CIS 505 assignment 1 standards research

RUNNING HEAD: ASSIGNMENT 1: STANDARDS RESEARCH 1

Week 2 Assignment No. 1: Standards Research

By: Christie Greene

CIS 505: Communication Technologies

Instructor: Dr. Richard Brown

October 22, 2014


Abstract

Standards are considered as a code of precepts for the guidance

of any profession, performance and similar accountable

organizations of pedigree, where quality may be a function of

future liberty and / or liability. It is no less sacred in the

telecommunications industry where it is accepted that standards

are required to encapsulate physical, electrical and procedural

characteristics of communication equipment and all aspects of

technological development. Standards presuppose collaboration for

internet management as vendors concur that interface and

communication go together in networks irrespective of the source

of the technology or computer vendors. Thus there are numerous

advantages to be derived from such collaboration as for example;

the assurance of the existence of large markets for particular

types and pieces of equipment, encouraging mass production and

integration that will inevitably result in lower costs; the

enablement of communication among products from multiple vendors

triggering flexible equipment selection and use. There are

accompanying disadvantages that lead to slowing down catching up

with the pace of technological developments. In addition, the


multiplicity of standards has led to conflicting standards in

many respects. It is to be noted however that the existence of

standards does not mean compulsion of use as many are voluntary

while some are regulatory, designed to meet some public

objective. There are numerous standards setting organizations. A

few of these are; the internet society, the International

Telecommunications Union ITU, the Institute of Electronic and

Electrical Engineers IEEE, the International Organization for

Standardization, or ISO. They are fuelled through working groups

whose contributions are tremendously useful in the development of

standards. The focus of this assignment is the inculcation of the

work of these organizations and their usefulness in the

development of communication technologies.


Overview of IETF Working Groups

The actual work in the development of standards is the

responsibility of the Internet Engineering Task Force IETF. This

organization under the Internet Society focuses on engineering

protocol and internet development. IETF has a number of Working

Groups (WGs) which primarily develop IETF specifications and

guidelines, intended to be standards or recommendations. The IETF

Working Groups are typically created to address a specific

problem or to produce one or more specific deliverables (a

guideline, standards specification, etc.). Working Groups are

generally expected to be short-lived in nature. Upon completion

of its goals and achievement of its objectives, the Working Group

is terminated. Each Working Group has a charter. WG charters

state the scope of work for group, and lay out goals and

milestones that show how this work will be completed. They are

not usually permanent but exist until their work is completed.

Selected Working Group


One of the working groups of the IETF is the Network

Working Group which is currently working on a “System for Cross-

Domain Identity Management SCIM: Protocol - draft-ietf-scim-api-

12”, currently an internet draft protocol.

Taken from the draft document, the System for Cross-Domain

Identity Management (SCIM) specification is an HTTP based

protocol that makes managing identities in multi- domain

scenarios easier to support through a standardized services.

Examples include but are not limited to enterprise to cloud

service providers, and inter-cloud based scenarios. The

specification suite seeks to build upon experience with existing

schemas and deployments, placing specific emphasis on simplicity

of integration, while applying existing authentication,

authorization, and privacy models. The intention of SCIM' is to

reduce the cost and complexity of user management operations by

providing a common user schema and extension model and a service

protocol defined by the document. As internet drafts are work in

progress, they cannot be cited as reference material for any

other reason except as such. This draft expires on April 23,

2015. While in this framework and status, it remains a working


document of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). It may be

updated, replaced, or may be rendered obsolete by other documents

at any time.


Justification of the IEEE 802 Standard used in networking

Local Area Network LAN development is predicated upon the

existence of low cost interface. In this respect, costs of

network connection are expected to be lesser that the equipment

cost alone. If this combination is to be commercially efficient

it would be considered necessary to make use of chips to meet an

anticipated high volume market. The rationale of the 802 network

standard is to ensure that high volume will be achieved through

cooperation and collaboration in order to facilitate

intercommunication among the variety of equipment from numerous

manufacturers. It is therefore a fundamental coordinating

standard.

