doc.: ieee 802.11-12/0299r4 submission mar 2012 andrew myles, ciscoslide 1 ieee 802 jtc1 standing...

doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/0299r4

Submission

Mar 2012

Andrew Myles, CiscoSlide 1

IEEE 802 JTC1 Standing CommitteeMarch 2012 agenda

13 March 2102

Name Company Phone email

Andrew Myles Cisco +61 284461010 [email protected]

Authors:

doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/0299r4

Submission

Mar 2012

This presentation will be used to run the IEEE 802 JTC1 SC meetings in Hawaii in March 2012

• This presentation contains a proposed running order for the IEEE 802 JTC1 Standing Committee meeting in March 2012, including– Proposed agenda

– Other supporting material

• It will be modified during the meeting to include motions, straw polls and other material referred to during the meeting


doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/0299r4

Submission

Mar 2012


Participants have a duty to inform in relation to patents

• All participants in this meeting have certain obligations under the IEEE-SA Patent Policy (IEEE-SA SB Bylaws subclause 6.2). Participants: – “Shall inform the IEEE (or cause the IEEE to be informed)” of the identity of

each “holder of any potential Essential Patent Claims of which they are personally aware” if the claims are owned or controlled by the participant or the entity the participant is from, employed by, or otherwise represents— “Personal awareness” means that the participant “is personally aware that the holder

may have a potential Essential Patent Claim,” even if the participant is not personally aware of the specific patents or patent claims

– “Should inform the IEEE (or cause the IEEE to be informed)” of the identity of “any other holders of such potential Essential Patent Claims” (that is, third parties that are not affiliated with the participant, with the participant’s employer, or with anyone else that the participant is from or otherwise represents)

– The above does not apply if the patent claim is already the subject of an Accepted Letter of Assurance that applies to the proposed standard(s) under consideration by this group

• Early identification of holders of potential Essential Patent Claims is strongly encouraged; there is no duty to perform a patent search

doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/0299r4

Submission

Mar 2012


There are a variety of patent related links

• All participants should be familiar with their obligations under the IEEE-SA Policies & Procedures for standards development.

• Patent Policy is stated in these sources:– IEEE-SA Standards Boards Bylaws— http://standards.ieee.org/guides/bylaws/sect6-7.html#6

– IEEE-SA Standards Board Operations Manual— http://standards.ieee.org/guides/opman/sect6.html#6.3

• Material about the patent policy is available at – http://standards.ieee.org/board/pat/pat-material.html

• If you have questions, contact the IEEE-SA Standards Board Patent Committee Administrator at [email protected] or visit http://standards.ieee.org/board/pat/index.html

• This slide set is available at http://standards.ieee.org/board/pat/pat-slideset.ppt

doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/0299r4

Submission

Mar 2012


A call for potentially essential patents is not required in the IEEE 802 JTC1 SC

• If anyone in this meeting is personally aware of the holder of any patent claims that are potentially essential to implementation of the proposed standard(s) under consideration by this group and that are not already the subject of an Accepted Letter of Assurance: – Either speak up now or

– Provide the chair of this group with the identity of the holder(s) of any and all such claims as soon as possible or

– Cause an LOA to be submitted

doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/0299r4

Submission

Mar 2012


The IEEE 802 JTC1 SC will operate using general guidelines for IEEE-SA Meetings

• All IEEE-SA standards meetings shall be conducted in compliance with all applicable laws, including antitrust and competition laws. – Don’t discuss the interpretation, validity, or essentiality of patents/patent claims. – Don’t discuss specific license rates, terms, or conditions.— Relative costs, including licensing costs of essential patent claims, of different

technical approaches may be discussed in standards development meetings. — Technical considerations remain primary focus

– Don’t discuss or engage in the fixing of product prices, allocation of customers, or division of sales markets.

– Don’t discuss the status or substance of ongoing or threatened litigation.– Don’t be silent if inappropriate topics are discussed … do formally object.

• See IEEE-SA Standards Board Operations Manual, clause 5.3.10 and “Promoting Competition and Innovation: What You Need to Know about the IEEE Standards Association's Antitrust and Competition Policy” for more details.

doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/0299r4

Submission

Mar 2012


Links are available to a variety of other useful resources

• Link to IEEE Disclosure of Affiliation – http://standards.ieee.org/faqs/affiliationFAQ.html

• Links to IEEE Antitrust Guidelines– http://standards.ieee.org/resources/antitrust-guidelines.pdf

• Link to IEEE Code of Ethics– http://www.ieee.org/web/membership/ethics/code_ethics.html

• Link to IEEE Patent Policy– http://standards.ieee.org/board/pat/pat-slideset.ppt

doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/0299r4

Submission

Mar 2012


The IEEE 802 JTC1 SC will operate using accepted principles of meeting etiquette

• IEEE 802 is a world-wide professional technical organization

• Meetings are to be conducted in an orderly and professional manner in accordance with the policies and procedures governed by the organization.

• Individuals are to address the “technical” content of the subject under consideration and refrain from making “personal” comments to or about the presenter.

doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/0299r4

Submission

Mar 2012

• Call to Order

• Select recording secretary <- important!

• Approve agenda

• Details on next page

• Conduct meeting according to agenda

• Recess

• Call to Order



• Recess

The IEEE 802 JTC1 SC has three slots at the Hawaii plenary meeting

Andrew Myles, Cisco

• Call to Order



• Adjourn

Tuesday13 March, PM1

Wednesday 14 March, PM1

Thursday15 March, PM1

doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/0299r4

Submission

Mar 2012

The IEEE 802 JTC1 SC has a detailed list of agenda items to be considered

• Approve minutes from– Interim meeting in January 2012 in Jacksonville

– Teleconference on 9 February 2012

• Review extended goals

• Review outcomes of SC6 meeting in China in February 2012– Review status of WAPI (802.11i replacement)

– Review status of TLSec/TePA-AC (802.1X/AE replacements)

– Review status of 802.16 security replacements

– Review status of N-UHT (802.11ac replacement)


doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/0299r4

Submission

Mar 2012

The IEEE 802 JTC1 SC has a detailed list of agenda items to be considered

– Review outcome of proposal for renewal of ISO/IEC 8802 standards

– Review next steps of forwarding 802.11-2012 for ISO/IEC ratification

– Review possible MoU to enable forwarding of 802.1 & 802.3 to ISO/IEC

– Review outcome of SC6 “best practices” proposal

– Review WG7, WG8 activities

• Consider any motions


doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/0299r4

Submission

Mar 2012


The IEEE 802 JTC1 SC will consider approving its agenda

Motion to approve agenda

• The IEEE 802 JTC1 SC approves the agenda for its meeting in Hawaii in March 2012, as documented on pages 9-11 of <this slide deck>

