| Thread Links | Date Links | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thread Prev | Thread Next | Thread Index | Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index |
|
Dear EC members,
Please see the below message from Andrew Myles who
is leading the 802-wide effort on responding to the ISO/IEC/JTC1 project.
Please forward in request for input to your WG members and have them reply
directly to Andrew at andrew.myles@cisco.com.
Regards,
--Paul Nikolich
Dear IEEE 802.x WG members The quick story (with details below) is:
Note responses are due by CoB on Monday 28 August 2006 to Andrew Myles (andrew.myles@cisco.com). Also note that this request is applicable to any IEEE 802 WG that may want to standardise internationally through ISO/IEC. Andrew Myles
Potential problems related the approval of WAPI as an amendment to ISO/IEC 8802-11 were recently avoided In 2005, both WAPI (proposed by SAC, the Chinese National Body) and IEEE 802.11i (proposed by the UK National Body on behalf of the IEEE 802.11 WG) were submitted to ISO/IEC JTC1 for international standardisation as amendments to ISO/IEC 8802-11 (plus various amendments) using the JTC1 Fast Track ballot procedure. ISO/IEC 8802-11 is effectively the same as the IEEE 802.11 standard. Approval by ISO/IEC JTC1 of both amendments as international standards would have been problematic because the two amendments contained contradictory editing instructions. Approval of only the WAPI amendment would have also been problematic because this would have made it almost impossible for any further IEEE 802.11 amendments to be submitted to ISO/IEC for international standardisation given the significant differences that would have existed between IEEE 802.11 (using 802.11i) and ISO/IEC 8802-11 (using WAPI). Fortunately, these potential problems do not need to be addressed because in June 2006 the Fast Track ballot on WAPI failed and the Fast Track ballot on IEEE 802.11i passed. IEEE 802.11i has now been published as an ISO/IEC international standard.
The WAPI/802.11i debate highlighted important questions regarding the relationship between IEEE 802 and ISO/IEC During the 802.11i/WAPI debate, the existing cooperation agreement between IEEE 802 and ISO/IEC JTC1/SC6/WG1 was quoted on multiple occasions to support various positions related to whether or not IEEE 802.11i and/or WAPI should be approved as international standards. The existing cooperation agreement is documented in "ISO/IEC TR 8802-1:2001: Overview of Local Area Network Standards" (attached). This document mostly contains a general (and somewhat dated) introduction to IEEE 802 standards for wired and wireless LANs. However, clause 4 defines a detailed process for cooperation between IEEE 802 and ISO/IEC JTC1/SC6/WG1 that enables almost automatic international standardisation of IEEE 802 standards. This agreement was based on earlier ISO/IEC JTC1/SC6 documents and resolutions, including "ISO/IEC JTC1/SC6 6N11917: Procedures for ISO/IEC JTC1 SC6 WG1 and IEEE 802 LMSC Cooperative Working" (attached). Interestingly, it appears that the detailed cooperation process defined in ISO/IEC TR 8802-1:2001 has never been used in full because the annex that is supposed to catalogue standards approved using the process is empty. In many cases, IEEE 802 standards have not been submitted to ISO/IEC for international standardisation. Where IEEE 802 standards have been submitted to ISO/IEC, they have always (?) been approved using the JTC1 Fast Track ballot procedure. An attempt to allow ISO/IEC JTC1/SC6 NBs to comment on the IEEE 802.11ma draft according to the defined process recently failed because the ISO/IEC JTC1/SC6 Secretariat failed to pass on liaisons from the IEEE 802.11 WG to the NBs. The lack of use of the cooperation agreement over a five year period immediately calls into question its effectiveness and usefulness. In ISO/IEC JTC1/SC6 N13128 (attached), the Chinese NB states the current cooperation agreement between IEEE 802 and ISO/IEC JTC1/SC6 needs "review, clarification and improvement". They highlight particular concerns relating to copyright ownership and potential competition from the IEEE as a developer of international/global standards. They also raise the question of whether the ISO/IEC 8802-11 standard can be modified within ISO/IEC JTC1/SC6/WG1 without approval from the IEEE 802.11 WG. Many IEEE 802 members are also concerned about the contents and effectiveness of this cooperation agreement, if only because the current agreement did not protect members from having to put a huge amount of effort and resources into the 802.11i/WAPI issue over a three period, with no useful gain.
ISO/IEC JTC1/SC6 has now started a process to review the cooperation agreement with IEEE 802 In June 2006, the ISO/IEC JTC1/SC6 plenary decided (see attached document ISO/IEC JTC1/SC6 N13127) to request the SC6 NBs, IEEE SA, IEEE 802 LMSC, JTC1 and ITTF to review the various documents that define the current cooperation agreement. The documents (all attached) are:
The process requires input to the ISO/IEC 8802-1:2001 project editor by 27 September 2006.
IEEE 802 LMSC is planning to make a submission to the cooperation agreement review IEEE 802 LMSC has received a request from ISO/IEC JTC1/SC6 to participate in the review of the cooperation agreement ISO/IEC JTC1/SC6/WG1 and IEEE 802.11 LMSC. Paul Nikolich (Chair of IEEE 802 LMSC) has requested Andrew Myles (andrew.myles@cisco.com) to facilitate the development of an IEEE 802 LMSC position for approval by IEEE 802 LMSC and subsequent submission to the ISO/IEC 8802-1:2001 project editor. Unfortunately, the time scales are relatively short. In an attempt to satisfy the required timescales, the following timetable will be used:
Comments are requested from IEEE 802 members with a
particular focus on identified major
issues ISO/IEC JTC1/SC6 are requesting comments on any of the
documents related to the cooperation agreement (including
6N11917, TR 8802-1:2001, 6N11240). However, to assist the
process of developing an IEEE 802 position, IEEE 802 members are requested to
focus on the following issues: Responses related to other issues or the detailed
comments on the documents are also
invited. All responses should be sent to Andrew Myles (andrew.myles@cisco.com) by CoB on
Monday 28 August 2006. |