Interoperability and Standards - Cisco...Manager and TelePresence and competitive products from other vendors), and desktop or enterprise productivity applications (such as Microsoft

April 18, 2012

Cisco’s Commitment to

Interoperability and Standards

White Paper

Authors: Laurent Philonenko, VP/GMClients & Mobility

Håkon Dahle, CTG Office of the CTO

Tormod Ree & Tom Doria, CTG Field Enablement

Contents

© 2012 Cisco and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved. Exclusively for use by Cisco Channel Partners and Cisco Customers only. 2 | P a g e

Contents

Table of Contents 2

1 Executive Summary 4

2 Why do we need interoperability? 5

3 What does the industry need to do? 6

4 Demystifying the World of Standards Development Organizations and Industry Forums 8

4.1 What is a Standards Development Organization? …………..……………………………………………………………..8

4.1.1 Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers…………………………………………………………………..8

4.1.2 Internet Engineering Task Force ................................................................................. 9

4.1.3 International Telecommunication Union ...................................................................... 9

4.1.4 International Organization for Standardization ........................................................... 10

4.1.5 International Electrotechnical Commission ................................................................ 10

4.2 The Process of Creating a Standard ……………………………………………………………………………………………..10

4.3 What are Industry Forums and Testing Organizations? ………………………………………………………………..11

4.3.1 International Multimedia Telecommunications Consortium.......................................... 11

4.3.2 Wi-Fi Alliance......................................................................................................... 12

4.3.3 SIP Forum ............................................................................................................. 12

4.3.4 Unified Communication Interoperability Forum .......................................................... 12

5 What is Cisco doing? 14

6 Cisco’s Leadership in Standards Development Organizations & Industry Forums 15

7 Concluding Thoughts 16

8 Appendix A: Cisco’s Participation in Standards Development Organizations & Forums 17

8.1 3GPP………………………………………………………………..…………………………………………………………………………..17

8.2 ATIS ……………………………………………………………………………..………………………………………………………………17

8.3 Cloud Security Alliance ………………………………………………….…………………………………………………………….18

Contents


8.4 DMTF ……………………………………………………………………………………………………….…………………………...18

8.5 FemtoForum ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….…18

8.6 GSMA …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….………19

8.7 Homeplug Alliance………………………………………………………………………………………………….………………19

8.8 IEEE ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….……………….19

8.8.1 Wireless Technology………………………………………………………………………………….……………..…19

8.9 IETF…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………19

8.9.1 IETF Leadership……………………………………………………………………………………………………………19

8.9.2 IETF Applications Area……………………………………………………………………………………..………….19

8.9.7 IETF Security Area……………………………………………………………………….………………………………22

8.10 ISO…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….22

8.11 IMTC …………………………………….…………………………………………………………………………………………..22

8.12 ITU…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….23

8.12.1 ITU NGN……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..23

8.12.2 ITU IP Version 6…………..……………………………………………………………………………………………..23

8.12.3 ITU Cloud .………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….23

8.12.4 ITU Video .………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….23

8.13 NIST Smart Grid .……………………………………………………………………………………………………………….23

8.14 SNIA .…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………24

8.15 TM Forum .………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..24

8.16 Wi-Fi Alliance .…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..24

8.17 WiGIG Alliance ..………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..24

8.18 Wireless Broadband Alliance ….…………………………………………………………………………………………25

8.19 XSF …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..25

Executive Summary


1 Executive Summary As customers continue to desire the ability to select “best of breed” technology to support their business

operations, technology vendors have been driven to provide solutions that are truly interoperable.

However, not all technology vendors approach interoperability in the same way. This has never been

more evident than in today’s world of Unified Communications. To arbitrate the differences between

vendors in their approaches toward achieving interoperability, Standards Development Organizations

such as the IEEE, IETF, ITU as well as other industry organizations were created. These organizations

serve to provide the important venues for discussion that bring competing vendors together with

customers, academic institutions, and other industry thought leadership. The intent then of these

organizations is that within their working groups, mutually agreed upon technical approaches for

resolving vendor interoperability issues could be reached through the creation of common sets of

standards. Great progress toward achieving the goals of multi-vendor interoperability has come out of

the hard work and leadership that Cisco and others have contributed to these organizations’

standardizations efforts.

Yet in a highly competitive market, some vendors have sought to seek market advantage by attempting

to discredit the significant work that Cisco and others have made toward achieving multi-vendor

interoperability. As an example, it has been suggested that Cisco’s lack of participation in certain

industry forums like UCIF are limiting the forward progress of the industry toward achieving true Unified

Communications interoperability. Clearly, these comments are not true and only serve to undermine the

spirit of vendor cooperation that has been achieved in Standards Development Organizations (SDOs) like

the IETF.

With these thoughts in mind, this white paper attempts to explain the true value of interoperability; the

real work required to achieve it; and Cisco’s involvement and dedication to that work.

Why do we n eed interoperability?


2 Why do we need interoperability? At its heart, interoperability is about enabling the free flow of communication across boundaries –

whether those boundaries are geographical, across firewalls between businesses and their ecosystems

or customers. Customers want to be able to share information quickly and easily across different

systems from multiple vendors.

Customers also stress the need for protecting their investments in existing systems and extending their

capabilities to new types of work scenarios. These systems include infrastructure (such as Active

Directory or Exchange or Notes), voice and video systems (such as Cisco’s Unified Communications

Manager and TelePresence and competitive products from other vendors), and desktop or enterprise

productivity applications (such as Microsoft Office, IBM Lotus, SAP, Salesforce.com and others). They

must work within heterogeneous environments and accommodate new solutions as they come to

market.

But that two systems work together is not enough. They must come together as seamlessly as possible

to ensure an uncompromised user experience.

Finally, this all needs to happen across platforms and devices, particularly as we move toward a post -PC

era of many different devices -- from smart phones and tablets in the field to desktop computers and

immersive room-based systems. These devices need to be blended into customers’ existing collaboration

environments while providing a consistent and compelling user experience.

This is what customers want!

What does the industry need to do?


