[Chapter-delegates] Moving towards open standards at ITU-T

Tue Jul 16 04:11:52 PDT 2013

The IETF is a well documented "Consensus and Due Process" organization. See RFC 2026 et seq.

The referenced paper below says there should be balloting. Is the proposal to move the IETF to a corporate membership model, like IEEE or W3C, or a government membership model, like ITU-T? The (unsupported) claim of the paper is balloting avoids dominant organizations' driving the result. That sounds nice on paper, but is counter to what actually happens in SDO's with balloting. We all have many stories of ballots being stuffed in the ITU, IEEE, and even the W3C. Is that how we want standards to be set: by who can buy the most votes?

We have a real life experiment in this area. Companies can take their work to the ITU-T. Individuals cannot take their work to the ITU-T. Individuals can, but it is hard, take their work to the IEEE or W3C. Governments can take their work to the ITU-T, IEEE, or W3C. Given all of these opportunities for voting, the fact the IETF does not vote but makes strong technical choices is why the IETF is still going strong, while the ITU-T withers, W3C re-invents itself, and IEEE is extremely strong at the layers of the stack that, by their nature, are corporate-driven.

On Jul 16, 2013, at 4:54 AM, Christian de Larrinaga <cdel at firsthand.net> wrote:

> Ken,
> 
> Great point. One reason presumably for requiring specific focus in a
> standard specification is to allow new stuff to slot in. So even if SIP
> is not compatible with H.323 or XMPP for instance it offers an
> alternative and the user can choose.
> 
> If I can pick out two further points you raise in your paper. (Nice!)
> 
> "While the IETF does not meet the openness
> requirements for Consensus and Due Process, the IETF is
> perhaps the most transparent standardization organization"
> 
> 
> which neatly identifies a proposed working activity for this community
> even if it doesn't pinpoint exactly how a shift in "rough consensus and
> running code" to "Consensus and Due Process" would differ in practice or
> the benefit in achieving such a change.
> 
> in the context of serving the definition
> 
> ..."in the 1994 report sponsored by the US National
> Science Foundation which described an open data network
> as being open: "to users, to service providers, to network
> providers and to change" [6]. Considering service providers
> and network providers both as examples of implementers
> (perhaps also creators and users), this report identifies the
> three major perspectives on open standards: creators,
> implementers and users."
> 
> With a tip towards de Falla and taking the hat wearing metaphor further
> than perhaps it can go the ideal standard developer is wearing a three
> cornered hat.
> 
> Satisfying balance across these three corners is a tough proposition as
> practitioners are observationally from creators and implementors and
> tend to represent "the day job" and in that context. Users I suggest
> have been under represented even in the better framed standards
> activities. So the three cornered hat is losing a corner.
> 
> That would suggest a further challenge.
> 
> 
> 
> Christian
> 
> Ken Krechmer wrote:
>> Dear All,
>> 
>> I am in support of these efforts to increase the openness of standards. 
>> I also do not wish to make the best, the enemy of the good.  So please
>> take the following in that light.
>> 
>> In full consideration open standards are a legal, political, operational
>> (of the Standards Development Organization, SDO) and technical issue. 
>> ISOC is addressing the legal and political issues, some of the
>> operational issues and few of the technical issues.  Consider:
>> "Interoperability" is often technically difficult to achieve and must be
>> balanced with increased costs (development or per unit) by the SDO. 
>> Guidelines would be of considerable help as implementers prefer to
>> obsolete earlier versions and users (often not well represented in
>> technical SDOs) usually do not want their earlier investments negated. 
>> Backward compatibility, a part of interoperability, is often only
>> partial.   Interoperability becomes more difficult to achieve as systems
>> become more complex and the need for testing (beyond conformance testing
>> ) to verify interoperability may become a necessary part of
>> standardization.  Backward compatibility testing may be very complex
>> (bordering on impossible) if the standard is not technically designed to
>> support this concept.
>> 
>> For those interested in a broader view of what an open standard could
>> be, please see: "Open Standards a Call for Action"
>> http://www.csrstds.com/OpnStdsCallforAction.pdf which was presented to a
>> conference at the ITU in 2008.
>> 
>> Ken Krechmer
>> Treasurer SFBayISOC
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Dave Burstein wrote:
>>> Folks
>>> 
>>> There's a good opportunity to quietly press for Open Standards at the
>>> ITU starting with the coming July meetings. ISOC has a strong
>>> statement (below) along with IETF and W3C. Hamadoun Touré has in
>>> principle agreed. So I'm bringing the idea to the U.S. State
>>> Department International Telecommunications Advisory Council meeting.
>>> I hope ISOC will see what's possible and find ways to move this
>>> forward. I sent the below note to Danny Sepulveda at State, who has
>>> taken over for Ambassador Phil Verveer. 
>>> 
>>>    ISOC can be very effective here. 
>>>   The State Department ITAC is an open group that you can join and is
>>> surprisingly influential. It gets you all the "confidential" ITU
>>> documents. Do ask me for the details on how you can join. It has
>>> influence.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Danny
>>> 
>>>   Several things are coming together to make a natural opportunity to
>>> support open standards at the ITU in the spirit of the Open Standards
>>> proclamation below. Hamadoun at WCIT and previously made clear he was
>>> in favor of "multi-stakeholder" and openness at ITU and I believe he
>>> was sincere. I'm going to approach him next week at Columbia and I'm
>>> optimistic he'll be supportive; he's taken a clear position on the
>>> general subject. 
>>> 
>>>   For several reasons, I think the coming ITU-T standards meeting in
>>> Geneva next month is a great opportunity to make quiet but important
>>> progress. I'm writing to urge you to make sure the appropriate people
>>> at State watch and support as appropriate. 