As a standard, the IEEE 802 covers the physical and data

link layers of the Open Systems Interconnection (OSI) model. It

defines standards and protocols for wired local area networks

(WLAN), metropolitan area networks (MAN) and wireless networks;

defines characteristics, operating procedures, protocols and

services for networks that carry variable sized packets and

specifies the development and handling of compatible devices and


equipment. It subdivides the data link layer into sub-layers,

namely the logical link control (LLC) and media access control

(MAC) layers, which provide protocol multiplexing and a multi-

access mechanism, respectively. IEEE 802 is comprised of

standards with separate working groups that regulate different

communication networks, including IEEE 802.1, 802.3, 802.11 and

802.15. IEEE 802.1 handles the architecture,

security, management and internetworking of local area networks

(LAN), metropolitan area networks (MAN) and wide area networks

(WAN) standardized by IEEE 802. IEEE 802.1 is comprised of four

groups that focus on different standards and policies relating to

internetworking, audio/video bridging, data center bridging and

security. The Internetworking group handles overall architecture,

link aggregation, protocol addressing, network path

identification/calculation and other technical practices and

recommendations.

When LAN first emerged as business tools it was realized

sooner that some refinements would need to be made and

definitions defined. This was the beginning of what became known


as Project 802reflecting the year and month of commencement; that

is 1980 February.

Project 802 defined network standards for the physical components

of a network (the interface card and the cabling) that are

accounted for in the physical and data-link layers of the OSI

reference model. 802 specification standards included Network

Interface Cards (NICs), Wide area network (WAN) components and

Components used to create twisted-pair and coaxial cable

networks. The 802 specifications also define the methods of NIC

access and data transfer over physical media. These include

connecting, maintaining, and disconnecting network devices. Thus,

the 802 standards are still evolving as technology advances and

making technological advancement a rolling phenomenon.


Evaluating IEEE, ISO and ANSI to determine the most important forcommunication technology

There is a plethora of standards organizations worldwide with

good intentions to make life easier for the consumers of the

products of technological innovations. With the need for

productivity, safety and security in our competitive industrial

world their presence should be of value to all. In their quest for

recognition, they are also concerned with ensuring that efforts are

not duplicated but rather there is a cooperation and symbiotic

relationship in technological development. Through this concerted

effort they may endorse each other’s standards, build upon them.

This is not to avoid the truth that there is heavy competition

against each other. A brief description of three of these

organizations and their work is given below with a view to

determine which organization is the most important for

communication technology.

The international Organization for Standardization ISO

The International Organization for Standardization (ISO) was

founded in 1947 and is headquartered in Geneva, Switzerland. ISO

has three official languages: English, French, and Russian. Its


membership comprises national standards organizations, one from

each of 163 countries. Each member represents its country’s

standardization activities to ISO and, in turn, represents ISO back

to its own country.

ISO defines a standard as “a document that provides

requirements, specifications, guidelines or characteristics that

can be used consistently to ensure that materials, products,

processes and services are fit for their purpose.” Products and

services that follow ISO standards can be deemed to be high

quality, safe, and reliable. Businesses that use ISO standards can

save money and time. New markets can be stimulated around ISO

standards, as is true for effective standards in general.

Since its inception, ISO has published over 19,500 standards.

Perhaps the most familiar is the ISO 9000 family of quality

management standards. ISO’s standards deal with a wide range of

aspects of everyday life, including food, water, health care, cars,

climate change, energy efficiency, and sustainability. More than

250 technical committees produce the standards.

Some of the interesting ISO standards that pertain to

electronics include gas cylinder valve connections for use in the


microelectronics industry, radio frequency identification for item

management, a security framework for ubiquitous sensor networks,

and the determination of chemical emission rates from electronic

equipment.