3 What does the industry need to do? A critical part of the answer is for vendors to share a commitment to interoperability, and to understand

and acknowledge how critical interoperability is to customers and the industry. Vendors express

commitment by:

facilitating great customer experiences across systems

disclosing interface information about their products

participating in standards development

contributing to open source programs

Once vendors commit to interoperability, the next question is how to achieve it. The best way is the use

of standards created through open, accessible development processes. Standards should not be

encumbered by unreasonable requirements regarding intellectual property or the use of proprietary

products as the starting point. They should be ratified democratically by recognized industry bodies, and

above all should allow developers to innovate beyond the standard to provide a great user experience,

while preserving interoperability. Such standards exist today. Some examples of these important

building blocks of communications and collaboration interoperability are:

H.264 for video

SIP and H.323 for call control signaling

XMPP for messaging and presence

TIP for TelePresence screen management

BFCP for screen sharing

CTI for customer collaboration

This is by no means an exhaustive list of the important standards in this space. There also is SMTP and

IMAP for email, X.500 for directory and many others.

Some important areas are not yet fully covered by standards today, such as conferencing call control. In

other areas, such as presence and instant messaging federation, standards are incomplete and different

interpretations might complicate implementations. Yet in others, such as firewall traversal, several

standards exist, and the choice between them should be left to the customer, depending on his or her

preferences and use patterns. New standardization areas are emerging, such as WebRTC and HTML5,

which aim at making browsers fully fledged communications endpoints and bringing voice and video

interoperability to a broader audience.

Although the work of defining a standard is important, its implementation in any given solution and the

resulting user experience that is fundamental for its successful adoption. A key notion here is native

implementation. A product may implement a particular standard “natively” – i.e. embed the technology

inside the product, or it may rely on an external device to act as a “translator” or gateway in order to

become interoperable with other products that implement this particular standard. Native

What does the industry need to do?


implementation is necessary for attaining high performance at a low cost. Without native

implementation, customers have to go through adapters, transcoders, middleware, mediators,

converters, gateways and other software and hardware that add cost to the solution. In addition, non-

native implementations of standards can also result in more parts to configure and manage, more layers

of software to traverse and more sources of latency. These issues ultimately degraded user experience

and can block successful adoption of a standard.

In some circumstances, the use of gateways is required to achieve interoperability. For example, a

gateway that supports the ability to interoperate with Microsoft’s proprietary RT-V video products with

standards based H.264 (AVC) video endpoints. However, when possible, the use of gateways should be

avoided, since they add complexity and cost and may impact the user experience with respect to latency

and quality.

For any technology company to truly execute on its commitment to interoperability, it is critical for that

company to actively participate and provide leadership in Standards Development Organizations and

industry forums. It is through the collaborative work that emerges from these organizations that

standards are born. However, for both technology companies and customers alike, the world of

Standards Development Organizations, industry forums, and testing organizations can be a confusing

and mystifying world to navigate.

Demystifying the World of Standards Development Organizations and Industry Forums


4 Demystifying the World of Standards Development

Organizations and Industry Forums As the computing and telecommunications industry’s needs for standardization has grown over the

years, so has the number of Standards Development Organizations, industry forums, and testing

organizations that influence standards. Today, the plethora of organizations that affect, influence, or

write standards can often be confusing to customers as they consider what standards to evaluate and

which industry body’s recommendations to follow.

To help provide some clarity around these issues, the following paragraphs will attempt to explain the

importance of each organization and their roles in shaping industry standards.

4.1 What is a Standards Development Organization? What differentiates a Standards Development Organization from an Industry Forum or testing

organization is that it is in a Standards Development Organization that the actual work of formulating,

drafting, and publishing a standard is accomplished. The individuals that compose the memberships of a

Standards Development Organization often may vary. However, membership is typically composed of

technical representatives from equipment manufacturers; service providers; and thought leadership

from both the academic and end user communities. Although these Standards Development

Organizations members may consist of vendor representatives from competing companies, all Standards

Development Organizations strive to be vendor agnostic.

There are multiple Standards Development Organizations that have come and gone over time. However,

only a handful of Standards Development Organizations have stood the test of time and have survived to

play key roles in truly shaping the computing and telecommunications industry. These Standards

Development Organizations include the following organizations:

4.1.1 Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers

The IEEE’s roots date back to 1884, just around the time when electricity was just beginning to

become a major force in society. The IEEE's mission statement states the lofty goal of “fostering

technological innovation and excellence for the benefit of humanity”. As the organizations

name implies, the IEEE is involved in that standardization of all forms of electronic computing,

communications, and the management and transfer of electrical power. With regard to

telecommunications, the IEEE’s first work was on standardization of the telegraph. Today, the

IEEE fields of interest have expanded well beyond electrical/electronic engineering and

computing into areas such as micro- and nanotechnology, ultrasonic, bioengineering, robotics,

electronic materials, and many others. Perhaps some of the best examples of the IEEE’s

standardization work that has influenced modern society are the development of the IEEE 802.3

standard which defines the specifications for Ethernet and IEEE 802.11 family of standards that

define wireless Ethernet more commonly known as Wi-Fi.



4.1.2 Internet Engineering Task Force

The IETF was formed in 1986 with a focus on solving U.S. government based internetworking

issues. Since then, the IETF has become more generically industry focused on solving the

problems of internetworking across the public Internet. With the growth of the scope and

capabilities of the Internet, the IETF’s work has broaden to include standardization of protocols

commonly used to support IP Telephony, Video Conferencing, and the communication of

Presence. To support the ability to focus on a specific area of communication technology, the

IETF is divided up into working groups which focus exclusively on a specific area of interest. The

ControLling mUltiple streams for tElepresence or CLUE working group is one such example. The

CLUE working group focuses on the development of standards that support controlling

telepresence calls with multiple video streams (and hence often also multiple screens). In

addition, the IETF has developed a series of standards that have defined Session Initiation

Protocol (SIP) which serves as one of the key signaling protocols supporting multivendor

interoperability today.

