Grading for this assignment will be based on answer quality, log.docx

Grading for this assignment will be based on answer quality,
logic/organization of the paper, and language and writing skills,
using the following rubric.
Points: 80
Assignment 1: Standards Research
Criteria
Unacceptable
Below 70% F
Fair
70-79% C
Proficient
80-89% B
Exemplary
90-100% A
1. Select one (1) of the working groups in the IETF or IEEE and
briefly summarize what this group is working on.
Weight: 5%
Did not submit or incompletely selected one (1) of the working
groups in the IETF or IEEE and did not submit or incompletely
summarized what this group is working on.
Partially selected one (1) of the working groups in the IETF or
IEEE and partially summarized what this group is working on.
Satisfactorily selected one (1) of the working groups in the
IETF or IEEE and satisfactorily summarized what this group is
working on.
Thoroughly selected one (1) of the working groups in the IETF
or IEEE and thoroughly summarized what this group is working
on.
2. Justify the need of the IEEE 802 standard used in networking.
Weight: 25%
Did not submit or incompletely justified the need of the IEEE
802 standard used in networking.
Partially justified the need of the IEEE 802 standard used in

networking.
Satisfactorily justified the need of the IEEE 802 standard used
in networking.
Thoroughly justified the need of the IEEE 802 standard used in
networking.
3. Evaluate the three (3) standard organizations including IEEE,
ISO, and ANSI to determine the most important for
communication technology.
Weight: 30%
Did not submit or incompletely evaluated the three (3) standard
organizations including IEEE, ISO, and ANSI to determine the
most important for communication technology.
Partially evaluated the three (3) standard organizations
including IEEE, ISO, and ANSI to determine the most important
for communication technology.
Satisfactorily evaluated the three (3) standard organizations
Thoroughly evaluated the three (3) standard organizations
4. Take a position on the need for a federal regulating body of
standards such as NIST. Include supporting evidence to justify
your opinion.
Weight: 25%
Did not submit or incompletely took a position on the need for a
federal regulating body of standards such as NIST. Did not
submit or incompletely included supporting evidence to justify
your opinion.
Partially took a position on the need for a federal regulating
body of standards such as NIST. Partially included supporting
evidence to justify your opinion.
Satisfactorily took a position on the need for a federal
regulating body of standards such as NIST. Satisfactorily
included supporting evidence to justify your opinion.
Thoroughly took a position on the need for a federal regulating

body of standards such as NIST. Thoroughly included
supporting evidence to justify your opinion.
5. 3 references
Weight 5%
No references provided
Does not meet the required number of references; some or all
references poor quality choices.
Meets number of required references; all references high quality
choices.
Exceeds number of required references; all references high
quality choices.
6. Clarity, writing mechanics, and formatting requirements
Weight: 10%
More than 6 errors present
5-6 errors present
3-4 errors present
0-2 errors present
AA P P E N D I X P P E N D I X BB
SS T A N D A R D S T A N D A R D S OO R G A N I Z A T I
O N SR G A N I Z A T I O N S
William Stallings
Copyright 2009

B.1 THE IMPORTANCE OF STANDARDS
..........................................................................2
B.2 STANDARDS AND REGULATION
...............................................................................3
B.3 STANDARDS-SETTING ORGANIZATIONS
................................................................4
Internet Standards and the Internet Society
...................................................................4
The Internet Organizations and RFC Publication
..............................................5
The Standardization Process
..............................................................................6
Internet Standards Categories
............................................................................7
Other RFC Types
...............................................................................................
8
The International Telecommunication Union
................................................................8
ITU Radio Communication Sector
....................................................................8
ITU Telecommunication Standardization
Sector...............................................9
Schedule
...............................................................................................

