August 6, 2012
Cisco’s Commitment to
Interoperability and Standards
White Paper
Cisco Collaboration Technology Group (CTG), August 2012
Authors:
Laurent Philonenko, VP/GMCTG Clients & Mobility BU
John Restrick, CTG Chief Architect Officer
Tom Doria & Tormod Ree, CTG Go to Market
Contents
Contents
Contents
2
1
Executive Summary
3
2
What Does the Industry Need to Do?
5
3
What is Cisco’s Approach?
7
4
Cisco’s Leadership in Standards Development Organizations & Industry Forums
9
5
Concluding Thoughts
10
Appendix A: Demystifying the World of Standards Development Organizations and Industry
Forums
11
Appendix B: Cisco’s Participation in Standards Development Organizations & Forums
17
© 2012 Cisco and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved.
2| P a g e
Executive Summary
1 Executive Summary
At its heart, interoperability is about enabling the free flow of communication across boundaries –
whether those boundaries are geographical, technical, or of any other nature. For certain technologies,
people have become accustomed to and expect the benefits that interoperability and industry standards
deliver. Imagine carrying around different laptops to connect to different Wi-Fi hotspots. Imagine a light
bulb only fitting lamps from one vendor. Imagine having to switch cell phones depending on who you
wanted to call. Imagine being able to only email somebody that used your same service provider. This is
what the world would be like without interoperability through industry standards.
Customers expect this borderless experience. They tell us that they want the same benefits from
collaboration solutions. They want to collaborate as if there were no boundaries, they need to protect
their investments in existing systems, and they need the ability to work in new ways with new
technologies and solutions both inside and outside of their organization. This type of “interoperability”
means more than just two systems working together. It means seamless integration between systems to
ensure an uncompromised user experience. And this needs to happen across platforms and devices.
The answer on how to achieve this needed interoperability is simple: the industry must rally around
standards created through open and accessible development processes. These standards need to be
ratified democratically by recognized industry bodies, and above all, they should allow developers to
innovate beyond the standard to provide a great user experience. They cannot be encumbered by
unreasonable intellectual property requirements, or use proprietary technologies as a starting point.
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. Cisco’s deep
commitment to open standards continues today, with Cisco participating in and leading work in more
than 20 different standards bodies and helping shape more than 1,600 standards initiatives.
Cisco believes that standards based interoperability is critical to the collaboration industry and should
provide users with the borderless experience they expect. Users should be able to call and communicate
with whomever they want, from whatever device or system they are using, regardless of where they are.
Making a video call should be just as easy as making a phone call. Standards based interoperability will
accelerate innovation, create economic value, and increase choice for users of voice and video
communications, entertainment and services.
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. On its path to achieving true multivendor interoperability, Cisco has encountered some significant hurdles. This is especially true for videoto-video interoperability, where the industry is still very far away from enabling easy video calls to
everyone. The major hurdle in this space is not the lack of standards, but vendors’ and providers’ refusal
to adopt such standards.
© 2012 Cisco and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved.
3| P a g e
Executive Summary
To promote interoperability and 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 important
venues for discussion bringing competing vendors together with customers, academic institutions, and
other industry thought leadership.
The intent of these organizations is to find mutually agreed upon technical approaches for resolving
interoperability issues through the creation of a 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’ standardization efforts.
Because there is so little debate as to the desirability of true interoperability, this paper will suggest
some ways that stakeholders can move forward, the real work required to get there, and Cisco’s
involvement and dedication to that work over the coming years.
© 2012 Cisco and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved.
4| P a g e
What Does the Industry Need to do?
2 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 customer experiences across systems