4.1.3 International Telecommunication Union

ITU was founded in 1865 as the International Telegraph Union. It took its present name in 1934,

and in 1947 became a specialized agency of the United Nations. Although its first area of

expertise was the telegraph, the work of ITU now covers the whole information and

communication technologies (ICT) sector. As with IEEE, the ITU’s mission statement states a lofty

goal of “committed to connecting all of the world's people – wherever they live and whatever

their means”. Within the context of this mission, the ITU focuses on the allocation of global radio

spectrum and satellite orbits, developing the technical standards that ensure networks and

technologies seamlessly interconnect, and work to improve access to ICTs to underserved

communities worldwide. Among the standards that have come out of the ITU in recent times are

the G.700-series specifications that define the encoding of audio for transmission over digital

networks, the H.323 and other H.300-series standards for signaling audio and video calls, and

H.264 for video compression jointly developed with the Moving Picture Experts Group (MPEG), a

working group of ISO/IEC.



4.1.4 International Organization for Standardization

The International Organization for Standardization widely known as ISO is an international

standard-setting body composed of representatives from various national standards

organizations. Founded on February 23, 1947, the organization promulgates worldwide

proprietary, industrial, and commercial standards. Like the IETF and other Standards

Development Organizations, ISO has working groups that focus on developing standards for

specific areas of technology. An example of one such working group is the Moving Picture

Experts Group (MPEG) which focuses on among other things on the development of video

compression standards for use in video conferencing and broadcast video communication. As an

example of the ISO’s on-going working in this area, ISO’s MPEG working group is collaborating

with IMTC and IETF for development and refinement of the specifications for Scalable Video

Coding (SVC).

4.1.5 International Electrotechnical Commission

Founded in 1906, the IEC (International Electrotechnical Commission) is the world’s leading

organization for the preparation and publication of International Standards for all electrical,

electronic and related technologies. The IEC is one of three global sister organizations (IEC, ISO,

ITU) that develop International Standards for the world. When appropriate, IEC cooperates with

ISO or ITU to ensure that International Standards fit together seamlessly and complement each

other. Joint committees, such as MPEG and JPEG (Joint Photographic Experts Group), ensure that

International Standards combine all relevant knowledge of experts working in related areas.

4.2 The Process of Creating a Standard Given that broad range of topics and interests that are represented in most Standards Development

Organizations , workgroups are typically formed to focus on a specific area of interest (example: IETF’s

workgroup for SIP Presence and Instant Messaging Extensions or SIMPLE). Out of these workgroups

recommendations are drafted often utilizing a process known as Request for Comments or RFCs in IETF

or draft in other venues. A draft RFC is the workgroup’s way of formally socializing an approach for

solving a specific technical problem. Often, competing RFC’s will be drafted supporting different

approaches for solving the same issue. The draft RFCs are reviewed in committee and testing of technical

concepts is often done by a specific forum’s testing organization; or by interested equipment

manufacturers or Service Providers. Due to the rigors of vetting out a draft concept, the process of

actually ratifying a standard can often take many months if not years. Once a standard has been ratified

by a Standards Development Organization, it is formally published to the industry. However, the



publication of a standard does not guarantee uniform industry adoption. In some cases, standards

simply serve as reference guides for developers. In those cases, each manufacturer or Service Provider

applies their own unique interpretation of the standard to their creation of technology (example SIP).

4.3 What are Industry Forums and Testing Organizations? Industry Forums and testing organizations don’t create standards. Rather they help serve to collect and

focus input from specific communities of interests within a focused area of technology. Industry Forums

then serve to provide this input back into a Standards Development Organizations both before and after

the publication of a standard. Industry Forums and testing organization also often serve to vet out the

application of a concept through doing the actual work of testing a draft or ratified standard for

interoperability between multiple vendors. This work helps bring to light the differences in the

interpretation of a draft or a standard that often emerges between different manufacturers or Service

Providers. Thus, these testing efforts help focus on key interoperability issues between vendors which

often results in refinement of a specific standard and further support for adoption.

Testing Organizations are sometimes part of an Industry Forum. However, often they are independent

public, private, or government organizations that provide test services to validate a manufacturer’s or

Service Provider’s claim of compliance with a specific standard.

As with Standards Development Organizations, there have been a number of Industry Forums and

testing organizations that have come and gone over time. Below are some examples of Industry Forums

and testing organizations that still exert significant influence on today’s telecommunications and Unified

Communications industry:

4.3.1 International Multimedia Telecommunications Consortium

The IMTC, founded in 1993, is an organization consisting of several companies interested in real-

time, rich-media communications. This includes voice and one-way (or two-way) data and one-

way (or two-way) video. Members of this community include Internet application developers

and service providers, teleconferencing hardware and software suppliers and service providers,

telecommunications service providers and equipment vendors, end users, educational

institutions, government agencies and non-profit corporations. As discussed above, the IMTC is

not a standards development organization, but rather an Interoperability testing and

recommendation forum. As an example of the work conducted in this forum, the IMTC helped

support the adoption of the Telepresence Interoperability Protocol (TIP) which has now been

made publically available to all vendors to license royalty-free. The IMTC is also helping further

development and refinement of the H.264 Advanced Video Coding (AVC) and pursuing work to

enable full features parity, such as dual/role-based video streams, flow control and bandwidth

negotiation, between H.323 and SIP systems.



4.3.2 Wi-Fi Alliance

The Wi-Fi Alliance is a prime example of a single focused technology Industry Forum or trade

association that is utilized to support the testing and certification of a specific IEEE set of

standards. Wi-Fi certification is broadly accepted as the industry’s seal of approval for

compliance with the IEEE’s standard for wireless network communication (IEEE 802.11). The

following are examples of current areas of focus for the Wi-Fi Alliance:

o Development of WPA2™ (Wi-Fi Protected Access 2): Wi-Fi wireless network security -

offer government-grade security mechanisms for personal and enterprise.

o Development of EAP (Extensible Authentication Protocol) - An authentication mechanism

used to validate the identity of network devices (for enterprise devices).

o Development of Wi-Fi CERTIFIED n: The latest-generation of Wi-Fi operation -

supports the IEEE 802.11n ratified standard. This test program also includes Wi-Fi

Multimedia (WMM) testing.