• Moved:

• Seconded

• Result

doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/0299r4

Submission

Mar 2012

The IEEE 802 JTC1 SC will consider approval of previous minutes (Jacksonville in January 2012)

Motion to approve minutes

• The IEEE 802 JTC1 SC approves the minutes for its meeting in Jacksonville in January 2012, as documented in 11-12-0199r0

• Moved:

• Seconded:

• Result:


doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/0299r4

Submission

Mar 2012

The IEEE 802 JTC1 SC will consider approval of previous minutes (teleconference in February 2012)

Motion to approve minutes

• The IEEE 802 JTC1 SC approves the minutes for its teleconference on 9 February 2012, as documented in 11-12-0204r0

• Moved:

• Seconded:

• Result:


doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/0299r4

Submission

Mar 2012


The IEEE 802 JTC1 SC reaffirmed its general goals in Sept 09, but they were extended in Nov 2010

Agreed (with changes from Nov 2010) goals

• Provides a forum for 802 members to discuss issues relevant to both:– IEEE 802– ISO/IEC JTC1/SC6

• Recommends positions to ExCom on ISO/IEC JTC1/SC6 actions affecting IEEE 802– Note that 802 LMSC holds the liaison to SC6, not 802.11 WG

• Participates in dialog with IEEE staff and 802 ExCom on issues concerning IEEE ’s relationship with ISO/IEC

• Organises IEEE 802 members to contribute to liaisons and other documents relevant to the ISO/IEC JTC1/SC6 members

Extensions

• The extensions to our goals came out of the 802 ExCom ad hoc held in November 2010 on the Friday evening

doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/0299r4

Submission

Mar 2012

The IEEE 802 JTC1 SC will review the outcomes of the recent SC6 meeting

Review status of:

• WAPI (802.11i replacement)

• TLSec/TePA-AC (802.1X/AE replacements)

• 802.16 security replacements

• N-UHT (802.11ac replacement)

• Proposal for renewal of ISO/IEC 8802 standards

• Next steps of forwarding 802.11-2012 for ISO/IEC ratification

• Possible MoU to enable forwarding of 802.1 & 802.3 to ISO/IEC

• Outcome of SC6 “best practices” proposal

• WG7, WG8 activities


doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/0299r4

Submission

Mar 2012

ISO/IEC JTC1/SC6 met in in Guangzhou, China in Feb 2012 and will meet in Graz, Austria in Sept 2102

• SC6 has a F2F meeting every 6 (future) - 9 (past) months or so

• The last meeting was held on 20-24 June 2011 in San Diego– All WGs met in San Diego— WG1: Physical and data link layers— WG7: Network and transport layers (also known as Future Network)— WG8: Directory— WG9: ASN.1 and registration

• The recent meeting was in Guangzhou, China in February 2012– Now confirmed for week of 20 Feb 2012, which is the same week as the Wi-Fi Alliance

meeting in Vienna

– Only two WGs are planning to meet— WG1: Physical and data link layers— WG7: Network and transport layers— WG8: Directory

• The next meeting is in Graz, Austria in Sept 2012– Same week as IEEE 802.11 WG meeting in Palm Springs


N15171

doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/0299r4

Submission

Mar 2012

Apparently hotels in China are threatened by the pleasures of Wi-Fi!

Sign in hotel where SC6 meeting was

recently held; it was all over the hotel

doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/0299r4

Submission

Mar 2012

Eight P-member NBs (out of 19) attended the SC6 plenary meeting

National Bodies (P members)

• South Korea

• Netherlands

• China

• UK

• US

• Switzerland

• Spain

• Germany

National Bodies (O members)

• Austria

• Hong Kong

Liaison organisations

• ECMA

• IEEE 802– Bruce Kraemer (802.11 WG Chair, HoD)

– Jodi Haasz (IEEE staff)


doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/0299r4

Submission

Mar 2012

Six P-member NBs attended the SC6/WG1 meeting, with 28 delegates from China

National Bodies (P members)

• South Korea – 3 attendees

• Netherlands – 1 attendees– Qualcomm

• China - 28 attendees– Nufront

– China Telecom

– IWNCOMM

• UK - 1 attendee

• US - 1 attendee

• Switzerland – 1 attendee

National Bodies (O members)

• Austria – 1 attendee– NXP

• Hong Kong – 1 attendee

Liaison organisations

• ECMA – 1 attendee

• IEEE 802 – 2 attendees– Bruce Kraemer (802.11 WG Chair, HoD)

– Jodi Haasz (IEEE staff)


doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/0299r4

Submission

Mar 2012


The “WAPI story” has been going on for a very, very, very long time ...

Brief summary of highlights/lowlights

• 2003: WAPI mandated for use in China, implemented by named firms

• 2004: Mandate withdrawn after China agrees to standardise WAPI first

• 2005: WAPI submitted to ISO/IEC fast track ballot in parallel to IEEE submitting 802.11i, after much controversy and appeals

• 2006: WAPI fails ISO/IEC fast track ballot and 802.11i passes, amid much controversy and appeals

• 2009: WAPI mandated in handsets and for SPs in China

• 2009: WAPI submitted to ISO/IEC as NP

• 2010: WAPI NP ballot passes but comments not resolved

• ...

doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/0299r4

Submission

Mar 2012

In Nov 2011 the China NB announced that they had withdrawn the WAPI project from SC6

• In late 2011, a Comment Resolution Committee was attempting to resolve the comments from the WAPI NP ballot– The IEEE 802 goal was to remove all the false claims about 802.11i

• The China NB announced they were withdrawing the WAPI project on 21 November 2011– See embedded document

– It is unclear who in China made the decision to cancel WAPI

• It was stated that the China NB withdrew the project because:– The project has “experienced and still been suffering many unreasonable

obstacles”

– It is likely the project will not complete within required time limits because of an “unfair and unjustified environment,”

• The China NB suggested they may resubmit the project “when a more favorable standardization environment is available”


N15030

doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/0299r4

Submission

Mar 2012

At the SC6 meeting in February 2012 there was little discussion of WAPI before the project was cancelled

At the SC6 meeting in China in February 2012

• WAPI was mentioned a number of times during the formal SC6 welcoming ceremony

• There was a WAPI network in operation during the week– Oddly, every AP had a different SSID

