Tech-invite3GPPspecsSIPRFCs
Overview21222324252627282931323334353637384‑5x

Content for  TR 21.900  Word version:  16.3.0

Top   Top   Up   Prev   Next
0…   4…   4.4…   5…   6…   7…   8…   9…

 

8  E-mail decisions

WGs may apply e-mail decision procedures for decisions they are entitled to take, as defined by superior bodies (e.g. on specifications, CRs, Liaison statements, etc.). Each WG may set its rules for making e-mail decisions, however, it is required that:
  • the rules are clearly defined and documented;
  • a delegate having participated in plenary meetings is able to identify that he has possibly missed an e-mail relevant to e-mail decision.
Clauses 8.1 - 8.6 describe an e-mail decision procedure example.
Up

8.1  E-mail drafting phase

An e-mail drafting session can be launched, either on a dedicated exploder list as a cybermeeting or as an informal discussion between interested delegates. Objectives can extend from debating an existing contribution, a Liaison Statement or a Change Request to progressing the service requirements of a specific Work Item and involving one or more Working Groups.
In case of "cybermeeting", the chairman of the discussions shall issue an un-ambiguous guideline including:
  1. the objectives and agenda of the meeting;
  2. input document(s) to be clearly specified;
  3. start date and end date of the debates;
  4. afterwards, summary of results of the "cybermeeting".
The end-goal being to reach an "agreement" on the deliverable, either at the next meeting or via an e-mail approval procedure.
Up

8.2  E-mail decision declaration

Authority for an e-mail decision to take place should usually be agreed at plenary meeting. If this is not possible, there shall be a clear notification (i.e. status report) indicating that there will be an e-mail decision. This notification shall be sent on the main mailing lists indicating the-mailing list where the discussion will take place (TSG, WG or SWG list). Target and timeframe shall be clearly indicated. A permanent Chairman (i.e. WG chairman or vice chairman) shall be nominated, who will be responsible for managing the e-mail decision procedure, including initiation, monitoring and announcing when it is complete.
Up

8.3  Status reportingWord‑p. 38
During the e-mail decision period, there shall be a clear message stating what the status of each open item is. It is recommended to have a weekly summary of the status of all items, from the previous plenary listing:
  • the name of the open item;
  • the name of the responsible delegate;
  • time left for comments before the deadline & expiration date;
  • current work versions of documents: Tdoc number, CR number, Revision number;
  • status (Debate ongoing, Agreed, Postponed, Rejected, ...).

8.4  Decision announcement

When a decision is made (Agreed, rejected, postponed…) a clear notification on what has been agreed shall be sent on the main mailing lists of the relevant groups.

8.5  Timing

E-mail decision procedure should start at the latest 3 weeks before relevant plenary:
  • the e-mail decision period is two weeks (one status report required);
  • the procedure shall be completed one week before the relevant TSG, WG or SWG plenary, due to practical arrangements.

8.6  General

  • in exceptional cases when the procedure cannot be followed a clear notice from chairman is required;
  • e-mails on mailing lists shall contain a subject with meaningful keywords, e.g. SA1 Tdoc xxx on Charging and/or 22xxx CR012r4;
  • if there are no comments during the allowed period, agreement is granted automatically;
  • status reports to higher level body meetings, should be e-mailed to the-mailing list one week before the meeting. This allows delegates a final possibility to review the progress in the last period.
Up

Up   Top   ToC