4.3.3 SIP Forum

The SIP Forum is an industry association with members from the leading IP communications

companies. Its mission: To advance the adoption and interoperability of IP communications

products and services based on SIP. The Forum promotes SIP as the technology of choice for the

control of real-time multimedia communication sessions throughout the Internet, corporate

networks, and wireless networks. The Forum directs technical activities aimed at achieving high

levels of product interoperability, provides information on the benefits and capabilities of SIP,

and highlights successful applications and deployments. Much like the IETF, the SIP Forum has

specific working groups that focus on specific areas of SIP enabled communications and

technology. One such example is the SIP Forum’s SIPit working group which holds regular testing

events designed to insure the effective execution of product interoperability in accordance with

the IETF SIP standards.

4.3.4 Unified Communication Interoperability Forum

Recent to the scene of telecommunications industry forums, UCIF was formed by a handful of

technology companies that includes Microsoft, HP, Polycom, and the LifeSize division of Logitech.

These founders have an aligned interest in the area Unified Communication that leverages

technologies that have been either individually or collaboratively developed by the founding

companies. Unlike existing standards organizations focused on a single media protocol, the UCI

Forum aspires to cross the multiple boundaries of interoperability using existing standards or



technologies created by the founders rather than creating new ones. The work of the alliance

may include:

Publishing specifications and guidelines

Defining test methodologies and certification programs

Interfacing with other standards groups

Liaising with regulatory governmental bodies responsible for UC

As an example of the work conducted in this forum, UCIF recently developed a set of H.264 SVC

video profiles that have been adopted by the ITU and will be included as part of the ITU’s

Scalable Video Coding (SVC) design for its H.264 Advanced Video Coding (AVC) standard.

What is Cisco doing?


5 What is Cisco doing? At Cisco, we look at interoperability as an opportunity to address all of the customer needs stated earlier

in this document. As Martin De Beer (SVP/GM Cisco’s Video Collaboration Group), noted in his recent

blog: “Our goal is to make video calling as easy and seamless as email is today. Making a video-to-video

call should be as easy as dialing a phone number. Today, however, you can’t make seamless video calls

from one platform to another, much to the frustration of consumers and business users alike. Cisco

believes that the right approach for the industry is to rally around open standards. We believe standards-

based interoperability will accelerate innovation, create economic value, and increase choice for users of

video communications, entertainment, and services.”

Cisco is committed to and leads this vision of standards-based interoperability in collaboration, and here

are a few proof points:

Cisco’s unified communications and collaboration stated strategy is its products to be natively

based on H.264, SIP, XMPP, BFCP, and TIP across the broadest portfolio in the industry, and for

the most part it is reality today

Cisco invests in creating and advancing standards and has more authors of RFCs (Requests for

Comments in the Internet Engineering Task Force) than any other company.

Cisco has a demonstrated track record of providing investment protection to customers, by

integrating to platforms such as Microsoft’s Exchange or Office or Lync, IBM’s Sametime or

Notes, VMWare’s Zimbra, Google’s Gmail, etc.

Not only do Cisco collaboration solutions support a broad range of platforms and devices --

including Windows, Mac, iOS, Android, and Blackberry -- we also provide the richest experience

in the industry. Through Cisco Jabber, customers can access presence, instant messaging, voice,

video, and conferencing across all of these platforms (see detailed schedule per platform)

enabling customer choice without sacrificing capability -- whether in a BYOD or enterprise-

supplied mode.

Cisco also contributes to open source communities, most notably the SIP stack we provided via

the Mozilla organization.

The network is a crucial asset for our customers, and Cisco’s collaboration portfolio takes

advantage of standards-based Medianet to optimize factors such as quality of service, call access

control, etc. Medianet is an open capability that others in the industry can use, as long as they

respect the same standards it is built on.

Interoperability is more than just two systems working together. And while standards adoption is critical,

it is just one step in delivering the kind of interoperability that customers want and need. Technology

manufacturers must also enable customers to succeed by protecting their investments and giving them

choices that offer a fantastic user experience across platforms and devices.

http://blogs.cisco.com/news/video-to-video-communications-is-the-future/

http://blogs.cisco.com/news/video-to-video-communications-is-the-future/

Cisco’s Leadership in Standards Development Organizations & Industry Forums


6 Cisco’s Leadership in Standards Development

Organizations & Industry Forums Since Cisco’s early beginnings in the 1980’s, Cisco has helped shape the standards that have served to

form today’s Internet as well as the way the world connects and communicates.

Today, Cisco’s deep commitment to standards is supported by Cisco’s active participation and leadership

in more than 20 different Standard’s Bodies and Industry Forums. In sum total, Cisco is currently

actively involved in shaping more than 1600 different standards initiatives.

The graph below further demonstrates Cisco’s leadership in support of standards by providing a

comparison of Cisco’s authorship of recent RFCs in the IETF in contrast to other technology companies.

Cisco’s leadership and contributions in these various initiatives spans an array of computing, networking,

and telecommunications technologies ranging from standards that help shape IPv6 to standards that will

make next generation Unified Communications interoperability possible.

To gain deeper insight into the full scope of Cisco’s work in Standards Development Organizations and

Industry Forums, please see the appendix associated with this document.

Concluding Thoughts


7 Concluding Thoughts As stated earlier in this document, achieving the true interoperability that customers’ desire requires a

shared commitment to embracing standards by our entire industry. This work requires competing

vendors to put aside their biases and differences and work together to support the common needs of the

end-user customer. Today, many success stories can be found in the good work that has emerged from

the Standards Development Organizations and industry forums discussed in this document. However, as

technology continues to evolve, new standards initiatives will need to be launched. These future needs

will require renewed commitments to support the important development work required to resolve new

interoperability challenges. As the industry leader in telecommunications, Cisco is committed to

meeting these challenges both today and tomorrow.