• There was a WAPI demonstration– Most of the session focused on a demonstration on how WEP could be broken

• WG1 agreed and SC6 approved a resolution to cancel the WAPI NP without any discussion at all– Resolution 6.1.3: SC 6 approves the cancellation of ISO/IEC 20011 project

(WAPI). SC 6 thanks the Chinese NB for the submission of the WAPI project and also the other NBs and IEEE for contributions and participation in the project


doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/0299r4

Submission

Mar 2012

It is unclear what is next for WAPI, from either a regulatory or standards perspective


Regulations Standards

• WAPI is still required by Type Approval regulations in handsets in China– These regulations are not available

in written form, although their existence was disclosed by China in WTO discussions

• WAPI is still also informally required by SPs in China

• It is hoped any requirement for WAPI in devices will be repealed soon given that WAPI will not become an ISO/IEC standard

• WAPI is a Chinese National Standard

• There are no known plans to standardise WAPI internationally

• It is possible that WAPI may be taken to IS status through “other” processes

• Please provide the SC any updates to this regulatory and standards situation

doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/0299r4

Submission

Mar 2012

Thank you to all those people who have dealt with the WAPI issue over the years

• There is no need to name the individuals– They know who they are

– And probably do not want to be named

• Events that have been covered include:– Delegation to China in 2004

– Delegation to China in 2005

– ISO/IEC JTC1/SC6 meetings from 2005-2012

– The 802.11i/WAPI fast track ballots in 2006

– The 802.11i/WAPI CRM in 2006

– The WAPI NP ballot in 2010

– The WAPI NP CRMs in 2011

– Many behind the scenes meetings


doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/0299r4

Submission

Mar 2012

The China NB announced that TLSec would be standardised in China by BWIPS

• In previous SC6 meetings the China NB have proposed a protocol called TLSec, which is roughly an 802.1AE replacement

• At the SC6 meeting in February 2012, an IWNCOMM representative presented TLSEc again, emphasising its use of TePA, and concluding– “It is necessary to do more research on LAN layer 2 security.

– TLSec in N14402 is different from IEEE 802.1AE”

• IWNCOMM asserted that China Telecom were supporting this work

• The IEEE 802 delegation responded with a presentation prepared before the meeting by some IEEE 802.1 WG experts – and some background on the IEEE 802.1 WG

• The discussion concluded with the China NB informing SC6 that further standardisation work on TLSec would continue in BWIPS– BWIPS is the organisation under CESI, led by IWNCOMM, that standardised WAPI


N15084

N15161

N15174

doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/0299r4

Submission

Mar 2012

The China NB announced that TePA-AC would be standardised in China by BWIPS

• In previous SC6 meetings the China NB have proposed a protocol called TePA-AC, which is roughly an 802.1X replacement

• At the SC6 meeting in February 2012, an IWNCOMM representative presented TePA-AC again, emphasising its use of TePA, and concluding– “Network access control is widely used in many network environments.

– TePA-AC in N14399 is different from IEEE 802.1x.”

• IWNCOMM claimed that TePA-AC covered a different application space from 802.1X, but Swiss NB rep appeared to disagree

• The discussion concluded with the China NB informing SC6 that further standardisation work on TePA-AC would continue in BWIPS– BWIPS is the organisation under CESI, led by IWNCOMM, that standardised

WAPI


N15083

doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/0299r4

Submission

Mar 2012

The China NB did not indicate any next steps for TAAA, the proposed security replacement for LRWNs

• In previous SC6 meetings the China NB have proposed a protocol called TAAA, which is roughly WAPI for Long Range Wireless Networks

• At the SC6 meeting in February 2012, an IWNCOMM representative presented TAAA again, emphasising its use of TePA, and concluding– “TAAA applies to various LRWN.

– The details of the solution may be discussed further.”

• It appears from the subsequent discussion that a LRWN could include both LTE and 802.16

• The IEEE delegation provided a response that was written at the last moment by an 802.16 expert, which informed SC6 that this activity is actually within the scope of ITU IMT-2000 and IMT-Advanced

• This information appeared to be a surprise to the IWNCOMM rep and there was no further discussion, or indication of next steps for TAAA


N15085

doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/0299r4

Submission

Mar 2012

There is some evidence of new activities related to TePA in other SDOs

• BWIPS have applied to IESG for a protocol number for a protocol called TISec– TISec is a “IP security framework for data communication between network nodes

which is based on a Tri-element Peer Authentication[1] mechanism and IP data security methods”

– It includes an authentication protocol TAI, which “provides network node authentication, key management, credential management, and provides a combination employment of different cryptographic algorithms”

– It includes a data encapsulation protocol TUE, which “works for the IP layer data integrity and confidentiality of the IP packet”

• It appears that the proposal forTISec is an alternative to IPsec ESP + IKEv2 where TePA is the authentication component, and the key management piece is unspecified

• TISec is not of direct relevance to the JTC1 ad hoc but it does indicate a continuing interest in TePA by some stakeholders in China


doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/0299r4

Submission

Mar 2012

There is some evidence of new activities related to TePA in other SDOs

• There are reports that TePA related standards are being promoted in SC27– More information is required


doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/0299r4

Submission

Mar 2012

It is feared that N-UHT could be linked to the opening up of 5GHz spectrum in China

• Most of the 5GHz band in China is not currently open for WLAN

• However, there was an effort led by Chinese SPs & supported by MIIT State Radio Regulatory Commission (SRRC) to open up 5GHz in China

• This effort had been going very well, until recently when it was claimed that the band may be opened up for N-UHT only

• The recently published 12th Five Year Plan for Wireless Radio Development provides support for an N-UHT only approach– The plan calls for China to make strategic use of its wireless spectrum

resources to support broadband, cloud computing, and IoT development

– It also calls for allocation of spectrum to indigenous Chinese technologies, and that it increase the amount of domestic IP in wireless radio equipment used in China


doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/0299r4

Submission

Mar 2012

Recent reports suggest that the risk to 5GHz in China might be overstated

• It is reported that:– MIIT have indicated they WERE looking at opening up the lower 5 GHz band

(e.g. 5.150GHz) to WLAN in 2012.— China still has unresolved issues regarding radio interference from radar, but MIIT will

use experience with radar in US & Europe

– MIIT have made clear that it would NOT grant exclusive access to any specific technology for access to the 5ghz band,

– MIIT have made clear all internationally standardized 802.11 products were eligible for use in China— Of course, this does not include 802.11ac which has not been standardised, even by

the IEEE.


doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/0299r4

Submission

Mar 2012

There was no mention of UHT or EUHT at the SC6 meeting in China in February 2012

• Nufront and the China NB had previously proposed standardisation of UHT (an 802.11n extension) and EHUT (an 802.11ac replacement) by SC6

• The IEEE 802 delegation expressed concern about various aspects of this proposal at the San Diego meeting in June 2011

• It was expected that the issue would be raised again at the China meeting of SC6 in February 2012

• UHT/EUHT were not mentioned at all, although Nufront representatives were in attendance

• Since the SC6 meeting, MIIT has announced that UHT and EUHT will be published as voluntary Chinese National Standards– After a somewhat unusual process in CCSA that effectively ignored the

concerns of many Chinese and non Chinese companies


doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/0299r4

Submission

Mar 2012

The recent standardisation UHT or EUHT in China raises a number of unknowns

• It is not known what the implications of UHT/EUHT standardisation in China are for the 5GHz bands in China– They could be opened up for 802.11ac and UHT/EUHT

– They could be opened up for UHT/EUHT only, although this was previously denied by MIIT

– They could remain mostly closed, which is the current status quo

• It is not known if type approval regulations will be used to mandate UHT/EUHT, similar to those used for WAPI

• It is not even known if UHT or EUHT have been implemented ...


doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/0299r4

Submission

Mar 2012

Nufront sent a letter to the IEEE 802.11 WG Chair suggesting some sort of interaction

• Before the SC6 meeting, Nufront sent a letter (in Chinese!) to the IEEE 802.11 WG Chair, asking:– What is IEEE 802.11’s view towards China developing EUHT?

– Does an opportunity exist for cooperation between IEEE 802 and EUHT promoters?

• The IEEE 802.11 WG Chair responded (in Chinese!) noting:– He does not know the opinion of the 802.11 WG yet

– The 802.11 WG is interested in discussions, and learning about EUHT

– The 802.11 WG members are likely to have a variety of technical questions, particularly in relation to coexistence of CSMA/CA and TMDA systems

– Nufront is invited to present to 802.11, or alternatively a meeting could be arranged in Beijing next February for a limited audience

• The 802.11 WG Chair may provide an update ...


doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/0299r4

Submission

Mar 2012

IEEE 802 delegation discussed ongoing liaisons of 802.11 drafts to SC6

• The status of various IEEE 802.11 drafts was discussed– 802.11mb/aa/ae/ad/ac were all mentioned

– It was also noted that the WG is working with CWPAN on 60GHz in China

• It was noted that the idea of the liaisons was to give SC6 NBs an opportunity to provide comments as early as possible

• This is particularly important given the ballot in the PSDO agreement is an up/down vote with no commenting

• The Austrian/ECMA rep did not like the up/down voting without comments– Multiple parties noted that NBs have lots of opportunities to provide comments

give the liaison process being used by the IEEE 802.11 WG

– It was noted that only a limited number of comments have been received so far


doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/0299r4

Submission

Mar 2012

The 802.11 WG has liaised various Sponsor Ballot drafts to ISO/IEC JTC1/SC6

• Normally the 802.11 WG liaises Sponsor Ballot documents

• However, the WG told SC6 it would liaise 802.11ac as soon as it passed a LB – we did!


Task Group

After Dallas

AfterLA

AfterSing.

After Palm Sp

After SanFran

After Okinawa

After Atlanta

After Jack.

Nov 10 Jan 11 Mar 11 May 11 July 11 Sept 11 Nov 11 Jan 12

TGae - - - - - D5.0 D7.0 -

TGaa - - - - - D6.0 D7.0 -

TGac - - - - - - - D2.0

TGad - - - - - - - D5.0

TGmb D6.0 - D8.0 - - D10.0 D12.0 -

TGs D8.0 - D10.0 - Ratified - - -

TGu D13.0 - - Ratified - - - -

doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/0299r4

Submission

Mar 2012

Publication of 802.11-2012 is important so we can submit it to ISO/IEC for “International” ratification

• One of the issue that comes up continuously is claims that IEEE 802.11 is not “International”– This has been repeated continuously by various Chinese stakeholders,

particularly in relation to the amendments that have not been sent to ISO/IEC

– Interestingly, the Swiss NB rep (who is a consultant to IWNCOMM) recently agreed that 802.11 is “international” in practice

• One way of resolving this issue is to submit IEEE 802.11-2012 to ISO/IEC as soon as possible– Currently 802.11-2012 is scheduled for ratification in late Jan 2012, and

publication sometime in March/April


doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/0299r4

Submission

Mar 2012

SC6 agreed to invite IEEE 802 to submit 802.11-2012 for processing under the PSDO

• The IEEE 802 delegation explained the status of IEEE 802.11-2012

• It was also reiterated it was going to be submitted to ISO/IEC JTC1 for ratification under the PSDO agreement as soon as it was published

• It was also noted that the PSDO process could be accelerated if SC6 formally invited the submission of IEEE 802.11-2012 – Saves need for a 60 day pre-ballot before the 5 month ballot

• SC6 ultimately issued the invitation, with one “disapprove” vote from the China NB– Resolution 6.1.6: Based on the ISO/IEEE PSDO Agreement, Clause 3.2, SC6 invites the IEEE

802.11 Working Group to submit IEEE 802.11-2012 for processing as an ISO/IEC International Standard once it is published by IEEE

• The IEEE staff and IEEE 802.11 Chair will arrange the submission at the appropriate time


doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/0299r4

Submission

Mar 2012

SC6 approved a table with proposed dispositions for various ISO/IEC 8802 standards

• The IEEE 802 delegation presented the liaison that was in response to the UK NB proposal for the disposition of various ISO/IEC 8802 standards– See N15106

• It was ultimately agreed that the table of proposed dispositions in the liaison should be accepted– Resolution 6.1.7: Noting the liaison response from IEEE 802 in 6N15106, SC6

instructs its Secretariat to revise the SC 6 Program of Work based on the table below


N15106

doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/0299r4

Submission

Mar 2012

SC6 approved the table on the status of 8802 standards


Project Number Year Name Recommendation05.01.00 8802-1 2011 SPECIFIC LANS Overview Retain. IEEE 802 will provide text for a replacement when the

current 802 O&A revision project is complete

05.01.01 8802-1 - SPECIFIC LANS Cooperative agreement with IEEE 802

Cancel project. Delete the draft.

