Re: IEEE International Code Designator and P802.15.3
I'm sorry, I've been watching this discussion passively for a while because
I thought Tony had made it clear that my role in tracking these object IDs
was in the dim past.
I performed a purely secretarial role of looking up all the object IDs which
had been procured for IEEE 802 use, making a list, and writing up
refinements in the procedures according to direction from Don Loughry, then
chairing the 802 Executive Committee. The basis at the time was a plan
approved in an Annex to 802.1F, under which each 802 base standard would
obtain a separate arc from ANSI.
That Annex specified that the Recording Secretary of 802 would be
responsible for maintaining the list, but because of the very infrequent
instances of updates, maintenance procedures were never established or
consistently maintained. (This is not intended as a criticism of anyone;
the difficulty was that the role of Recording Secretary could change more
frequently than new Object IDs were needed, so experience in dealing with
this would not be passed on.) As a result, I have been called upon to supply
copies of the old list and Don Loughry's procedures over the years, so my
name continues to come up whenever someone tries to reconstruct the
situation.
Tony's suggestion, that the 8802 arc be utilized instead, would take the
whole matter beyond the scope of the original plan to use ANSI assignments
on a basis of one per base standard.
For information, here is my recollection of the sequence of events:
(1) 802.3 began using the 8802 arc because there was no Project 802 system
in place.
(2) 802.1 arranged the plan to use ANSI arcs on a per-standard basis. Tony
Jeffree, as chair of the management task group, was the leader in setting up
the plan and documenting it in 802.1F. Many 802 arcs were obtained then.
(3) Newer 802 Working Groups (802.9, 802.11 and 802.12, I think) reached the
point of needing assignments, and asked 802.1 how to go about it. Tony
wasn't there. I dug out 802.1F and figured out the procedure, and also went
through all the published standards and listed the existing assignments.
(4) The needed arcs were obtained, and Don Loughry used my results and
secretarial help to document the assignments and refined procedures.
(5) I've occasionally supplied copies of that work on request, but because
there has been another long period with no new assignments, not much has
changed.
Respectfully,
Hal Keen
----- Original Message -----
From: <a.ricketts@ieee.org>
To: "Geoff Thompson" <gthompso@nortelnetworks.com>
Cc: <davel@pdd.3com.com>; <David_Law@3mail.3com.com>; <Hal.Keen@ieee.org>;
<stds-802-sec@ieee.org>; <stds-rac@ieee.org>
Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2002 8:35 AM
Subject: Re: IEEE International Code Designator and P802.15.3
>
> Geoff,
>
> Thank you for the response. I did suggest the 802.3 arc to my contact as I
> was aware of it. However, he seemed to be under the impression that
unless
> the arc was specifically for all of 802, as opposed to "just" 802.3, then
> it did not make sense for 802.15 to use it. He also mentioned 802.1 and
> rejected it for the same reason.
>
> I was not in a position technically to dispute or argue the point, so I
> opened discussion of the IEEE ICD. If what you recommend is the preferred
> method, I would suggest that perhaps there is a communication issue for
802
> as to which groups within 802 can and should access the arcs.
>
> Just a thought.
>
> Thanks again for the quick response,
> Anita
>
> PS Given your email and the email from Tony, I will forward the suggestion
> to 802.15 and indicate that they should contact Hal Keen for a node. I
> will also, per Tony's email, ask 802.15 to flesh out in greater detail the
> post-publication plans for additional optional suites and any expected
> procedures.
> ___________________________________________
> Anita C. Ricketts
> Manager, Business Programs and Services
> IEEE Standards
> 445 Hoes Lane
> Piscataway, NJ 08854-1331
> +1 732 562 3847
> +1 732 562 1571 (Fax)
> a.ricketts@ieee.org
>
>
>
> Geoff Thompson
> <gthompso@nortelnet To: a.ricketts@ieee.org
> works.com> cc: stds-rac@ieee.org,
davel@pdd.3com.com,
> David_Law@3mail.3com.com,
<stds-802-sec@ieee.org>, Hal.Keen@ieee.org
> 04/09/2002 02:35 PM Subject: Re: IEEE
International Code Designator and P802.15.3
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Anita-
>
> In 802.3 there are a couple of roots used in 802.3 that I know of.
> They are:
> {iso(1)member-body(2)us(840)802dot3(10006)... (Current)
> {iso(1) std(0) iso8802(8802) csma(3)... (Obsolete)
>
> In addition we reference 802.1F which has (at least) the following root
> {iso(1)member-body(2)us(840)ieee802dot1partF(10011)
>
> I believe that there is a system is place for arc assignments within 802.