............10
IEEE 802 Committee
...............................................................................................
....10
ATM Forum
...............................................................................................
..................12
The International Organization for Standardization
....................................................13
Supplement to
Business Data Communications, Sixth Edition
Prentice Hall 2009
ISBN: 0136067417
http://williamstallings.com/BDC/BDC6e.html
B-2
An important concept that recurs frequently in this book is

standards. This appendix provides
some background on the nature and relevance of standards and
looks at the key organizations
involved in developing standards for networking and
communications.
B.1 THE IMPORTANCE OF STANDARDS
It has long been accepted in the telecommunications industry
that standards are required to
govern the physical, electrical, and procedural characteristics of
communication equipment. In
the past, this view has not been embraced by the computer
industry. Whereas communication
equipment vendors recognize that their equipment will generally
interface to and communicate
with other vendors' equipment, computer vendors have
traditionally attempted to monopolize
their customers. The proliferation of computers and distributed
processing has made that an
untenable position. Computers from different vendors must
communicate with each other and,
with the ongoing evolution of protocol standards, customers
will no longer accept special-

purpose protocol conversion software development. The result
is that standards now permeate all
the areas of technology discussed in this book.
There are a number of advantages and disadvantages to the
standards-making process. The
principal advantages of standards are:
• A standard assures that there will be a large market for a
particular piece of equipment or
software. This encourages mass production and, in some cases,
the use of large-scale-
integration (LSI) or very-large-scale-integration (VLSI)
techniques, resulting in lower
costs.
• A standard allows products from multiple vendors to
communicate, giving the purchaser
more flexibility in equipment selection and use.
The principal disadvantages of standards are:
• A standard tends to freeze the technology. By the time a
standard is developed, subjected to
review and compromise, and promulgated, more efficient
techniques are possible.

B-3
• There are multiple standards for the same thing. This is not a
disadvantage of standards per
se, but of the current way things are done. Fortunately, in recent
years the various
standards-making organizations have begun to cooperate more
closely. Nevertheless, there
are still areas where multiple conflicting standards exist.
B.2 STANDARDS AND REGULATION
It is helpful for the reader to distinguish three concepts:
• Voluntary standards
• Regulatory standards
• Regulatory use of voluntary standards
Voluntary standards are developed by standards-making
organizations, such as those
described in the next section. They are voluntary in that the
existence of the standard does not

compel its use. That is, manufacturers voluntarily implement a
product that conforms to a
standard if they perceive a benefit to themselves; there is no
legal requirement to conform. These
standards are also voluntary in the sense that they are developed
by volunteers who are not paid
for their efforts by the standards-making organization that
administers the process. These
volunteers are generally employees of interested organizations,
such as manufacturers and
government agencies.
Voluntary standards work because they are generally developed
on the basis of broad
consensus and because the customer demand for standard
products encourages the
implementation of these standards by the vendors.
In contrast, a regulatory standard is developed by a government
regulatory agency to meet
some public objective, such as economic, health, and safety
objectives. These standards have the
force of regulation behind them and must be met by providers in
the context in which the
regulations apply. Familiar examples of regulatory standards are
in areas such as fire codes and

health codes. But regulations can apply to a wide variety of
products, including those related to
computers and communications. For example, the Federal
Communications Commission
regulates electromagnetic emissions.
B-4
A relatively new, or at least newly prevalent, phenomenon is
the regulatory use of
voluntary standards. A typical example of this is a regulation
that requires that the government
purchase of a product be limited to those that conform to some
referenced set of voluntary
standards. This approach has a number of benefits:
• It reduces the rule-making burden on government agencies.
• It encourages cooperation between government and standards
organizations to produce
standards of broad applicability.
• It reduces the variety of standards that providers must meet.
B.3 STANDARDS-SETTING ORGANIZATIONS

Various organizations have been involved in the development of
standards related to data and
computer communications. The remainder of this document
provides an overview of some of the
most important of these organizations:
• Internet Society
• ITU
• IEEE 802
• ATM Forum
• ISO
Internet Standards and the Internet Society
Many of the protocols that make up the TCP/IP protocol suite
have been standardized or are in
the process of standardization. By universal agreement, an
organization known as the Internet
Society is responsible for the development and publication of
these standards. The Internet
Society is a professional membership organization that oversees
a number of boards and task

forces involved in Internet development and standardization.
This section provides a brief description of the way in which
standards for the TCP/IP
protocol suite are developed.
B-5
THE INTERNET ORGANIZATIONS AND RFC PUBLICATION
The Internet Society is the
coordinating committee for Internet design, engineering, and
management. Areas covered
include the operation of the Internet itself and the
standardization of protocols used by end
systems on the Internet for interoperability. Three organizations
under the Internet Society are
responsible for the actual work of standards development and
publication:
• Internet Architecture Board (IAB): Responsible for defining
the overall architecture of
the Internet, providing guidance and broad direction to the IETF
• Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF): The protocol
engineering and development