05.02.00 8802-2 1998 SPECIFIC LANS Logical Link Control 90.93

Retain in stabilized state

05.03.00 8802-3 2000 SPECIFIC LANS CSMA/CD Edn. 6

Retain. Will be superseded as soon the next revision of IEEE 802.3 is ratified by ISO/IEC.

05.05.00 8802-5 1998 SPECIFIC LANS Token Ring. Edn.3

Retain in stabilized state

05.11.00 8802-11 2005 LANS. Wireless MAC/PHY specifications Edn. 2

Retain. Will be superseded as soon the next revision of IEEE 802.11 is ratified by ISO/IEC

05.21.01 11802-1 2005 LAN GUIDELINES LLC Addresses

Retain. IEEE 802 will provide a replacement at a future date

05.22.01 11802-2 2005 LAN GUIDELINES Standard group MAC addresses

Retain. IEEE 802 will provide a replacement at a future date

05.25.00 11802-5 1997 Media Access Control (MAC) Bridging of Ethernet v2.0 in Local Area Network

Retain in stabilized state.

05.31.00 15802-1 1995 COMMON LANS MAC service Retain. IEEE 802 will provide a replacement based upon 802.1AC at a future date

05.33.00 15802-3 1998 COMMON LANS MAC bridges Retain. IEEE 802 will provide a replacement at a future date based upon either 802.1D-2005 or 802.1Q-2011

doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/0299r4

Submission

Mar 2012

The proposal that only IEEE 802 “maintain, alter and extend” ISO/IEC 8802 standards was controversial

• The IEEE 802 liaison also indicated that IEEE 802 would be willing to submit standards (particularly 802.1 and 802.3) to ISO/IEC under certain conditions – “…it is essential that ISO/IEC JTC1/SC6 agrees that the responsibility to

maintain, alter or extend the functionality of IEEE 802 standards ratified by ISO/IEC remains solely with IEEE 802”

• This condition was particularly controversial among most NBs

• The main issue of contention appeared to revolve around the definition of “extend”; many NBs considered a restriction of extensions as limiting SC6’s ability to do their normal work


doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/0299r4

Submission

Mar 2012

The SC6 NBs had a variety of objections to the proposed IEEE condition

China NB will probably object

• Stated that they believe it is based on a misinterpretation of “one standard worldwide”

• Objected to the “alter” and “extend” conditions

• Suspected it violates anti-trust laws – will need legal advuce

• Suspected it contradicts ISO/IEC Directives – will need to ask staff

UK NB had some concerns

• Stated it was unreasonable to limit “extensions” by SC6, on the basis that any document that normatively referenced an 8802 standard could be considered an extension

Swiss NB had not reviewed

• Stated they had not seen the liaison in time


N15176

doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/0299r4

Submission

Mar 2012

SC6 ultimately decided on a process to help resolve issues related to the IEEE 802 proposal

Resolution 6.1.4

• SC 6 instructs its Secretariat to forward the following liaison statement to IEEE 802:– “SC6 appreciates and acknowledges IEEE 802’s proposal (6N15106) for an

agreement.

– SC 6 will forward an initial list of related questions from its NBs and LO to IEEE 802 by 2012-03-09

– SC 6 requests a response and a draft MoU from IEEE 802 by 2012-05-01. A second list of questions will be provided to IEEE 802 by 2012-07-01

– SC 6 requests a response and updated MoU from IEEE 802 by 2012-08-01.”

• Approved unanimously


doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/0299r4

Submission

Mar 2012

SC6 ultimately decided on a process to help resolve issues related to the IEEE 802 proposal

Resolution 6.1.5

• SC 6 requests its NBs and LO to provide any questions related to IEEE 802 proposal (6N15106) for an agreement to the SC 6 Secretariat by 2012-03-07

• SC 6 Secretariat is instructed to forward them to IEEE 802 by2012-03-09

• The replies from IEEE 802 and a first draft MoU will be distributed to the SC 6 NBs and LO

• SC6 NBs may provide additional comments related to these replies and MoU for an agreement by 2012-06-22

• The replies from IEEE 802 and a second draft MoU will be distributed to the SC 6 NBs and LO and discussed at the SC 6 plenary in Gratkorn/Graz

• Approved unanimously


doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/0299r4

Submission

Mar 2012

An ad hoc group developed an initial set of questions about the IEEE 802 proposal & conditions

• An ad hoc group (but not including any China NB reps) developed an initial set of questions; these were not approved or reviewed by SC6

• The questions were:– Could the IEEE 802 group provide additional information about the proposed

agreement?

– Does IEEE 802 propose any changes to Sc6 review, comments and comment resolution processes?

– At what stage(s) and for what comment period will the IEEE 802 group provide drafts for comment?

– How will the IEEE 802 group deal with comments?

– Would the IEEE 802 group receive and process Sc6 proposals for correction, amendment or revision of IEEE 802 standards?

– How would the IEEE 802 group respond to an addition by Sc6 to an IEEE 802 standard based on a normative reference?

– Does the IEEE 802 group grant Sc6 the right to develop standards competing with and making reference to IEEE 802 standards?


doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/0299r4

Submission

Mar 2012

Additional questions were received from two SC6 NBs by the 7 March deadline

• Questions were received from China NB

• Questions were received from Swiss NB


N15226

N15227

doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/0299r4

Submission

Mar 2012

The key issue appears to be the proposed limitation on “extensions”

• Some NB interpreted extensions to mean anything that normatively referenced an ISO/IEC 8802 standard– ie anything that relied on an ISO/IEC 8802 standard

• This probably was not the intent of the IEEE 802.1 and 802.3 WGs given that they would presumably like their standards to be used and referenced by other standards in the normal way

• This suggests a tighter definition of “extend” is required to:– Meet the needs of IEEE 802.1 and 802.3 WGs

– Mitigate the concerns of SC6 NBs


doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/0299r4

Submission

Mar 2012

The WAPI experience provides a good base on which to understand & define “extend”

• Many people objected to WAPI for many reasons; one major objection was that it replaced integral elements of the IEEE 802.11 specification

• In particular, it did so by making changes to the IEEE 802.11 standard in an uncontrolled way– eg WAPI made changes to element IDs, status codes and error codes without any

reference to the IEEE 802.11 ANA

– eg the WAPI spec made changes to parts of the standards that were never intended to be changed by SDOs other than IEEE 802.11

• This process would have diminished the ongoing integrity of IEEE 802.11 by spreading the specification into multiple documents, under the control of different SDOs

