Implementation Issues. The parties agree to meet and negotiate, to the satisfaction of both parties, any discrepancies or disagreements that develop as the SEBB program is implemented. Should any contract language be found not to be allowed under State law and/or SEBB rules, State law and SEBB rules shall govern.
Implementation Issues. The parties agree to meet and negotiate, to the satisfaction of both parties, any discrepancies or disagreements that develop as the SEBB program is implemented. XXX agrees to TA the above replacement change. Should any contract language be found not to be allowed under State law and/or SEBB rules, State law and SEBB rules shall govern. District: Waiting for PEA PEA Counter: PEA rejects this additional sentence. P ropose to create it’s own section: Tax Shelter Annuity Option
Implementation Issues. We will consider a given period T . To simplify, this period will be used both by the group leader and by the member of the group as a period to send their GKA messages. ≥ − A node can be in one of the following two states : member state or group leader state. A node in a member state will enter the process to become a group leader if it has not received an IGROUP message for a duration kT . A node which has not received any message from a group leader for a duration kT with k 2 will suppose that there is no group leader and starts the procedure to become a leader. Since a node may not have received a packet of the group leader because this packet has been lost, k must be selected so that the probability that k 1 successive transmissions of a GKA message are lost is small. Then, to become a group leader, the node selects a random integer ir between 1 and a given number l (backoff window size) and initializes a timer at irtrtd, where trtd is a predefined duration computed to be at least the round trip delay of a message throughout the ad hoc network. With such a figure for trtd we can be sure that if two nodes draw different integers ir and irr , the node having selected the larger integer will receive the IGROUP message of the other node and then will stop its election process. The backoff window size l must be chosen with respect to the total number of nodes in the network so that the probability of two nodes choosing the same integer is small. This back-off procedure is performed to avoid possibly multiple group leader candidates, for instance, when a group is set up or split into two subgroups. When the node in the member state sends its first IGROUP message, it is in the group leader xxxxx.Xx the group leader state, a node must collect IREPLY messages and form the related IGROUP message. When there is a change in the group (arrival or withdrawal) the group leader must change its contribution. Additionally, irrespective of the modification of the composition of the group, the group leader must change its contribution periodically, to maintain the security of the session key. When a group leader is elected, it may choose to wait additional periods before sending an IGROUP containing the contributions of the group members. In doing so, the group leader may avoid unnecessary changes to the session key due to not having received all the contributions in time. In the group leader state, a node will also look out for IGROUP messages from another group leader....
Implementation Issues. We will onsider a given period T. To simplify, this period will be used both by the group leader or by the member of the group as a period to send their GKA messages. A node an be in one of the following two states : member state or group leader state. A node in a member state will enter the pro ess to be ome a group leader if it has not re eived IGROUP message for a duration kT. A node whi h has not re eived any message from a group leader for a duration kT with k ≥ 2 will suppose that there is no group leader and starts the pro edure to be ome a leader. Sin e a node may not have re eived a pa ket of the group leader be ause this pa ket has been lost, k must be sele ted so that the probability that k − 1 su essive transmissions of a GKA message are lost is small. Then, to be ome a group leader, the node sele ts a random integer ir between 1 and a given number l (ba ko window size) and initializes a timer at irtrtd, where trtd is a prede ned duration omputed to be at least the round trip delay of a message throughout the ad ho network. With su h a gure for trtd we an be sure that if two nodes draw di erent integers ir and ir′ , the node having sele ted the larger integer will re eive the IGROUP message of the other node and then will stop its ele tion pro ess. The ba ko window size l must be hosen with respe t to the total number of nodes in the network so that the probability that two nodes hoose the same integer is small. This ba k-o pro edure is performed to avoid possibly multiple group leader xxxxxxxxx, for instan e, when a group is set up or split into two subgroups.
Implementation Issues. In the proposed key agreement protocol, all the group members collaboratively construct the key tree to establish the common group key. In order to achieve this goal, all participants need to know the key structure of subtrees which they belong to. First, the group creator is able to establish an initial key tree structure in the group creation phase, since he has the list of initial group members. He then multicasts the group initiation message, which contains the key tree structure and related initiation information, to all group members. Upon receipt of the initiation message, each member keeps the key structure and performs the mutual authentication procedure to construct the key tree hierarchy collaboratively. If a member joins or leaves a group, group members can adjust the key structure themselves according to the joining and leaving messages. Therefore, no extra message is needed to maintain the consistency of the key structure. As mentioned earlier, the key value of a non-leaf node is established by two designated negotia- tors, randomly chosen from left and right subtrees respectively. The problem is how to randomly choose the negotiators. We can simply designate the left most member in the left subtree and the right most member in the right subtree as the default negotiators, or let the group creator assigns the two negotiators for each non-leaf node dynamically. The members having more compu- tation power and better network connectivity can be assigned to non-leaf nodes, so that the key agreement protocol gains better performance in constructing the key tree hierarchy. An alternative rekeying 3 m2 6 7 m3 m4 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 m1 m2 m3 m4 m1 leaves m3 m4 Figure 3. Key tree after leaving the member m1 to this issue is not to choose, but let all partici- pants compete for the two negotiators. It means that every member is a negotiator candidate, and takes a random delay to send the authentication messages for the subtrees he belongs to. When a member receives the authentication message sent from the member in the same subtree, he will not need to send the authentication message for the current subtree. It makes load balance in con- structing the key tree, since every member has the chance to perform the key establishment operation. In the member join phase, a new member should find a joined member as his partner before joining the secure group. In the previous section, we assume that the partner should locate at the leaf node nearest the root. This ass...
Implementation Issues. A. DOC will investigate any information that is brought to its attention indicating that this Agreement is not being fully implemented, both by asking MOT to investigate such allegations and by itself gathering relevant information. If DOC informs MOT of such information and requests MOT to supply information relevant to the potential non-implementation, MOT will supply DOC with the requested information within 30 days. After receiving the information from MOT, DOC will consider whether the Agreement is being fully implemented. If DOC preliminarily determines that the Agreement is not being fully implemented, it will notify MOT of its determination and provide MOT with an opportunity to engage in consultations within 15 days after MOT receives the notification of DOC’s preliminary determination. DOC will make a final determination as to whether the Agreement is being fully implemented within 30 days after these consultations have been completed.
Implementation Issues. 8.4.1 Implementation Committee A six (6) person committee will be established, comprised of three (3) Company representatives and three (3) PWU representatives, to identify and resolve any problems and make recommendations to the Oversight Committee for any changes to the collective agreement. Any inconsistencies between the existing collective agreement and this article will be resolved in a manner consistent with the goals and principles of this Article. Any unresolved matters and changes to the collective agreement will be referred to the Oversight Committee for resolution.
Implementation Issues
