has completed any necessary recirculation ballots. Rules Reference LMSC P&P Actions Requiring Approval by a Majority Vote LMSC OM The IEEE 802 LMSC EC Field Definitions <project> The name of the project, or (in the case of a PAR) the anticipated name of the project, e.g. P802.11ba <draft> The identifying revision of the draft, e.g. D1.2 <doc URL> An URL to a permanent unambiguous location of the document Return Return Submission Slide 26 <Pat Kinney>, <Kinney Consulting LLC>

<Sept 2020> doc.: <15-20-0280-00-0mag> Motion: Conditional approval to send a draft to RevCom Motion Text (include) (Insert contents of this cell into your presentation) Conditionally approve sending <project> to RevCom. [Approve CSD [modification] documentation in <doc-url>] See <doc-url> for supporting documentation, Date the ballot closed Ballot vote tally including Approve, Disapprove and Abstain votes Comments that support the remaining disapprove votes and WG responses. Schedule for recirculation ballot and resolution meeting. In the WG, PAR (y/n/a): <y>,<n>,<a>; [CSD (y/n/a): <y>,<n>,<a>] Other Info (include) Background Applies to: a project that has passed sponsor ballot with at least 75% approval and ballot resolution efforts have been substantially completed. See rules reference below for the definition of "substantially complete" and for the required supporting documentation. Rules Reference LMSC OM - Procedure for conditional approval to forward a draft standard Field Definitions <project> The name of the project, or (in the case of a PAR) the anticipated name of the project, e.g. P802.11ba <doc URL> An URL to a permanent unambiguous location of the document Return Return Submission Slide 27 <Pat Kinney>, <Kinney Consulting LLC>

<Sept 2020> doc.: <15-20-0280-00-0mag> Annex B Conditional Approval to Start SA Ballot Example used is 802.15.4w, July 2019 Submission Slide 28 <Pat Kinney>, <Kinney Consulting LLC>

<Sept 2020> doc.: <15-20-0280-00-0mag> Conditional Approval to Start SB 802.15.4w Ballot History ( I / II ) Letter Ballot 155: March 22 April 22 VOTERS 92 , VOTED 48 YES 35, ABSTAIN 12 , NO 1 100 comments (57 technical, 43 editorial), 4 must be satisfied (MBS) comments Accepted comments: 36 (1 MBS) Revised comments: 50 (1 MBS) Rejected comments: 14 (2 MBS) Comment resolution contained in document 15-19/193r10 Submission Slide 29 <Pat Kinney>, <Kinney Consulting LLC>

<Sept 2020> doc.: <15-20-0280-00-0mag> Conditional Approval to Start SB 802.15.4w Ballot History ( II / II ) Letter Ballot 157 Recirculation: May 23 June 7 VOTERS 92 , VOTED 58 YES 44, ABSTAIN 12 , NO 2 18 comments (16 technical, 2 editorial), 16 must be satisfied (MBS) comments Single new LB 157 No voter took part in comment resolution and was satisfied with the resolutions Accepted comments: 4 (2 MBS) Revised comments: 14 (14 MBS) Rejected comments: 0 (0 MBS) NO voter from original ballot has also agreed to vote YES Comment resolution contained in document 15-19/267r2 Submission Slide 30 <Pat Kinney>, <Kinney Consulting LLC>

<Sept 2020> doc.: <15-20-0280-00-0mag> Conditional Approval to Start 15.4w SB 802.15.4w Next Steps Finish MEC review LB159 (recirc 2) in process. Closes Thursday, August 1, 2019 Recirc 3 (if needed) Start Aug 5, close Aug 20. Submission Slide 31 <Pat Kinney>, <Kinney Consulting LLC>

<Sept 2020> doc.: <15-20-0280-00-0mag> Conditional Approval to Start 15.4w SB Motion Conditionally approve sending 802.15.4w D03 (or current version) to Sponsor Ballot and Confirm the CSD for 802.15.4w in https://mentor.ieee.org/802-ec/dcn/18/ec-18- 0081-00-ACSD-802-15-4w.docx (WG 26, 0, 0) Moved: Heile Second: Gilb Submission Slide 32 <Pat Kinney>, <Kinney Consulting LLC>

<Sept 2020> doc.: <15-20-0280-00-0mag> Annex C Approval to Start SA Ballot Example used is 802.22.3, July 2019 Submission Slide 33 <Pat Kinney>, <Kinney Consulting LLC>

<Sept 2020> doc.: <15-20-0280-00-0mag> IEEE P802.22.3 Spectrum Characterization and Occupancy to Sponsor Ballot Bob Heile Chair, IEEE 802.15 <Pat Kinney>, <Kinney Consulting LLC> Submission Slide 34

doc.: <15-20-0280-00-0mag> IEEE P802.22.3 Spectrum Characterization and Occupancy to Sponsor Ballot IEEE WG Letter Ballot Launch Date # of Comments Received Comment Resolution Status Response Ratio Approval Ratio Draft Status WG LB #1 February 12th 2017 to March 13th 2017 153 Comments were addressed and Resolved 76% 17% P802.22 Draft v2.0 Prepared (P802.22.3 Draft v1.0) WG LB #2 October1st to October 30th 2017 95 Comments were addressed and Resolved 77% 50% P802.22 Draft v3.0 Prepared (P802.22.3 Draft v2.0) WG LB #3 February21st 2018 to March 4th 2018 60 Comments were addressed and Resolved 61.54% 60% P802.22 Draft v4.0 prepared (P802.22.3 Draft 3.0) WG LB #4 October 2nd 2018 to October 31st 2018 72 Comments were addressed and resolved 73% 71% P802.22 Draft v5.0 prepared (P802.22.3 Draft 4.0) WG LB #5 Feb 18th 2019 to March 20th 2019 55 Comments were addressed and resolved 75% 9 yes 9 returned 12 voters 100% P802.15.22.3 Draft v6.0 prepared to start the Sponsor Ballot (P802.22.3 Draft 5.0) NO MUST BE SATISFIED COMMENTS Submission Slide 35 <Pat Kinney>, <Kinney Consulting LLC>

<Sept 2020> doc.: <15-20-0280-00-0mag> IEEE P802.22.3 Spectrum Characterization and Occupancy to Sponsor Ballot Last Ballot on D5 was unanimous MEC review successfully completed All 55 (non MBS) comments rejected An unchanged draft D5 would go to Sponsor Ballot Comment Resolution Spreadsheet can be found at: https://mentor.ieee.org/802.22/dcn/19/22-19-0029- 00-0003-802-22-3-draft-5-ballot-resolution.xlsx Submission <Pat Kinney>, <Kinney Consulting LLC> Slide 36

<Sept 2020> doc.: <15-20-0280-00-0mag> IEEE P802.22.3 Spectrum Characterization and Occupancy to Sponsor Ballot Motion Approve sending 802.15.22.3 D05 to SA Ballot Confirm the CSD for 802.15.22.3 in https://mentor.ieee.org/802.22/dcn/19/22-19-0028-01-0003-updated- csd-for-p802-22-3-transfer-of-project-to-ieee-802-15-wg.docx (WG 26-0-2) Mover: Heile Second: Mody <Pat Kinney>, <Kinney Consulting LLC> Submission Slide 37