• The key problem with WAPI is that it made changes to IEEE 802.11 by using internal, and sometimes undefined, interfaces in IEEE 802.11; it did not use external, well defined interfaces!


doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/0299r4

Submission

Mar 2012

An “extension” could be defined as any specification that relies on 802 internal interfaces

• An external interface is one that is explicitly defined for interfacing with other standards– eg MAC SAP (802.11-2012, 5.2)

– eg MLME SAP (802.11-2012, 6.3)

• An internal interface is one that is not an external interface

• An “extension” to an IEEE 802 standard could then be defined as a specification that uses an internal interface of the IEEE 802 standard

• This definition should make most parties happy– The UK NBs concern should be mitigated because appropriate normative

referencing is possible

– The IEEE 802.1 and 802.3 WG’s fears should be mitigated because they would retain sole responsibility for their standards

– The China NB’s concerns may or may not be mitigated


doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/0299r4

Submission

Mar 2012

A constraint on “extensions” to IEEE 802 standards will not allow IEEE 802 to object to replacements in SC6

• ISO/IEC JTC1/SC6 is an independent SDO and should generally not be restricted from doing work that does not “maintain, alter or extend” IEEE 802 standards

• This means that SC6 would be free to define complete replacements for IEEE 802 standards and long as they did not “alter or extend” them


Could IEEE 802 object, using the proposed conditions, to:

NoEUHT, which is a competitor to 802.11ac

UHT, which is an extension of 802.11n

TLSec and TePA-AC , which are competitors to 802.1X/AE

WAPI, which is an extension to 802.11

No

Yes

Yes

doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/0299r4

Submission

Mar 2012

The IEEE 802 JTC1 SC will discuss possible answers to the SC6 in relation to the proposed MoU

Questions from Swiss NB (Proposed text in red)

• At what stage(s) and for what comment period will the IEEE 802 group provide drafts for comment, and how will IEEE handle the comments resolution?– For standards that are likely to be submitted to ISO/IEC JTC1 under the PSDO

process, the IEEE 802 WG’s will provide drafts to SC6 as at least as soon as those drafts are approved by an IEEE 802 Sponsor Ballot. This is the process that has been used by IEEE 802.11 WG over the last year or so. In some cases, the IEEE 802 WGs may provide drafts to SC6 even earlier. The liaising of IEEE 802.11ac D2.0 is a recent example of an earlier liaison.

– IEEE 802 WGs are required to consider and fully resolve comments on drafts received from any source. It is more likely any comments will have an impact on the draft development if they are provided within the Sponsor Ballot timeframes. However, the IEEE 802 WG will also consider and resolve comments received after these deadlines. If comments are received too late to be considered during the development of a standard then they will be considered during the maintenance process.


doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/0299r4

Submission

Mar 2012

The IEEE 802 JTC1 SC will discuss possible answers to the SC6 in relation to the proposed MoUQuestions from Swiss NB (Proposed text in red)

• Does the IEEE 802 group grant SC6 the right to develop standards competing with and making reference to IEEE 802 standards?– SC6, or any other SDO, is always free to develop independent standards that compete

with IEEE 802 standards.

– However, IEEE 802 would like agreement that SC6 will not develop standards that maintain, alter or extend existing IEEE 802 standards.

– In this context “extend” means to define functionality that must make use of internal interfaces in the IEEE 802 standards. These internal interfaces were never intended to support parallel changes by multiple SDOs.

– The restriction on maintenance, alterations and extensions is beneficial to the entire industry because it promotes the ongoing integrity of IEEE 802 standards by focusing ongoing development in a single SDO and thus supporting continuing interoperability.

– Of course, IEEE 802 has no objections to any SDO defining new functionality and standards that reference IEEE 802 standards in a way that makes use of the external interfaces to IEEE 802 standards. These interfaces were defined for exactly this purpose.


doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/0299r4

Submission

Mar 2012



• How shall project editors for IEEE 802 standards in the scope of SC6 submitted to ISO be installed to conform to IEEE requirements as well as to the ISO/IEC Directives and the JTC1 Supplements?– According to the ISO/IEC Directives the role of a JTC1 Project Editor is to “maintain the

document throughout the stages of technical work” up to publication and “maintain an updated document incorporating all approved corrigenda and amendments“ after publication.

– The IEEE 802 will normally propose an IEEE 802 standard for ISO/IEC ratification using the PSDO. Under the processes defined in the PSDO that are likely to be used for ratification of IEEE 802 standards there is no technical work or maintenance required in SC6. On this basis, there is probably no need for an SC6 Project Editor to be appointed for these projects. Presumably ISO/IEC will appoint a staff editor to undertake any necessary publication processes.

– The IEEE 802 will normally appoint an editor for the IEEE 802 version of the standard that will follow IEEE processes for the development and maintenance of IEEE 802 standards.


doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/0299r4

Submission

Mar 2012



• Would the IEEE 802 group be ready to comment on New Work Item Proposals and standard drafts received from SC6?– IEEE 802 is always ready to comment on any documents received from SC6

within the scope of IEEE 802.

– In recent times, IEEE 802 has demonstrated is willingness to comment on SC6 documents on multiple occasions including documents related to:— WAPI— TLSec— TePA-AC— UHT/EUHT


doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/0299r4

Submission

Mar 2012



• Would the IEEE 802 group be ready to participate to joint Study Groups and projects?– In principle, IEEE 802 is always willing to work with other SDOs, including SC6,

in joint study groups or projects where it provides value for all parties. However, evaluations of value must be undertaken based on the merits of each proposal at the time.

– IEEE 802 is unlikely to agree to any joint projects to maintain, alter or extend IEEE 802 standards because we believe the benefits of using existing IEEE 802 processes are likely to outweigh any benefits of a joint project.

– Of course, any individuals associated with a SC6 NB interested in technical work related an IEEE 802 standard are always encouraged to participate in the IEEE 802 project using our normal open and transparent processes.


doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/0299r4

Submission

Mar 2012


Questions from China NB (Proposed text in red)

• Will IEEE agree to state in the agreement that SC6 may propose to revise the ISO/IEC standards originated in IEEE?– Under the PSDO between ISO and IEEE, SC6 is always able to make a

proposal to revise an ISO/IEC 8802 standard derived from an IEEE 802 standard. On this basis, there is no need to reiterate this possibility in an MoU between SC6 and IEE802.

