Re: FW: IEEE 802 & IPF
To debate this issue, I need to fully understand the specifics of the
IPF. I haven't been able to locate any information on this topic.
For example, I'd like to see the current agreement between 802 and
JTC1. I'd also like answers to the following questions (which might
be answered in the agreement):
-Exactly what is JTC1?
-Exactly what does JTC1 do with our money?
-Aside from the IPF, what is the relationship between 802 and JTC1?
-What is the history of the IPF donation to JTC1:
-Who in 802 agreed to the fund transfer?
-When did the IPF start?
>Below is a note from Steve Oksala regarding IEEE 802 and the potential loss
>to ANSI JTC1 of the IPF fee. I sent an early warning to ANSI so that they do
>not make false assumptions on their budget for year 2000. I told Steve I
>would forward this note to you-all.
>No action is needed or requested by the SEC at this time (and we will have
>plenty of time to discuss this at our November meeting) and draft the
>carefully worded memo.
>Jim Carlo(firstname.lastname@example.org) Cellular:1-214-693-1776 Voice&Fax:1-214-853-5274
>TI Fellow, Networking Standards at Texas Instruments
>Chair, ISO/IEC JTC1/SC6 Telecom and Info Exchange Between Systems
>Chair, IEEE802 LAN/MAN Standards Committee
>From: Oksala, Stephen P [mailto:email@example.com]
>Sent: Monday, November 01, 1999 2:07 PM
>To: Carlo, Jim
>Cc: Gorman, Judy; Garner, Jennifer; Pritchard, Robert; Jameson, Scott;
>Subject: FW: IEEE 802 & IPF
>I would urge you and 802 to not be hasty on this. First of all, I think
>everyone is aware that secretariats get committed on a one year basis; so I
>would hope that 802 would not take action that would leave the rest of the
>community in the lurch. Second, I would like to think that the whole
>situation would get evaluated - if 802 drops funding, presumably it is also
>dropping the TAG responsibility. And with nobody else involved, that would
>also mean dropping the secretariat for SC 6 and potentially even the P
>membership. I don't know what the answers are, but I would like to see a
>total plan and not just one that abandons a system that IEEE had previously
>signed up for and which, under the rules of the road, IEEE is still
>obligated to meet.
>Stephen P. Oksala
>Director, Standards Management
>2076 Swedesford Road, MS B203H
>Malvern, PA 19355
>From: Garner, Jennifer [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
>Sent: Friday, October 29, 1999 11:27 AM
>To: Oksala, Steve
>Cc: McMillan, Kate
>Subject: FW: IEEE 802 & IPF
>I suppose this should get a document number for posting to the Finance
>Committee agenda for December. This would have a significant impact on
>income through IPF collection. I also assume it is time to start
>discussions with regards to continuation of US administration of the SC 6
>if a large body of its US community no longer intends to provide financial
>Please let me know your thoughts. If you want this posted to the agenda,
>what do we want to title the agenda item?
>Thanks in advance -
>> >Lisa, while I am today uncertain of the possible outcome, IEEE 802 has a
>> >meeting in two weeks. One of the items that is on the agenda every year
> > >to re-address continuing to pay the JTC1TAG International Program Fee. At
> > >the current time, while we will have many more discussions, I believe it
>> >very doubtful that IEEE 802 will continue IPF fee collection in the year
>> >2000. I wanted to give you an early warning of possible financial issues
>> >JTC1TAG for planning purposes.
>> >Jim Carlo(email@example.com) Cellular:1-214-693-1776 Voice&Fax:1-214-853-5274
>> >TI Fellow, Networking Standards at Texas Instruments
>> >Chair, ISO/IEC JTC1/SC6 Telecom and Info Exchange Between Systems
>> >Chair, IEEE802 LAN/MAN Standards Committee