Appendix A: Cisco’s Participation in Standards Development Organizations & Forums


8 Appendix A: Cisco’s Participation in Standards

Development Organizations & Forums

This appendix contains a partial listing of the Cisco’s contributions and leadership participation in

Standards Development Organizations and industry forums. Aside from the leadership roles Cisco plays

in the Standards Development Organizations listed below, hundreds of more standards initiatives are

supported by Cisco employees as active contributors in helping create new telecommunications and

Unified Communications standards thus, helping to shape the way the world communicates and

connects.

8.1 3GPP o Specification Work Group 1 (Services – Mobility) Contributor: Vojislav Vucetic, Manager

Technical Marketing Architecture Development, Cisco Systems, Inc.

o Specification Work Group 2 (Architecture – Ipv6) Contributor: Frank Brockners,

Technical Leader NOSTG Architecture, Cisco Systems, Inc.

o Specification Work Group 2 (Architecture – EPC, VoIP, LIPA, SIPTO) Contributor: Maulik

Vaidya, Manager Technical Markerting Starnet Software, Cisco Systems, Inc.

o Specification Work Group 3 (Security – Single Sign On) Contributor: Klaas Wierenga,

Consulting Engineer, Cisco Systems, Inc.

o Specification Work Group 4 (Codec - HTTP Streaming) Contributor: Ali Begen, Technical

Leader VCPBU, Cisco Systems, Inc.

o Core Network & Terminals Work Group (2G/3G, EPC) Contributor: Nirav Salot, Software

Engineer Starnet Software, Cisco Systems, Inc.

8.2 ATIS o TOPS Council IPTV Director: Bob McIntyre, VP CTO Service Providers, Cisco Systems, Inc.

o TOPS Council Cloud Director: Michael Koons, VP GSP Systems Engineering, Cisco

Systems, Inc.

o PTSC-LAES (Lawful Intercept) Working Group Contributor:Craig Mulholland, Consulting Engineer Video & Smart Communities, Cisco Systems, Inc.

o SON Forum (Cloud SOA) Chair: Mike Geller, Technical Leader Service Provider, Cisco Systems, Inc.

o IPTV Interop Forum Chair: Tony Wasilewski, Distinguished Engineer SPVTG- R&D Administration, Cisco Systems, Inc.



8.3 Cloud Security Alliance o SecurityWorking Group Contributor:Steinthor Bjarnason, Consulting Engineer

Borderless Networks, Cisco Systems, Inc.

8.4 DMTF o Infrastructure Sub-Committee Contributor: Aleksandr Zhdankin, Technical Leader TG -

XMP Model & Model Infrastructure, Cisco Systems, Inc. o Telecommunications and Networks Working Group Contributor: Aleksandr Zhdankin,

Technical Leader TG - XMP Model & Model Infrastructure, Cisco Systems, Inc. o Platform Management Sub-Committee Contributor: Aleksandr Zhdankin, Technical

Leader TG - XMP Model & Model Infrastructure, Cisco Systems, Inc. o Cloud Management Working Group Contributor: Aleksandr Zhdankin, Technical Leader

TG - XMP Model & Model Infrastructure, Cisco Systems, Inc. o Architecture Working Group Contributor: Aleksandr Zhdankin, Technical Leader TG -

XMP Model & Model Infrastructure, Cisco Systems, Inc. o Alliance Committee Contributor: Aleksandr Zhdankin, Technical Leader TG - XMP Model

& Model Infrastructure, Cisco Systems, Inc. o System Virtualization, Partitioning, and Clustering Contributor: : Aleksandr Zhdankin,

Technical Leader TG - XMP Model & Model Infrastructure, Cisco Systems, Inc. o SVPC Virtual Networking Working Group Contributor: Naveen Joy, Technical Leader

Infrastructure, Cisco Systems, Inc. o Cloud Audit Data Federation Working Group Contributor: Peter Tomsu, Consulting

Engineer, Cisco Systems, Inc. o Cloud Management Working Group Contributor: Peter Tomsu, Consulting Engineer,

Cisco Systems, Inc. o Input Output Virtualization Incubator Working Group: Peter Tomsu, Consulting

Engineer, Cisco Systems, Inc. o System Virtualization, Partitioning, and Clustering Working Group: Peter Tomsu,

Consulting Engineer, Cisco Systems, Inc. o Telecommunications and Networks Working Group: Peter Tomsu, Consulting Engineer,

Cisco Systems, Inc.

8.5 FemtoForum o Femtocell Working Group Contributor: Rajesh Pazhyannur, Technical Leader WNBU,

Cisco Systems, Inc. o Mobility Working Group Contributor: Rajesh Pazhyannur, Technical Leader WNBU, Cisco

Systems, Inc.



8.6 GSMA o Wireless Working Group Contributor: Dave Stephenson, Technical Leader WNBU, Cisco

Systems, Inc.

8.7 Homeplug Alliance o Homeplug Alliance Working Group Director: Product Manager WNBU, Cisco Systems,

Inc.

8.8 IEEE

8.8.1 Wireless Technology

o 802Working Group Coordinator: Andrew Myles, Technical Leader WNBU Engineering, Cisco Systems, Inc.

o 802.11 Working Group Officer: Andrew Myles, Technical Leader WNBU Engineering, Cisco Systems, Inc.

o 802.11 JTC1 ad hoc Working Group Chair: Andrew Myles, Technical Leader WNBU Engineering, Cisco Systems, Inc.

o 802.11ac Working Group Officer: Brian Hart, Principle Engineer WNBU Strategic Initiatives, Cisco Systems, Inc.

o 802.11ad Working Group Officer: Brian Hart, Principle Engineer WNBU Strategic Initiatives, Cisco Systems, Inc.

o 802.11u Working Group Officer: Dave Stephenson, Technical Leader WNBU, Cisco Systems, Inc.

o 802.11af Working Group Officer:Peter Ecclesine, Technical Leader WNBU Engineering, Cisco Systems, Inc.

8.9 IETF

8.9.1 IETF Leadership

o IETF Chair: Fred Baker, Cisco Fellow, Cisco Systems, Inc.