arm of the Internet
• Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG): Responsible for
technical management of
IETF activities and the Internet standards process
Working groups chartered by the IETF carry out the actual
development of new standards
and protocols for the Internet. Membership in a working group
is voluntary; any interested party
may participate. During the development of a specification, a
working group will make a draft
version of the document available as an Internet Draft, which is
placed in the IETF's "Internet
Drafts" online directory. The document may remain as an
Internet Draft for up to six months,
and interested parties may review and comment on the draft.
During that time, the IESG may
approve publication of the draft as an RFC (Request for
Comment). If the draft has not
progressed to the status of an RFC during the six-month period,
it is withdrawn from the
directory. The working group may subsequently publish a
revised version of the draft.
The IETF is responsible for publishing the RFCs, with approval

of the IESG. The RFCs are
the working notes of the Internet research and development
community. A document in this
series may be on essentially any topic related to computer
communications and may be anything
from a meeting report to the specification of a standard.
The work of the IETF is divided into eight areas, each with an
area director and each
composed of numerous working groups. Table B.1 shows the
IETF areas and their focus.
B-6
Table B.1 IETF Areas
IETF Area Theme Example Working Groups
General IETF processes and procedures Policy Framework
Process for Organization of
Internet Standards
Applications Internet applications Web-related protocols
(HTTP)
EDI-Internet integration

LDAP
Internet Internet infrastructure IPv6
PPP extensions
Operations and
management
Standards and definitions for
network operations
SNMPv3
Remote Network Monitoring
Routing Protocols and management for
routing information
multicast routing
OSPF
QoS routing
Security Security protocols and
technologies
Kerberos
IPSec

X.509
S/MIME
TLS
Transport Transport layer protocols Differentiated services
IP telephony
NFS
RSVP
THE STANDARDIZATION PROCESS The decision of which
RFCs become Internet
standards is made by the IESG, on the recommendation of the
IETF. To become a standard, a
specification must meet the following criteria:
• Be stable and well understood
• Be technically competent
• Have multiple, independent, and interoperable
implementations with substantial
operational experience
• Enjoy significant public support

• Be recognizably useful in some or all parts of the Internet
B-7
The key difference between these criteria and those used for
international standards from
ITU is the emphasis here on operational experience.
The left-hand side of Figure B.1 shows the series of steps,
called the standards track, that a
specification goes through to become a standard; this process is
defined in RFC 2026. The steps
involve increasing amounts of scrutiny and testing. At each
step, the IETF must make a
recommendation for advancement of the protocol, and the IESG
must ratify it. The process
begins when the IESG approves the publication of an Internet
Draft document as an RFC with
the status of Proposed Standard.
The white boxes in the diagram represent temporary states,
which should be occupied for
the minimum practical time. However, a document must remain
a Proposed Standard for at least

six months and a Draft Standard for at least four months to
allow time for review and comment.
The shaded boxes represent long-term states that may be
occupied for years.
For a specification to be advanced to Draft Standard status,
there must be at least two
independent and interoperable implementations from which
adequate operational experience has
been obtained.
After significant implementation and operational experience
has been obtained, a
specification may be elevated to Internet Standard. At this
point, the Specification is assigned an
STD number as well as an RFC number.
Finally, when a protocol becomes obsolete, it is assigned to the
Historic state.
INTERNET STANDARDS CATEGORIES
All Internet standards fall into one of two categories:
• Technical specification (TS): A TS defines a protocol, service,
procedure, convention, or
format. The bulk of the Internet standards are TSs.

