Thread Links Date Links
Thread Prev Thread Next Thread Index Date Prev Date Next Date Index

RE: FW: IEEE 802 & IPF


JTC1 is Joint Technical Committee 1.  ISO and IEC had overlaping areas
of responsibility that affected areas like telecom.  Instead of developing
conflicting standards for the same area, they decided to create a joint
group to cover these subjects.  

JTC1 has been the path for producing international standardization of 
802 standards.  (For the wireless standards and perhaps cable some
issues came up about whether that or some other international
SDO had the charter.)  While IEEE 802 has international participation,
IEEE in the formal standards heirarchy is considered to produce US
national standards.  (On a practical level, IEEE 802 standards have been 
increasingly accepted internationally though we did get some feedback
that some people find the formal international recognition important.)

Our money does not go to JTC1.  Each committee within JTC1 requires 
administration - a secretariat.  A country takes responsibility for
a secretariat meaning that they provide the chair for the subcommittee
and handle administration.  The US holds the secretariat for JTC-1,
SC6 (the subcommittee for LAN standards) and some others.  

In some countries, the government funds their secretariats but the US
government does not do that.  For a while a group of companies including
HP each paid a share of the costs of administering the US secretariats
spreading the cost over a small number of big companies, but at some
point there was a decision that it would be more fair to spread the costs
more by having each standards participant for JTC-1 track standards pay 
a fee. 

We pay the fee to IEEE which forwards it to ANSI which uses it to cover
the costs of the secretariat.  It was more or less imposed upon us by
ANSI and IEEE as a requirement for international standardization.  The
executive committee agreed to the mechanism.  Over time we have negotiated
some minor adjustments.  For instance, the fee was suppose to be $300 a
year, but that would have been a pain for us to collect and administer so
we collect $100 per meeting and since about 10% of our attendees are not
US, we figure the payment at 90% of the attenndence.

Because 802 is a very large standards group and also because some other
groups are arranged such that only a small part of their actual standards
developers paid the fee, 802 has paid the lion's share of the fee over the

I don't recall when it started but it has probably been in place
for 5 to 10 years.

Until recently our only direct relationship with JTC1 was informal liaisons
as only countries could be members.  We submitted our documents through 
ANSI and a US TAG (technical advisory group) to JTC1 SC6.
Recently, JTC1 has changed their rules.  I believe that IEEE now has
a form of membership.  This also allows us to submit drafts to a more
streamlined standards process.  Jim and Geoff can best fill you
in on the new relationship while I put my head back into the infinite
stream of Infiniband email.


-----Original Message-----
From: Roger B. Marks []
Sent: Tuesday, November 02, 1999 7:59 AM
Subject: 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
>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( 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
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Oksala, Stephen P []
>Sent: Monday, November 01, 1999 2:07 PM
>To: Carlo, Jim
>Cc: Gorman, Judy; Garner, Jennifer; Pritchard, Robert; Jameson, Scott;
>Rajchel, Lisa
>Subject: FW: IEEE 802 & IPF
>Importance: High
>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.
>Steve Oksala
>Stephen P. Oksala
>Director, Standards Management
>2076 Swedesford Road, MS B203H
>Malvern, PA 19355
>Phone: 610-648-2050
>Fax: 610-695-4700
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Garner, Jennifer []
>Sent: Friday, October 29, 1999 11:27 AM
>To: Oksala, Steve
>Cc: McMillan, Kate
>Subject: FW: IEEE 802 & IPF
>Importance: High
>Steve -
>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
>> is
> > >to re-address continuing to pay the JTC1TAG International Program Fee.
> > >the current time, while we will have many more discussions, I believe
>> is
>> >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
>> in
>> >JTC1TAG for planning purposes.
>> >
>> >Jim Carlo( Cellular:1-214-693-1776
>> >TI Fellow, Networking Standards at Texas Instruments
>> >Chair, ISO/IEC JTC1/SC6 Telecom and Info Exchange Between Systems
>> >Chair, IEEE802 LAN/MAN Standards Committee
> >