>>> 
>>>   At Friday afternoon's meeting, I'm going to propose moving forward
>>> to work with ITU-T in the spirit of the IETF-ISOC-IEEE-W3C
>>> Open Standards principles as well as Doctor Touré's concluding
>>> statements at WTPF. Specifically, I'm going to recommend that ITU
>>> affirm that members, including the U.S. government, ISOC and IETF,
>>> freely share all documents with their interested
>>> committee members. Touré made that clear in several
>>> statements around WCIT and Ambassador Kramer made it so via ITAC. In
>>> addition, to promote access by civil society to the standards process,
>>> ITU-T should make clear that those wanting to participate may do so
>>> through civil society groups like ISOC that are members of ITU or
>>> through the liaison status of IETF. I'll urge the two groups to make
>>> this practical and affordable for all members. 
>>> 
>>>   One reason this is a good opportunity is that a long term leader of
>>> SG-15, Tom Starr of ITAC, ATIS & AT&T, effectively chaired the ATIS
>>> DSL Standards Group T1E1.4 which defined the DSL that 300 million
>>> people use today. At the time, its work was completely open, proving
>>> effective standards work can be done without secrecy. I remember he
>>> was very proud at the time the group was open, although he hasn't
>>> opposed the current system.
>>> 
>>>   I hope you'll personally follow this up and take concrete steps to
>>> promote open standards as opportunities become apparent.   
>>> 
>>> Dave Burstein
>>> 
>>> Leading Global Standards Organizations Endorse 'OpenStand' 
>>> Principles that Drive Innovation and Borderless Commerce 
>>> 
>>> IEEE, IAB, IETF, Internet Society and W3C Invite Other Standards 
>>> Organizations, Governments and Companies to Support Modern Paradigm 
>>> for Global, Open Standards  
>>> 
>>> PISCATAWAY, N.J., and WASHINGTON, D.C., United States; GENEVA, 
>>> Switzerland, and http://www.w3.org/ -- 29 August 2012 -- Five leading 
>>> global organizations -- IEEE, Internet Architecture Board (IAB), 
>>> Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), Internet Society and 
>>> World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) -- today announced that they have 
>>> signed a statement affirming the importance of a jointly developed set 
>>> of principles establishing a modern paradigm for global, open standards. 
>>> The shared "OpenStand" principles -- based on the effective and 
>>> efficient standardization processes that have made the Internet and 
>>> Web the premiere platforms for innovation and borderless commerce -- are 
>>> proven in their ability to foster competition and cooperation, support 
>>> innovation and interoperability and drive market success.  
>>> 
>>> IEEE, IAB, IETF, Internet Society and W3C invite other standards 
>>> organizations, governments, corporations and technology innovators 
>>> globally to endorse the principles, which are available at 
>>> open-stand.org <http://open-stand.org>. 
>>> 
>>> The OpenStand principles strive to encapsulate that successful 
>>> standardization model and make it extendable across the contemporary, 
>>> global economy's gamut of technology spaces and markets. The principles 
>>> comprise a modern paradigm in which the economics of global 
>>> markets -- fueled by technological innovation -- drive global 
>>> deployment of standards, regardless of their formal status within 
>>> traditional bodies of national representation. The OpenStand principles 
>>> demand: 
>>> 
>>> * cooperation among standards organizations;  
>>> 
>>> * adherence to due process, broad consensus, transparency, balance 
>>> and openness in standards development; 
>>> 
>>> * commitment to technical merit, interoperability, competition, 
>>> innovation and benefit to humanity; 
>>> 
>>> * availability of standards to all; and 
>>> 
>>> * voluntary adoption. 
>>> 
>>> "New dynamics and pressures on global industry have driven changes in 
>>> the ways that standards are developed and adopted around the world," 
>>> said Steve Mills, president of the IEEE Standards Association. 
>>> "Increasing globalization of markets, the rapid advancement of 
>>> technology and intensifying time-to-market demands have forced 
>>> industry to seek more efficient ways to define the global standards 
>>> that help expand global markets. The OpenStand principles foster the 
>>> more efficient international standardization paradigm that the world 
>>> needs." 
>>> 
>>> Added Leslie Daigle, chief Internet technology officer with the Internet 
>>> Society: "International standards development for borderless economics 
>>> is not ad hoc; rather, it has a paradigm--one that has demonstrated 
>>> agility and is driven by technical merit. The OpenStand principles 
>>> convey the power of bottom-up collaboration in harnessing global 
>>> creativity and expertise to the standards of any technology space that 
>>> will underpin the modern economy moving forward." 
>>> 
>>> Standards developed and adopted via the OpenStand principles include 
>>> IEEE standards for the Internet's physical connectivity, IETF standards 
>>> for end-to-end global Internet interoperability and the W3C standards 
>>> for the World Wide Web. 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Editor, DSL Prime, Fast Net News, Net Policy News and A Wireless Cloud
>>> Author with Jennie Bourne  DSL (Wiley, 2002) and Web Video: Making It
>>> Great, Getting It Noticed (Peachpit, 2008)
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> As an Internet Society Chapter Officer you are automatically subscribed
>>> to this list, which is regularly synchronized with the Internet Society
>>> Chapter Portal (AMS): https://portal.isoc.org
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> As an Internet Society Chapter Officer you are automatically subscribed
>> to this list, which is regularly synchronized with the Internet Society
>> Chapter Portal (AMS): https://portal.isoc.org
> _______________________________________________
> As an Internet Society Chapter Officer you are automatically subscribed
> to this list, which is regularly synchronized with the Internet Society
> Chapter Portal (AMS): https://portal.isoc.org

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 841 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
URL: <https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/private/chapter-delegates/attachments/20130716/0d20acfb/attachment.asc>