• Applicability statement (AS): An AS specifies how, and under
what circumstances, one
or more TSs may be applied to support a particular Internet
capability. An AS identifies
one or more TSs that are relevant to the capability, and may
specify values or ranges for
particular parameters associated with a TS or functional subsets
of a TS that are relevant
for the capability.
B-8
OTHER RFC TYPES There are numerous RFCs that are not
destined to become Internet
standards. Some RFCs standardize the results of community
deliberations about statements of
principle or conclusions about what is the best way to perform
some operations or IETF process
function. Such RFCs are designated as Best Current Practice
(BCP). Approval of BCPs follows
essentially the same process for approval of Proposed
Standards. Unlike standards-track

documents, there is not a three-stage process for BCPs; a BCP
goes from Internet draft status to
approved BCP in one step.
A protocol or other specification that is not considered ready
for standardization may be
published as an Experimental RFC. After further work, the
specification may be resubmitted. If
the specification is generally stable, has resolved known design
choices, is believed to be well
understood, has received significant community review, and
appears to enjoy enough community
interest to be considered valuable, then the RFC will be
designated a Proposed Standard.
Finally, an Informational Specification is published for the
general information of the
Internet community.
The International Telecommunication Union
The International Telecommunication Union (ITU) is a United
Nations specialized agency.
Hence the members of ITU-T are governments. The U.S.
representation is housed in the
Department of State. The charter of the ITU is that it "is
responsible for studying technical,

operating, and tariff questions and issuing Recommendations on
them with a view to
standardizing telecommunications on a worldwide basis." Its
primary objective is to standardize,
to the extent necessary, techniques and operations in
telecommunications to achieve end-to-end
compatibility of international telecommunication connections,
regardless of the countries of
origin and destination.
ITU RADIO COMMUNICATION SECTOR The ITU
Radiocommunication (ITU-R)
Sector was created on 1 March 1993 and comprises the former
CCIR and IFRB (founded 1927
and 1947, respectively). ITU-R is responsible for all ITU's work
in the field of radio
communications. The main activities of ITU-R are:
B-9
• Develop draft ITU-R Recommendations on the technical
characteristics of, and operational

procedures for, radiocommunication services and systems.
• Compile Handbooks on spectrum management and emerging
radiocommunication services
and systems.
ITU-R is organized into the following study groups:
• SG1 Spectrum management
• SG3 Radiowave propagation
• SG 4 Fixed-satellite service
• SG 6 Broadcasting service (terrestrial and satellite)
• SG 7 Science services
• SG 8 Mobile, radiodetermination, amateur and related satellite
services
• SG 9 Fixed service
• SC Special Committee on Regulatory/Procedural Matters
• CCV Coordination Committee for Vocabulary
• CPM Conference Preparatory Meeting
ITU TELECOMMUNICATION STANDARDIZATION SECTOR
The ITU-T was created on 1

March 1993 as one consequence of a reform process within the
ITU. It replaces the International
Telegraph and Telephone Consultative Committee (CCITT),
which had essentially the same
charter and objectives as the new ITU-T. The ITU-T fulfils the
purposes of the ITU relating to
telecommunications standardization by studying technical,
operating and tariff questions and
adopting Recommendations on them with a view to
standardizing telecommunications on a
worldwide basis.
ITU-T is organized into 14 study groups that prepare
Recommendations, numbered as
follows:
2. Network and service operation
3. Tariff and accounting principles
4. Telecommunications management network and network
maintenance
B-10
5. Protection against electromagnetic environment effects

6. Outside plant
9. Integrated broadband cable networks and television and
sound transmission
11. Signaling requirements and protocols
12. Performance and quality of service
13. Next generation networks
15. Optical and other transport networks infrastructures
16. Multimedia terminals, systems, and applications
17. Security, languages, and telecommunication software
19. Mobile telecommunications networks
SCHEDULE Work within ITU-R and ITU-T is conducted in
four-year cycles. Every
four years, a World Telecommunications Standardization
Conference is held. The work program
for the next four years is established at the assembly in the form
of questions submitted by the
various study groups, based on requests made to the study
groups by their members. The
conference assesses the questions, reviews the scope of the
study groups, creates new or
abolishes existing study groups, and allocates questions to

them.
Based on these questions, each study group prepares draft
Recommendations. A draft
Recommendation may be submitted to the next conference, four
years hence, for approval.
Increasingly, however, Recommendations are approved when
they are ready, without having to
wait for the end of the four-year study period. This accelerated
procedure was adopted after the
study period that ended in 1988. Thus, 1988 was the last time
that a large batch of documents
was published at one time as a set of Recommendations.
IEEE 802 Committee
The key to the development of the LAN market is the
availability of a low-cost interface. The
cost to connect equipment to a LAN must be much less than the
cost of the equipment alone.
This requirement, plus the complexity of the LAN logic,
dictates a solution based on the use of
chips and very-large-scale integration (VLSI). However, chip
manufacturers will be reluctant to
commit the necessary resources unless there is a high-volume
market. A widely accepted LAN