8.9.2 IETF Applications Area

o Telnet TN3270 Enhancements (tn3270e) Working Group Chair:Michael Boe, principle

engineer, Cisco Systems, Inc.

o IPNG (ipngwg) Working Group Co-Chair:Dr. Steve E. Deering, Cisco Systems, Inc.

o Constrained RESTful Environments (core) Working Group Co-Chair: Cullen Jennings,

engineering fellow, Cisco Systems, Inc.



8.9.3 IETF Internet Area

o Access Node Control Protocol (ancp) Working Group Co-Chair: Wojciech Dec, engineering technical leader NOSTG Architecture, Cisco Systems, Inc.

o Host Identity Protocol (hip) Working Group Co-Chair: David Ward, VP.SP CHIEF ARCHITECT & CTO, Cisc Systems Inc.

o Layer Two Tunneling Protocol Extensions (l2tpext) Working Group Co-Chair: Carlos Pignataro, Distinguished Engineer, Cisco Systems, Inc.

o Network-Based Mobility Extensions (netext) Working Group Co-Chair: Rajeev Koodli, Principle Engineer Starent Engineering and MITG, Cisco Systems, Inc.

8.9.4 IETF Operations and Management Area

o ADSL MIB (adslmib) Working Group Co-Chair: Benoit Claise, Distinguished Engineer NOSTG Architecture, Cisco Systems, Inc.

o Address Resolution for Massive numbers of hosts in the Data center (armd) Working Group Co-Chair: Benson Schliesser, Principle Engineer SP CTO Office, Cisco Systems, Inc.

o Diameter Maintenance and Extensions (dime) Working Group Area Director: Benoit Claise, Distinguished Engineer NOSTG Architecture, Cisco Systems, Inc.

o Energy Management (eman) Working Group Area Director: Benoit Claise, Distinguished Engineer NOSTG Architecture, Cisco Systems, Inc.

o IP Flow Information Export (ipfix) Working Group Area Director: Benoit Claise, Distinguished Engineer NOSTG Architecture, Cisco Systems, Inc.

o Network Configuration (netconf) Working Group Area Director: Benoit Claise, Distinguished Engineer NOSTG Architecture, Cisco Systems, Inc.

o NETCONF Data Modeling Language (netmod) Area Director: Benoit Claise, Distinguished Engineer NOSTG Architecture, Cisco Systems, Inc.

o Operational Security Capabilities for IP Network Infrastructure (opsec) Working Group Co-Chair: Gunter Van de Velde, Technica Leader NOSTG Technical Marketing, Cisco Systems, Inc.

o RADIUS EXTensions (radext) Area Director: Benoit Claise, Distinguished Engineer NOSTG Architecture, Cisco Systems, Inc.

o IPv6 Operations (v6ops) Working Group Co-Chair: Fred Baker, Cisco Fellow, Cisco Systems, Inc.

8.9.5 IETF Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area

o Binary Floor Control Protocol Bis (bfcpbis)Working Group Co-Chair: Charles Eckel, Technical Leader MXABU Engineering, Cisco Systems, Inc.

o Internet Wideband Audio Codec (codec) Working Group Co-Chair:Cullen Jennings, engineering fellow, Cisco Systems, Inc.

o Dispatch (dispatch) Working Group Co-Chair: Cullen Jennings, engineering fellow, Cisco Systems, Inc.

o Emergency Context Resolution with Internet Technologies (ecrit) Working Group Co-Chair: Marc Linsner, Consulting Engineer, Cisco Systems, Inc.

o INtermediary-safe SIP session ID (insipid) Working Group Co-Chair: Gonzalo Salguerio, Customer Support Engineer, Cisco Systems, Inc.

o Multiparty Multimedia Session Control (mmusic) Working Group Co-Chair: Flemming Andreasen, Distinguished Engineer SMBU MI Engineering, Cisco Systems, Inc.



o Audio/Video Transport Payloads (payload) Working Group Co-Chair: Ali Begen, Technical Leader VCPBU, Cisco Systems, Inc.

o Real-Time Communication in WEB-browsers (rtcweb)Working Group Co-Chair: Cullen Jennings, engineering fellow, Cisco Systems, Inc.

o SIP Common Log Format (sipclf) Working Group Technical Advisor: Chris Lonvick, Director Consulting Engineering, Cisco Systems, Inc.

o Speech Services Control (speechsc) Working Group Co-Chair:David Oran, Engineering Fellow, Cisco Systems, Inc.

o Extensible Messaging and Presence Protocol (xmpp) Working Group Co-Chair: Joe Hildebrand, Principle Engineer Jabber Engineering, Cisco Systems, Inc.

o Metric Blocks for use with RTCP's Extended Report Framework (xrblock)Working Group Co-Chair: Charles Eckel, Technical Leader MXABU, Cisco Systems, Inc.

8.9.6 IETF Routing Area

o Routing Area Director: Stewart Bryant, Principal Engineer Research & Advanced Development, Cisco Systems, Inc.

o Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (bfd) Working Group Co-Chair: David Ward, VP.SP CHIEF ARCHITECT & CTO, Cisco Systems, Inc.

o Inter-Domain Routing (idr) Working Group area Director: Steward Bryant, principle


o IS-IS for IP Internets (isis) Working Group Area Director: Steward Bryant, principle


o IS-IS for IP Internets (isis) Working Group Co-Chair: David Ward, VP.SP CHIEF ARCHITECT & CTO, Cisc Systems Inc.

o Keying and Authentication for Routing Protocols (karp) Working Group Co-Chair: Brian Wies, Distinguished Engineer SRTG Engineering, Cisco Systems, Inc.

o Layer 2 Virtual Private Networks (l2vpn) Working Group Co-Chair: Giles Heron, Principle Engineer SP Chief Architects Office, Cisco Systems, Inc.

o Layer 3 Virtual Private Networks (l3vpn) Working Group Co-Chair: Steward Bryant,

principle engineer, Cisco Systems, Inc.

o Mobile Ad-hoc Networks (manet) Working Group Co-Chair: Stan Ratliff, software

engineer, Cisco Systems, Inc. o Multiprotocol Label Switching (mpls) Working Group Co-Chair: George Swallow,