> The keeper of the registry for that is Hal Keen. Tony can get you in touch
> with him.
>
> While it is fine for the RAC to "do the right thing" in terms of new
> assignments, this is one of those times when you are supposed to be VERY
> careful about changing things. What we don't particularly want is every
> standard to have a different scheme just because it started in a different
> year.
>
> Geoff
>
> At 01:08 PM 4/9/02 -0400, a.ricketts@ieee.org wrote:
>
> >Hello All,
> >
> >As you may know, in 1997 the IEEE RAC secured an ICD (0111) from the
> >British Standards Institute. This ICD allows the RAC to assign an OID as
> >deemed appropriate.
> >
> >Recently, I was contacted by P802.15.3. I have included the message
> below.
> >They are in the last stages of standards development and require an OID
> >(for the unique identification of a security suite) for the standard. At
> >least one OID would be included in the standard with the possibility of
an
> >additional optional OID. In addition, after the standard is published,
> >there is a real possibility that others will want to "register"
additional
> >optional schemes that will require OIDs.
> >
> >Here is the issue: the WG is at the point of getting the node from IANA
> >and working out the long-term operational issues later. Personally,
since
> >this standard has a registration component, I would prefer to see the
node
> >assigned from the existing ICD assigned to the IEEE, (via the RAC).
There
> >seem to be a plethora of OID assignments around with no real central
> >understanding of how many are actually affiliated with some IEEE
activity.
> >
> >Here is the question: what would be the sub-node assignment? The ICD is
> >"iso (1) iso-identified-organization (3) ieee (0111)"
> >
> >The WG needs to know what would come next in order to help their decision
> >making process. Unfortunately, they are very short on time and need to
> >make their decision before the end of the week, (hence the urgent email).
> >
> >If I have not made any sense, my apologies in advance. Please advise and
> I
> >will do my best to make this more clear. Regardless, any assistance you
> >can offer is much appreciated.
> >
> >Best Regards,
> >Anita
> >
> >Forwarded Message:
> >----- Forwarded by Anita Ricketts/STDS/STAFF/US/IEEE on 04/09/2002 01:04
> PM
> >-----
> >
> >
> "James
> D.
>
> Allen" To: <a.ricketts@ieee.org>,
> <y.hosang@ieee.com>
> > <james.d.allen cc: <gilb@appairent.com>,
> > "Daniel Bailey" <DBailey@ntru.com>,
> > @ieee.org> <asinger@ntru.com>, "John
Barr"
>
> > <John.Barr@motorola.com>, "Robert
> > Heile" <bheile@ieee.org>,
> > "Rasor Gregg-ECPP04"
> > 04/04/2002 <Gregg.Rasor@motorola.com>
> >
> 10:17
> AM Subject:
>
> Please
> respond
>
> to
>
> james.d.allen
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >
> >
> >
> >Hi Anita
> >
> >I understand you are in charge of the IEEE Registration Authority.
> >
> >I am the Vice chair of 802.15 and 802.15.3 and we have a few questions
> we'd
> >like to ask.
> >
> >
> >
> >Background:
> >In our draft standard (due for Sponsor ballot in July), we have the
> ability
> >to use optional security suites. The architecture of the draft standard
> is
> >such that each suite has it's own identification number (called an Object
> >Identifiers or OID). We have put several reserved, but unspecified, OIDs
> >into the standard as place holders.
> >
> >
> >Questions:
> >
> >1- Is there already a numbering system for security options anywhere else
> >in
> >the IEEE that we could use as a reference to this standard?
> >
> >2- If we asked the IEEE to maintain the registry of suites, is that
> >possible, how would we do it, who would we work with, and what is the
cost
> >implication?
> >
> >3- How is it done now and if it is, can you point us to a application and
> >procedure?
> >
> >
> >Thanks! We are trying to get all of this text for the current letter
> >ballot
> >re-circulation done before the 12th so your rapid response would be very
> >helpful.
> >
> >Regards,
> >Jim Allen
> >
> >VP Research & Engineering
> >Appairent Technologies
> >150 Lucius Gordon Dr.
> >Rochester, NY 14586
> >
> >585-214-2465.
> >
> >
> >
> >___________________________________________
> >Anita C. Ricketts
> >Manager, Business Programs and Services
> >IEEE Standards
> >445 Hoes Lane
> >Piscataway, NJ 08854-1331
> >+1 732 562 3847
> >+1 732 562 1571 (Fax)
> >a.ricketts@ieee.org
>
>
>
>
>