 鲜花( 0)  鸡蛋( 0)
|

楼主 |
发表于 2004-11-28 00:53
|
显示全部楼层
Issue 5, The different treatment of N7506 and N7537.
/ q% Y, W+ ^4 QWhy BK NB’s NP given a fast –track in the mean time China NB’s NP was cancelled. * J) K% K7 u4 c" s- L
Why favor one and discriminate the other? On what ground? & t: }+ o2 |, J8 a+ `
, o9 ?' y) d$ U* W, D( E# b ZIssue 6, Visa denial?
# a# e; o, k3 B6 C) Y. z& oWhy are the technical experts of China’s NB were denied visas? What is the host obligation? Will it become a common pattern in the future? Who is responsible for the damages to China NB and the ISO course? Issue 7, Meeting agendas?
. U7 o& f2 A0 f$ [0 V0 `Chinese experts cannot attend the meetings, what is going to happen to N7506? Who is going to explain it? Who is going to defend it? Will it be discarded? Will it be trailed without defense?
1 J+ J/ F( W3 k' S0 t. B
2 v! c, o, K# e4 U5 T+ {- {Issue 8, Will N7537(IEEE802.11i) pass without consideration of China NB’s views? % d% I: B" \* N6 M o! x/ r, ~. T
Now that it is alleged that N7537 will displace N7506, making it obsolete, now that N7537 has been given a favorable leading position, now that China NB’s N7506, although held leading positions both in technology and timing, has been eliminated, and even if restored has lost advantages, now that China’s experts has pointed out the defects of N7537, despite of all these, N7537(IEEE802.11i) may pass.
; `6 T) A9 s' Y2 \9 gBut pass at what cost? Is it due process?
' {! C3 U5 Y7 Z" ~8 J: d6 X% P$ w6 v6 }& B1 C, S' W0 u9 P
4, WHAT IS AT STAKE?
5 @" ^. H+ D7 G) D a( Z
! o( Z" b5 L3 m2 ]# i: R6 \All these problems, questions and issues should not be overlooked. What at stake here is a lot more than the fate of one NB and its NP, there are broader implications and deep impact on every one of us. For example,
n! L9 o, r( x5 |' ?. T1, ISO may be over run by IEEE and loose autonomy and prestige.
9 ~+ G, T3 z/ e/ _) B+ x2, Procedures will be distorted, manipulated and abused.
" q3 }0 }, C" G' t6 T( c+ ]3, National Bodies may be discouraged to make contributions. + O) s- ^6 U4 M# o0 u
4, Standards with defects are allowed to pass ISO. 7 y. C) L5 }& z
5, As a result, ISO may hurt its reputation and image.
' D, C1 n: o1 B; j* X) g' v6, Chances of national adoptions for ISO standards may be reduced. $ B5 I; k$ d0 \9 O0 `& _3 h
/ C; B6 I9 ?4 n6 o$ U; E3 H5, CHINA NB RESPONDE TO PROBLEMS AND ISSUES
d1 r" A/ m- i/ }7 H% k! H {" [! d
. \* j5 p: q6 Y2 z! N0 U0 e1, We believe there is a mishandling of N7506 in overlooking fast-track request. 9 v( G& R" k3 i- n
8 `. B( t7 E& g3 ?, o# y! L4 a2, China NB cannot accept the proposal to submit NP to IEEE. It is not written in procedural directives and does not fit the role and status of China NB.
* \; Z1 o k N5 d
5 u$ Q' b. i" I8 u, ]0 u4 y3, China NB does not agree with the view that ISO/IEC amendment is “useless”. We believe that ISO/IEC amendments have as much, or even more, authority than IEEE’s.
* T: {/ ~$ k4 l/ v% f" P
' }( [! Y* {2 C2 n4, We believe that China NB’s NP (N7506) qualifies the fast-track requirement and that the cancellation of N7506 did not go through due process, and explanations (although late) are not satisfactory. |
|