B-11
standard assures that volume and also enables equipment from a
variety of manufacturers to
intercommunicate. This is the rationale of the IEEE 802
committee.
The committee issued a set of standards, which were adopted in
1985 by the American
National Standards Institute (ANSI) as American National
Standards. The standards were
subsequently revised and reissued as international standards by
the International Organization for
Standardization (ISO) in 1987, with the designation ISO 8802.
Since then, the IEEE 802
committee has continued to revise and extend the standards,
which are ultimately then adopted
by ISO.
The committee quickly reached two conclusions. First, the task
of communication across
the local network is sufficiently complex that it needs to be
broken up into more manageable
subtasks. Accordingly, the standards are organized as a three-
layer protocol hierarchy: Logical

Link Control (LLC), medium access control (MAC), and
physical.
Second, no single technical approach will satisfy all
requirements. The second conclusion
was reluctantly reached when it became apparent that no single
standard would satisfy all
committee participants. There was support for various
topologies, access methods, and
transmission media. The response of the committee was to
standardize all serious proposals
rather than to attempt to settle on just one. The current state of
standardization is reflected by the
various working groups in IEEE 802 and the work that each is
doing (Table B.2)
B-12
Table B.2 IEEE 802 Active Working Groups
Number Name Charter
802.1 Higher Layer LAN Protocols Standards and recommended
practices for:

802 LAN/MAN architecture, internetworking
among 802 LANs, MANs, and other wide
area networks, 802 overall network
management, and protocol layers above the
MAC and LLC layers.
802.3 Ethernet Standards for CSMA/CD (Ethernet) based
LANs
802.11 Wireless LAN Standards for wireless LANs
802.15 Wireless Personal Area
Networks
Personal area network standards for short
distance wireless networks
802.16 Broadband Wireless Access Standards for broadband
wireless access
802.17 Resilient Packet Ring Standards for RPR LAN/MAN for
rates up to
many gigabits per second
802.18 Radio Regulatory TAG Monitor regulations that may
affect 802.11,

802.15, and 802.16
802.19 Coexistence TAG
802.20 Mobile Broadband Wireless
Access
Standards for mobile broadband wireless
access
802.21 Media Independent Handoff Standards to enable
handover and
interoperability between heterogeneous
network types including both 802 and non
802 networks
802.22 Wireless Regional Area
Networks
Standards for regional wireless networks
using unused frequencies in the broadcast
television band
ATM Forum
The ITU-T is responsible, among other areas, for the
development of standards for Broadband

ISDN (B-ISDN), which is based on ATM technology. The ATM
Forum also plays a crucial role
in the development of ATM standards. In the ITU-T and the
constituent member bodies from the
participating countries, the process of developing standards is
characterized by wide participation
by government, users, and industry representatives, and by
consensus decision-making. This
process can be quite time consuming. While ITU-T has
streamlined its efforts, the delays
involved in developing standards are particularly significant in
the area of B-ISDN, which is
B-13
dominated by the rapidly evolving asynchronous transfer mode
(ATM) technology. Because of
the strong level of interest in ATM technology, the ATM Forum
was created with the goal of
accelerating the development of ATM standards. The ATM
Forum is an international nonprofit
organization, funded by over 600 member companies. End users
are also represented within the
Forum.