Distinguished Engineer NOSTG RSG XR Routing, Cisco Systems, Inc. o Open Shortest Path First IGP (ospf) Working Group Co-Chair: Abhay Roy, Principle

Engineer NOSTG NX-OS PI Engineering, Cisco Systems, Inc. o Path Computation Element (pce) Working Group Co-Chair: JP Vasseur, Cisco Fellow,

Cisco Systems, Inc. o Pseudowire Emulation Edge to Edge (pwe3) Area Director: Stewart Bryant, Principal

Engineer Research & Advanced Development, Cisco Systems, Inc. o Routing Over Low power and Lossy networks (roll) Working Group Co-Chair: JP

Vasseur, Cisco Fellow, Cisco Systems, Inc. o Routing Area Working Group (rtgwg) Area Director: Stewart Bryant, Principal Engineer

Research & Advanced Development, Cisco Systems, Inc.



o Secure Inter-Domain Routing (sidr) Area Director: Stewart Bryant, Principal Engineer Research & Advanced Development, Cisco Systems, Inc.

8.9.7 IETF Security Area

o Application Bridging for Federated Access Beyond web (abfab) Working Group Co -Chair: Klaas Wierenga, Consulting Engineer CTO Consulting, Cisco Systems, Inc.

o EAP Method Update (emu) Working Group Co-Chair: Joseph A. Salowey, Technical Leader SNSBU EPM, Cisco Systems, Inc.

o Network Endpoint Assessment (nea) Working Group Co-Chair: Dr. Susan Thomson, Technical Leader NOSTG Architecture, Cisco Systems, Inc.

o Transport Layer Security (tls) Working Group Co-Chair: Joseph A. Salowey, Technical Leader SNSBU EPM, Cisco Systems, Inc.

8.9.8 IETF Transport Area

o Behavior Engineering for Hindrance Avoidance (behave) Working Group Co-Chair: Dan Wing, Distinguished Engineer SRTG Engineering, Cisco Systems, Inc.

o Content Delivery Networks Interconnection (cdni) Working Group Co-Chair: Francois Le Faucheur, Distinguished Engineer NOSTG Architecture, Cisco Systems, Inc.

o Peer to Peer Streaming Protocol (ppsp) Working Group Co-Chair: Stefano Previdi, Distinguished Engineer NMAI System Architecture, Cisco Systems, Inc.

o Transport Area Working Group (tsvwg) Co-Chair: James M. Polk, Consulting Engineer, Cisco Systems, Inc.

8.10 ISO o ISO/IEC JTC1/SC6 (Wireless) Working Group Contributor: Andrew Myles, Technical

Leader WNBU, Cisco Systems, Inc. o Security Working Group Contributor: Damir Rajnovic, Engineering Manager, Cisco

Systems, Inc. o Security Working Group- ISO/IEC 27033-2, ISO/IEC 27033-5 Author: Laura Kuiper,

Consulting Engineer, Cisco Systems, Inc.

8.11 IMTC o IMTC Board of Directors: Patrick Luthi, Technical Leader, CTG CTO Office , Cisco Systems

Inc.

o Vice President: Patrick Luthi, Technical Leader, CTG CTO Office, Cisco Systems Inc.

o Requirements Working Group Chair: Patrick Luthi, Technical Leader, CTG CTO Office,

Cisco Systems Inc.

o Telepresence Activity Group – Co Chair: Allyn Romanow, Cisco Systems, Inc.

o Telepresence Interoperability Protocol (TIP) Activity Group – Co Chair: David Benham,

Cisco Systems Inc.

o SIP Parity Activity Group – Co Chair: Charles Eckel, Cisco Systems Inc.

Appendix A: Cisco’s Participation in Standards Development Organizat ions & Forums


8.12 ITU

8.12.1 ITU NGN

o SG 13 Author/Editor: Benoit Claise, Distinguished Engineer, Cisco Systems, Inc.

8.12.2 ITU IP Version 6

o IPv6WG Ad Hoc Working Group Document Author/Editor:Chip Sharp, Director Consulting Engineering, Cisco Systems, Inc.

o IPv6WG Ad Hoc Working Group Chair: Eliot Lear, Principle Engineer CTO Consulting, Cisco Systems, Inc.

o SG 9 Rapporteur (Chair):Gale Lightfoot, Program Manager SP CTO Office, Cisco Systems, Inc.

8.12.3 ITU Cloud

o FG-Cloud Working Group Chair: Monique Morrow, Distinguished Consulting Engineer, Cisco Systems, Inc.

o FG-Cloud WA 1-2 Uses cases Requirements & Architecture Working Group Document Author or Editor: Peter Tomsu

o Joint Coordination Activity on Cloud Computing (JCA-Cloud) - Chair: Monique Morrow, Distinguished Consulting Engineer, Cisco Systems, Inc.

8.12.4 ITU Video

o SG 16 Question 1 Rapporteur (Chair): Patrick Luthi, Technical Leader CTG CTO Office, Cisco Systems, Inc.

o SG 16 Question 2 Rapporteur (Chair): Paul Jones, Director of Interent Business Unit, Cisco Systems, Inc.

o SG 16 Question 12 Rapporteur (Chair): Paul Jones, Director of Interent Business Unit, Cisco Systems, Inc.

o IPTV-GSI SG 16 Question 13 – Chair Audience Measurement: Philip Jacobs, Technical Leader SP CTO, Cisco Systems, Inc.

o SG 16 Video Coding Experts Group – key contributor: Gisle Bjontegaard, Cisco Fellow, Cisco Systems, Inc.

8.13 NIST Smart Grid o Smart Grid Working Group Coordinator: Jennifer Sanford, Manager Government Affairs,

Cisco Systems, Inc.



8.14 SNIA o Cloud Storage Working Group CDMI V1.0 Specification Author:Mike Siefer, Consulting

Engineer, Cisco Systems, Inc.