– However, IEEE 802 is unlikely to agree to any proposal for SC6 to revise an ISO/IEC 8802 standard because we believe it is almost always better for IEEE 802 revisions and their ISO/IEC 8802 equivilents to be developed within IEEE 802 using our normal processes. We note that under the PSDO, copyright permission would be required from IEEE before SC6 could undertake any revision independently


doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/0299r4

Submission

Mar 2012



• Document 6N15106 requests that the right to “extend the functionality of IEEE 802 standards ratified by ISO/IEC remains solely with IEEE 802. What does it mean to “extend the functionality?” Please provide examples and consider how this clause would impact on technology innovation and the principle of open standards.– IEEE 802 defines an “extension” of an IEEE 802 standard as additional

functionality that make use in its specification of internal interfaces in the IEEE 802 standards. These internal interfaces were never intended to support changes by multiple SDOs.

– In contrast, other SDOs are encouraged to define add additional functionality that make use in its specification of external interfaces in the IEEE 802 standard. For example, an external interface in IEEE 802.11 is the MAC SAP

– ... continued


doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/0299r4

Submission

Mar 2012



• Document 6N15106 requests that the right to “extend the functionality of IEEE 802 standards ratified by ISO/IEC remains solely with IEEE 802. What does it mean to “extend the functionality?” Please provide examples and consider how this clause would impact on technology innovation and the principle of open standards.– ... continued

– On this basis, WAPI and possibly UHT would be defined as “extensions” and thus would not be allowed under the terms of the proposed MoU . EUHT and TLSec would probably be defined as competitors to existing IEEE 802 standards and thus would not be disallowed. Of course, there may be a variety of other reasons why SC6 should not standardise EUHT and TLSec

– The restriction on SC6 developing extensions of IEEE 802 standards has no impact on innovation because the extensions can still be developed under the auspices of IEEE 802. This restriction also implicitly supports the ISO principle of “one standard ... worldwide” Alternatively, SC6 is always free to develop standards that are completely independent of IEEE 802 standards.


doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/0299r4

Submission

Mar 2012



• Would IEEE believe that other ISO/IEC member bodies would enjoy the same rights claimed by IEEE?– It is widely understood “best practice” that a single organisation should have

sole responsibility for developing or maintaining standard (or any document), albeit in cooperation with other stakeholders. This principle supports the ongoing integrity of the standard.

– On this basis, IEEE 802 believes that SC6 should not attempt to maintain, alter or extend standards developed by other organisations without their permission. In this context, other organisations includes any ISO/IEC NBs.

– Therefore, ISO/IEC NBs should enjoy exactly the same rights as being claimed by IEEE 802


doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/0299r4

Submission

Mar 2012



• Will IEEE object to ISO/IEC standard and project proposals making normative references to ISO/IEC standards originated from IEEE (IIIS)?– Note: What is IIIS?

– IEEE 802 encourages any SDO or other organisation to make normative references to ISO/IEC 8802 standards derived from IEEE 802 standards. However, in making such references, those SDOs and other organisations should respect the ongoing integrity of the standards by only using the interfaces defined in the standards that are intended for external use.


doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/0299r4

Submission

Mar 2012



• Will IEEE allow ISO/IEC standards to make normative references to IEEE only standards that have not and will not be submitted to ISO/IEC for international standardization?– IEEE 802 encourages ISO/IEC to make normative references to IEEE 802

standards. However, in making such references, ISO/IEC should respect the ongoing integrity of the IEEE 802 standards by only using the interfaces defined in the IEEE 802 standards that are intended for external use.


doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/0299r4

Submission

Mar 2012



• Can national standards adopt IEEE originated ISO/IEC standards into national standards with modifications for suit for local needs?– Note: this is a policy and legal question for IEEE staff


doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/0299r4

Submission

Mar 2012



• What would IEEE do if IEEE’s standards in development are found having contradictions with existing ISO/IEC standards?– IEEE 802 note that “contradiction” is not defined by the ISO/IEC Directives and

that the results of the fast track ballots related to WAPI and 802.11i in 2005 suggested that there is no commonly understood definition of the term.

– However, IEEE 802 will follow the same principles that IEEE 802 are requesting SC6 follow. This means that IEEE 802 is free to define completely independent but competing standards with ISO/IEC standards. Of course, IEEE 802 will generally avoid defining standards that duplicate the functionality of existing or draft ISO/IEC standards. It further means that IEEE 802 will not attempt to maintain, alter or extend any existing or draft ISO/IEC standards.


doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/0299r4

Submission

Mar 2012


Questions from SC6 ad hoc group (Proposed text in red)

• Could the IEEE 802 group provide additional information about the proposed agreement?– Yes, the IEEE 802 proposal for the agreement is now included in a draft MoU


doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/0299r4

Submission

Mar 2012



• Does propose any changes to SC6 review, comments and comment resolution processes?– IEEE 802 is not proposing any changes to formal SC6 processes for review,

comment and comment resolution beyond those defined by the ISO/IEC Directives and other documents, including the PSDO agreement between ISO and IEEE


doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/0299r4

Submission

Mar 2012



• At what stage(s) and for what comment period will the IEEE 802 group provide drafts for comment?– IEEE 802 will accept comments on drafts at any time from any source.

Obviously, if comments are made earlier then there is a greater chance they can be used to justify changes to a draft. However, comments received later in the standards development process will also be seriously considered. In the worst case, comments will be dealt with in the maintenance process after publication


doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/0299r4

Submission

Mar 2012



• How will the IEEE 802 group deal with comments?– The IEEE 802 WGs always seriously consider and resolve every comment

received from any source either during the development of a standard or during the maintenance process


doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/0299r4

Submission

Mar 2012



• Would the IEEE 802 group receive and process SC6 proposals for correction, amendment or revision of IEEE 802 standards?– Yes, at any time


doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/0299r4

Submission

Mar 2012



• How would the IEEE 802 group respond to an addition by SC6 to an IEEE 802 standard based on a normative reference?– The IEEE 802 expect SC6 to concede responsibility for all alterations,

maintenance and extensions of IEEE 802 standards.

– We define an “extension” of an IEEE 802 standard as any document that extends the functionality of an IEEE 802 standard using interfaces that were not intended for external use.

– On this basis, the consideration of WAPI would be the responsibility of IEEE 802, whereas the standardisation of EUHT could be the responsibility of SC6


doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/0299r4

Submission

Mar 2012



• Does the IEEE 802 group grant SC6 the right to develop standards competing with and making reference to IEEE 802 standards?– SC6 would always have the right to develop a competing standard that does not

make use of internal interfaces in an IEEE 802 standard

– On this basis, the consideration of WAPI would be the responsibility of IEEE 802 because it uses internal interfaces of IEEE 802.11, whereas the standardisation of EUHT could be the responsibility of SC6.


doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/0299r4

Submission

Mar 2012

The IEEE 802 needs to develop a draft MoU that documents any conditions

Rough outline – lots more discussion/work needed

It is likely the formal MoU will be generated by IEEE staff

• Goal: retain integrity and consistency of IEEE 802 standards.