American National Standards Institute ANSI

The American National Standards Institute (ANSI) was founded

in 1918 with its headquarters in Washington, D.C., and an

operational office in New York City. Its mission is “to enhance

both the global competitiveness of U.S. business and the U.S.

quality of life by promoting and facilitating voluntary consensus

standards and conformity assessment systems, and safeguarding their

integrity.”

This private, non-profit organization oversees the development

of voluntary, consensus-developed standards. It is dedicated to

strengthening the U.S. in the global marketplace while ensuring the

health and safety of consumers and the environment. Its annual

budget is a modest $22 million.

ANSI’s membership comprises companies, governmental agencies,

academic institutions, international bodies, other organizations,


and individuals. It represents the interests of more than 125,000

companies and 3.5 million professionals. Internationally, ANSI

officially represents the U.S. standardization activities in ISO

and IEC.

The institution offers standards for information Technology

and facilitates voluntary concession standards to maintain

integrity of the promulgated standards. Standards are coordinated

through panels and forums involved in homeland security, health

care, information technology, identity theft prevention and

nuclear energy. It plays a significant role in international

standardization and is sole member of the ISO and international

electro-technical commission. Some standards are developed in

accordance with the operational sector; for example, health care,

information technology panel for partnership between private and

public health sectors, international committee for information

technology standards accredited by ANSI. The organization does

not develop standards but represents the United States interest

in regional and international standardization activities while

overseeing conformity assessment activity that will promote

United States products, services and systems.


Evaluating the institutions

At the beginning of the answer to this question, I provided

the basis upon which communication technologies are developed. In

the synopsis of each of them, it is noted that there is a

symbiotic relationship through which each standard becomes

usefully applied to the development of communications technology.

IEEE is electronically charged to support the development of

standards in the others. The ANSI is a member of the ISO

representing the United States. The ISO adopts procedures that

are outstanding in order to promote acceptable standards that

have far reaching effects that reflect integrity and

acceptability. The ISO standards are very authoritative,

ethically developed. All three are concerned with interconnection

and communication of computers through standardization of

processes. Finally there is in practice a cooperative environment

that meets certain prerequisites and conditions. ANSI does not

develop standards but represents the United States interest in

regional and international standardization activities while

overseeing conformity assessment activity that will promote


United States products, services and systems. So, while ANSI

doesn’t directly develop standards, it oversees and accredits the

standards that come from approximately 200 standards-developing

organizations, government agencies, companies, and other groups.

ANSI’s approval of a standard helps ensure that the principles of

openness, consensus, and due process were followed during its

development. Standards from more than 180 standards publishers are

available through the ANSI store.

Conclusion

Thus, the work of all three organizations is complementary

and while IEEE does establish standards, the ISO is practically

the apex for the promotion of standards in Information

Technology. Most of the IEEE’s standards are accredited by ANSI.

Additionally, there are many standards-developing organizations

accredited by ANSI whose standards affect the electronics industry.


Taking a position on the need for a federal regulating body of

standards such as NIST

The thrust of the question rests on the need for a federal

regulating body of standards in similar line of NIST. My approach

will first consider the purpose of creating the organization,

secondly its work and thirdly, how that satisfies the need for

which it was established. I intend thereafter to consider the

possibility for an alternative to its work.

NIST was established with a mission to promote US innovation

and industrial competitiveness through advancement of measurement

science, standards and technology in ways that enhance economic

security as well as improved quality of life for American

citizenry. Its work is highly sensitive, operating under

confidentiality and integrity, such that it hardly shares

information with the public. NIST information has included those

exempt from disclosure by statute, trade secrets, commercial or

finance information that is privileged. In its work, the

organization conducts world class research in collaboration with

the industrial sector to advance technical infrastructure and

assist companies to improve production and services; it offers


technical and business assistance to smaller manufacturers in

order to create and retain jobs, make profits and achieve

quality. The organization also promotes a scheme to encourage

performance excellence among manufacturers, educational

institutions, health care providers, non-profit organizations;

conducts outreach programs, provide awards for excellence,

provides grants within a technical innovation program.