8.15 TM Forum o Application Framework (TAM) Working Group Contributor: Aleksandr Zhdankin,

Technical Leader XMP Model & Model Infrastructure, Cisco Systems, Inc. o Business Process Framework (eTOM) Working Group Contributor: Aleksandr Zhdankin,

Technical Leader XMP Model & Model Infrastructure, Cisco Systems, Inc. o Cloud Services Initiatives Working Group Contributor: Aleksandr Zhdankin, Technical

Leader XMP Model & Model Infrastructure, Cisco Systems, Inc.

o Intelligent De vice Management Working Group Contributor: Aleksandr Zhdankin,

Technical Leader XMP Model & Model Infrastructure, Cisco Systems, Inc.

o Software Enabled Services (SES) Management Solution Working Group Contributor: Aleksandr Zhdankin, Technical Leader XMP Model & Model Infrastructure, Cisco Systems, Inc.

o TM Forum Integration Program (TIP) Contributor: Aleksandr Zhdankin, Technical Leader XMP Model & Model Infrastructure, Cisco Systems, Inc.

8.16 Wi-Fi Alliance o Peer-to-Peer Working Group Contributor: Andrew Myles, Technical Leader WNBU

Engineering, Cisco Systems, Inc. o VHT5G Working Group Contributor: Brian Hart, Principle Engineer WNBU Strategic

Initiatives, Cisco Systems, Inc. o Voice Enterprise Working Group Contributor: Dave Stephenson, Technical Leader

WNBU, Cisco Systems, Inc. o Spectrum Regulatory Working Group Contributor: David Case, Technical Leader EMC

Standards & Operations, Cisco Systems, Inc. o Security Working Group Contributor: Josesph Salowey, Technical Leader SNSBU, Cisco

Systems, Inc. o Smart Grid Working Group Contributor: Peter Ecclesine, Technical Leader WNBU, Cisco

Systems, Inc. o TVWS Working Group Contributor: Peter Ecclesine, Technical Leader WNBU, Cisco

Systems, Inc. o Healthcare Working Group Contributor: Stuart Higgins, Architect Borderless Networks,

Cisco Systems, Inc.

8.17 WiGIG Alliance o WiGig Alliance Working Group Contributor: Brian Hart, Principle Engineer WNBU

Strategic Initiatives, Cisco Systems, Inc.



8.18 Wireless Broadband Alliance o Wireless Broadband Alliance Working Groups Contributor: Andrew Myles, Technical

Leader WNBU Engineering, Cisco Systems, Inc.

8.19 XSF o XEP-0184 (Collaboration Message Delivery Receipts) Standard Author: Joe Hildebrand,

Principle Engineer Jabber Engineering, Cisco Systems, Inc. o XEP-0198 (Collaboration Stream Management) Standard Author: Joe Hildebrand,

Principle Engineer Jabber Engineering, Cisco Systems, Inc. o XEP-0045 (Collaboration Multi User Chat) Standard Author: Peter Saint-Andre,

Technical Leader Jabber Engineering, Cisco Systems, Inc. o XEP-0292 (Collaboration vCard4 Over XMPP) Standard Author: Samantha Mizzi,

Engineer, Cisco Systems, Inc.



THE SPECIFICATIONS AND INFORMATION REGARDING THE PRODUCTS IN THIS MANUAL ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE WITHOUT NOTICE. ALL

STATEMENTS, INFORMATION, AND RECOMMENDATIONS IN THIS MANUAL ARE BELIEVED TO BE ACCURATE BUT ARE PRESENTED WITHOUT

WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED. USERS MUST TAKE FULL RESPONSIBILITY FOR THEIR APPLICATION OF ANY PRODUCTS.

THE SOFTWARE LICENSE AND LIMITED WARRANTY FOR THE ACCOMPANYING PRODUCT ARE SET FORTH IN THE INFORMATION PACKET THAT

SHIPPED WITH THE PRODUCT AND ARE INCORPORATED HEREIN BY THIS REFERENCE. I F YOU ARE UNABLE TO LOCATE THE SOFTWARE LICENSE

OR LIMITED WARRANTY, CONTACT YOUR CISCO REPRESENTATIVE FOR A COPY.

The Cisco implementation of TCP header compression is an adaptation of a program developed by the University of California, Berkeley (UCB) as

part of UCB’s public domain version of the UNIX operating system. All rights reserved. Copyright © 1981, Regents of the Unive rsity of California.

NOTWITHSTANDING ANY OTHER WARRANTY HEREIN, ALL DOCUMENT FILES AND SOFTWARE OF THESE SUPPLIERS ARE PROVIDED “AS IS” WITH

ALL FAULTS. CISCO AND THE ABOVE-NAMED SUPPLIERS DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING, WITHOUT

LIMITATION, THOSE OF MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE AND NONINFRINGEMENT OR ARISING FROM A COURSE OF

DEALING, USAGE, OR TRADE PRACTICE.

IN NO EVENT SHALL CISCO OR ITS SUPPLIERS BE LIABLE FOR ANY INDIRECT, SPECIAL, CONSEQUENTIAL, OR INCIDENTAL DAMAGES, INCLUDING,

WITHOUT LIMITATION, LOST PROFITS OR LOSS OR DAMAGE TO DATA ARISING OUT OF THE USE OR INABILITY TO USE THI S MANUAL, EVEN IF

CISCO OR ITS SUPPLIERS HAVE BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES.

Cisco and the Cisco Logo are trademarks of Cisco Systems, Inc. and/or its affiliates in the U.S. and other countries. A lis ting of Cisco's trademarks

can be found a t www.cisco.com/go/tradema rks. Third pa rty trademarks mentioned are the property of their respective owners. The use of the

word partner does not imply a partnership relationship between Cisco and any other company. (1005R)

Any Internet Protocol (IP) addresses and phone numbers used in this document are not intended to be actual addresses and phone numbers.

Any examples, command display output, network topology diagrams, and other figures included in the document a re shown for illustrative

purposes only. Any use of actual IP addresses or phone numbe rs in illustrative content is unintentional and coincidental.

© 2010 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved.

http://www.cisco.com/go/trademarks

Documents

Interoperability and Standards - Cisco...Manager and TelePresence and competitive products from other vendors), and desktop or enterprise productivity applications (such as Microsoft