• Implication: any changes to IEEE 802 standards are only ever undertaken by one organisation, in this case IEEE 802

• Mechanism: IEEE 802 is solely responsible for “maintaining, altering and extending” any IEEE 802 or equivalent ISO/IEC 8802 standards

• Comments– Maintaining and altering of IEEE 802 standards (and their ISO/IEC 8802

equivalents) already require permission from IEEE 802 under the PSDO agreement because these actions are affected by IEEE copyrights

– An “extension” is any new specification that depend on an interface to the IEEE 802 standard that is not intended for external use


doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/0299r4

Submission

Mar 2012

The SC6 Chair had previously suggested some “best practices” for SC6 ...

• The SC6 Chair had suggested some “best practices”, apparently partially motivated by the “WAPI experience”:– Accusations, written or verbal, of any other NBs or LOs, should be strictly

forbidden.

– Accusations, written or verbal, of any standards owned by SC 6 or LOs, should be strictly forbidden.

– New work items of direct or obvious duplicate nature to existing standards within SC 6 or LOs should be strongly discouraged.

– Revisions of any SC 6 standards should not be attempted through other than the editors.

– Participants to SC 6 should keep to the common-sense spirit of cooperative peer collaboration and should, by no means, inadvertently exploit the venue of SC 6 as a hostile battle field.


doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/0299r4

Submission

Mar 2012

... after much discussion a revised set of “best practices” was agreed by all SC6 NBs

Agreed SC6 best practices

• The ISO TMB document, “ISO Code of Conduct” (registered as SC 6 N14956 and JTC 1 N10715) describes the responsibilities on technical committees to ensure that their work is carried out to the highest professional standard within the framework of the ISO/IEC Directives.

• SC6, of course, endorses this approach for all areas of its work but, further, wishes to highlight the manner in which the work within SC6 meets these requirements through the following statements:– SC6 expects open and constructive technical discussion within its WGs through

respectful and professional debate for the successful progression of its Programme of Work;

– SC6 expects participants to undertake the work in a spirit of cooperative collaboration and to maintain respect towards other participants and decorum at all time; and

– SC6 always welcomes new technical work item proposals with the expectation that such contributions are accompanied by information that highlights key technical innovations and market value with significant interest to the NBs.


doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/0299r4

Submission

Mar 2012

SC6/WG1 attended to a variety of other issues of indirect or interest to IEEE 802 members

• SC6 sent a liaison to IEEE 1901– It was reported that there is a coexistence issue between IEEE 1901 and

ISO/IEC 12139-1

– SC6 has attempted to have a liaison conversation with IEEE 1901 to which IEEE 1901 has not responded

– A further liaison was approved— As the term of the ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 6/WG 1 Study Group on PLC will end in January

2013, resolution of the coexistence problems, to ensure coexistence of IEEE 1901 (2010), ITU-T G.hn and ISO/IEC 12139-1 is now urgent. SC 6 therefore kindly requests the IEEE 1901 Working Group to put due priority on collaboration with the ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 6/WG 1 Study Group on PLC

– Bruce Kraemer offered to ask the Chair of IEEE 1901 to respond


doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/0299r4

Submission

Mar 2012


• There was much discussion related to NFC– A number of drafts moved forward

– There seem to be an issue with interoperability/coexistence of multiple solutions

• ISO/IEC 24771 is being revised– Korean MAC/PHY standard (using binary CDMA) for ad hoc wireless network to

support QoS in an industrial work environment

• The Picocast standard (ISO/IEC 29157) is being revised– Picocast is a Korean PHY/MAC spec for short-range wireless low-rate

applications in the ISM band

– It is claimed to provide a unified yet efficient wireless solution for versatile service convergence (mobile video, audio, voice, control, & sensor)


doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/0299r4

Submission

Mar 2012


• ISO/IEC 15149 was approved – This standard defines a magnetic field area network (MFAN)

– A wireless network that provides reliable communication in harsh environments using magnetic field

• ISO/IEC17921 Magnetic Communication Protocol NP was approved– A Korean proposal for a PHY and MAC layer protocol for in-band control of

wireless power transfer


doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/0299r4

Submission

Mar 2012

SC6/WG7 is redesigning the internet ...

• WG7 is working on “Future Network”, which seems to be defining a new Internet

• The WG7 Chair described it outside the meeting as an “academic exercise” and they have no plans for a transition from the existing reality

• Projects mentioned during the meeting include:– ISO/IEC DTR 20002, “Managed P2P Framework”

– ISO/IEC 29181, Future Network: Problem Statement and Requirements — Part 2: Naming and Addressing— Part 3: Switching and routing— Part 4: Mobility— Part 5: Security— Part 6: Media Transport— Part 7 : Service Composition

– Distributed Mapping System

– Framework for energy efficient network


doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/0299r4

Submission

Mar 2012

... and SC6/WG7 is extending 802.15.4

• Projects include:– An NP (ISO/IEC 17812) to use IEEE 802.15.4-2011 to provide low-latency

scalable wireless mesh topologies— Is 802.15 WG aware of this?


doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/0299r4

Submission

Mar 2012

SC6/WG8 appears to standardise Directory Services


doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/0299r4

Submission

Mar 2012

JTC1 has changed their NP form

• The NP form is used to justify projects in JTC1 and its SCs

• IEEE 802.11 became very familiar with this form in the context of the WAPI NP proposal

• JTC1 has now modified and substantially simplified and clarified the NP form


6N15242

doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/0299r4

Submission

Mar 2012

The IEEE 802 JTC1 SC will consider any motions

• There are likely to be motions relating to– Proposed MoU

– Answers to SC6 NB questions related to MoU


doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/0299r4

Submission

Mar 2012

Are there any other matters?


doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/0299r4

Submission

Mar 2012

The IEEE 802 JTC1 SC will adjourn for the week

Motion:

• The IEEE 802 JTC1 ad hoc, having completed its business in Hawaii in March 2012, adjourns

• Moved:

• Seconded:

• Result


doc.: ieee 802.11-12/0299r4 submission mar 2012 andrew myles, ciscoslide 1 ieee 802 jtc1 standing...

Documents