The ATM Forum has seen more active participation from
computing vendors than has been
the case in ITU-T. Because the forum works on the basis of
majority rule rather than consensus,
it has been able to move rapidly to define some of the needed
details for the implementation of
ATM. This effort, in turn, has fed into the ITU-T
standardization effort.
The International Organization for Standardization
The International Organization for Standardization, or ISO,
1
is an international agency for the
development of standards on a wide range of subjects. It is a
voluntary, nontreaty organization
whose members are designated standards bodies of participating
nations, plus nonvoting
observer organizations. Although ISO is not a governmental
body, more than 70 percent of ISO
member bodies are governmental standards institutions or
organizations incorporated by public
law. Most of the remainder have close links with the public
administrations in their own
countries. The United States member body is the American

National Standards Institute.
ISO was founded in 1946 and has issued more than 12,000
standards in a broad range of
areas. Its purpose is to promote the development of
standardization and related activities to
facilitate international exchange of goods and services and to
develop cooperation in the sphere
of intellectual, scientific, technological, and economic activity.
Standards have been issued to
cover everything from screw threads to solar energy. One
important area of standardization deals
with the Open Systems Interconnection (OSI) communications
architecture and the standards at
each layer of the OSI architecture.
In the areas of data communications and networking, ISO
standards are actually developed
in a joint effort with another standards body, the International
Electrotechnical Commission
(IEC). IEC is primarily concerned with electrical and electronic
engineering standards. In the
1
ISO is not an acronym (in which case it would be IOS), but a
word, derived from the Greek

isos, meaning "equal."
B-14
area of information technology, the interests of the two groups
overlap, with IEC emphasizing
hardware and ISO focusing on software. In 1987, the two groups
formed the Joint Technical
Committee 1 (JTC 1). This committee has the responsibility of
developing the documents that
ultimately become ISO (and IEC) standards in the area of
information technology.
The development of an ISO standard from first proposal to
actual publication of the
standard follows a six-step process. The objective is to ensure
that the final result is acceptable to
as many countries as possible. Briefly, the steps are:
1. Proposal stage: A new work item is assigned to the
appropriate technical committee, and
within that technical committee, to the appropriate working
group.
2. Prepatory stage: The working group prepares a working
draft. Successive working

drafts may be considered until the working group is satisfied
that it has developed the
best technical solution to the problem being addressed. At this
stage, the draft is
forwarded to the working group's parent committee for the
consensus-building phase.
3. Committee stage: As soon as a first committee draft is
available, it is registered by the
ISO Central Secretariat. It is distributed among interested
members for balloting and
technical comment. Successive committee drafts may be
considered until consensus is
reached on the technical content. Once consensus has been
attained, the text is finalized
for submission as a Draft International Standard (DIS).
4. Enquiry stage: The DIS is circulated to all ISO member
bodies by the ISO Central
Secretariat for voting and comment within a period of five
months. It is approved for
submission as a Final Draft International Standard (FDIS) if a
two-thirds majority is in
favor and not more than one-quarter of the total number of votes
cast are negative. If the
approval criteria are not met, the text is returned to the

originating working group for
further study and a revised document will again be circulated
for voting and comment as
a DIS.
5. Approval stage: The Final Draft International Standard
(FDIS) is circulated to all ISO
member bodies by the ISO Central Secretariat for a final yes/no
vote within a period of
two months. If technical comments are received during this
period, they are no longer
considered at this stage, but registered for consideration during
a future revision of the
International Standard. The text is approved as an International
Standard if a two-thirds
B-15
majority is in favor and not more than one-quarter of the total
number of votes cast are
negative. If these approval criteria are not met, the standard is
referred back to the
originating working group for reconsideration in the light of the
technical reasons
submitted in support of the negative votes received.

6. Publication stage: Once a Final Draft International Standard
has been approved, only
minor editorial changes, if and where necessary, are introduced
into the final text. The
final text is sent to the ISO Central Secretariat, which publishes
the International
Standard.
The process of issuing an ISO standard can be a slow one.
Certainly, it would be desirable
to issue standards as quickly as the technical details can be
worked out, but ISO must ensure that
the standard will receive widespread support.
Best Current
Practice
Proposed
Standard
Draft
Standard
Internet

Standard
Figure B.1 Internet RFC Publication Process
Historic
Internet
Draft
Experimental Informational

Grading for this assignment will be based on answer quality, log.docx

More Related Content

Similar to Grading for this assignment will be based on answer quality, log.docx (20)

More from whittemorelucilla (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

Grading for this assignment will be based on answer quality, log.docx