It is a current consideration that NIST has grown too large

over the years, employing, 3000 scientists, engineers,

technicians and support and administration staff. The

organization it is understood, hosts 2700 associates from

academia, industry and other government agencies. The

organization also is partner to over 1300 manufacturing

specialists in over 400 service locations. As a government

agency, NIST is well endowed with the prestige and latitude in

fulfilling its mission, operating in almost every area of

economic development and every sector. It is therefore meeting

the needs that define its establishment.

Against the above comes the question whether there is a need

for an alternative organization either to fulfill the same


objectives or complimentary to the NIST. In an article by Yesim

Yilmaz (Cato Policy Analysis), it was the view of the writer

that: (a) NIST takes up too much time, money and resources to

deliver results: Its programs are widely dispersed and there is

hardly any limit to its spending. While government budget

supports every aspect of its work spending is from taxpayer

funds. (b) He further argues that regulation is not necessarily a

government reserve but can be usefully assigned to private third

party organizations that can oversee operations, set standards,

establish certifications etc. NIST can then focus on more

researches while the independent third parties set the

operational details and establish standards in complimentary

patterns to be established. (c)The funds now made available to

NIST can be used to provide incentives to private researchers who

will be encouraged to produce results. (d) He further indicated

that much of the regulation in the US economy is privately

undertaken, concluding that this direction should be maintained.

(e) He maintained that the cost of government regulations through

its agencies is escalating because it is inclusive of employee


costs, compliance, and risk management costs. In addition, there

are hidden costs that are difficult to quantify.

In summary, there are suggestions that there are numerous

government regulatory bodies in the US economy and that more

specializations should be encouraged with incentives to

independent third party agencies. The costs/ benefits of

regulations have been proven over time to be effective under

independent third party regulating agencies rather than

governmental standard regulators. There is therefore a need to

recognize and understand important activities that effectively

exist without government direction.

It is argued that monitoring and certification should be

controlled by the actors in the regulatory systems to mandate the

rules, standards and regulations. Federal government should

therefore grant this to third party regulatory agencies with the

related capacity. The need for competition should be encouraged

between the governmental agency and third party regulatory

agencies, as well as among independent third parties

In conclusion, the programs of NIST are rich, widely

dispersed albeit, pursuing its mission. The need for


confidentiality and secrecy in areas of national security also

dictate the need for its existence. Thus, there are vital signs

associated with a need for a federal regulatory body of standards

such as NIST. However, the operation of its regulatory

responsibilities may have been overstretched creating the need

for consideration of an alternative. Its work is too widespread,

covering a large area of economic development and national

security. Its budget of over $1 billion in 2012 spent in science

and technical research, industrial technology services and

construction of research facilities may be spread to include

independent third party programs. The facts speak clearly on

whether there is a need for federal regulatory body of standards

such as NIST. However further researches should be conducted in

specific areas relating to planning and management of the

direction of NIST and its mission in order to provide clear bases

for determination of that need. It is quite clear though that a

clear mix of paths between the NIST and third party regulatory

bodies may be necessary.


References

IEEE 802 / IETF: RFC Archives; Relationship modified March 20,

2006

IEEE: Role of Information and Communication Technology;

Conference publication, Information Science & Engineering;

December 2009

Internet Society: Getting started in the IETF

NIST Publication (Public and Business Affairs Office): Obama

administration budget request for NIST, February 14, 2011;

includes critical science and technology investment to advance US

innovation and boost economic recovery

National Institute of Standard and Technology. (2013). Computer Security Risk Management.

from http://www.csrc.nist.gov/publications

Yesin Yilmaz, (1998); private regulation; a real alternative for

regulatory reform; Cato policyanalysis No.303, April 1998

http://www.csrc.nist.gov/publications

CIS 505 assignment 1 standards research

Documents

Transcript of CIS 505 assignment 1 standards research