participating in standards development

contributing to open source programs

prioritizing native implementation of standards
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. The 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 is also 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,
© 2012 Cisco and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved.
5| P a g e
What Does the Industry Need to do?
which aim at making browsers fully fledged communications endpoints, bringing voice and video to a
broader audience, and making standards for interoperability even more critical.
Although the work of defining a standard is important, its implementation in any given solution, and the
resulting user experience 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 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
degrade the user experience and can block successful adoption of a standard.
In some circumstances, the use of gateways is required to achieve interoperability. For example,
gateways could allow for adoption of new technologies by bridging older environments (e.g. PSTN) with
new environments (e.g. VoIP). However, having a gateway because of a vendor’s isolated
implementation of a technology, such as the gateways needed to support the ability to interoperate
Microsoft’s proprietary RTVideo products with standards based H.264 (AVC) video endpoints, should not
be necessary. Such gateways add complexity and cost, may impact the user experience with respect to
latency and quality, and their only purpose is to remedy a vendor’s lack of commitment to standards.
For any technology company to truly execute on its commitment to interoperability, it is critical for that
company to participate actively 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. Ideally, these forums and consortia would allow for an open and transparent way to
achieve interoperability.
© 2012 Cisco and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved.
6| P a g e
What is Cisco’s Approach?
3 What is Cisco’s Approach?
At Cisco, we look at interoperability as an opportunity to address all of a customer’s needs, particularly
those outlined in this document. As Marthin 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.”
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 also must enable customers to succeed by protecting their investments and giving them
choices that offer a fantastic user experience across platforms and devices.
To promote seamless interoperability, Cisco applies a number of guiding principles to our own actions:

Maximum participation in the advancement of standards through collaborative, democratic standard
setting organizations
As stated before, any technology company that is truly committed to interoperability, actively
participates, and provides leadership in Standards Development Organizations and Industry Forums.
It is through collaborative work within these organizations that standards are born. As the graph
below shows, Cisco’s track record of participation in setting and advancing standards is formidable.
We invest in creating and advancing standards and have more authors of RFCs (Requests for
Comments in the Internet Engineering Task Force) than any other company. We will continue doing
so in the future.

Prioritize native implementation where possible
We are committed to native implementation, which is essential for attaining high performance at a
low cost. Without native implementation, customers have to go through “translators” that add cost
to the solution and can degrade user experience. Cisco’s unified communications and collaboration
strategy is for 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 that is a reality today. We also strive to test
our implementations against others, participating actively at events like SipIt (SIPForum) and
SuperOp (IMTC).

Support the broadest possible range of platforms
© 2012 Cisco and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved.
7| P a g e
What is Cisco’s Approach?
Cisco has a demonstrated track record of providing investment protection to customers by
integrating platforms such as Microsoft’s Exchange, 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 these platforms, enabling customer choice
without sacrificing capability -- whether in a BYOD (“bring your own device”) or enterprise-supplied
mode.

Contribute to open source communities
Cisco also contributes to open source communities and standards development, most notably the
SIP stack we provided via the Mozilla organization.
© 2012 Cisco and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved.
8| P a g e
Cisco’s Leadership in Standards Development Organizations & Industry Forums
4 Cisco’s Leadership in Standards
Organizations & Industry Forums
Development
Since its 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 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 IETF documents in contrast to other technology companies.
Figure 1: Companies behind authors of IETF documents, number of authors. From http://www.arkko.com/tools/docstats,
February 2012.
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.
© 2012 Cisco and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved.
9| P a g e
Concluding Thoughts
5 Concluding Thoughts
Achieving the true interoperability that our 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. 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, or the work of existing bodies might need to
be revisited. It is critical that the industry rally around these efforts.
Cisco believes that interoperability is not a ‘nice to have’. Industry players need to be asking themselves
why they are not interoperable, rather than, if interoperability is required. Regulators can also help
shape the future by liaising with market operators and facilitating industry best practices. As an industry
leader in real time communication such as voice and video, Cisco is committed to meeting these
challenges both today and tomorrow.
© 2012 Cisco and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved.
10| P a g e
Appendix A: Demystifying the World of Standards Development Organizations and Industry Forums
Appendix A: 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 explain the importance of
each organization and their roles in shaping industry standards.
What is a Standards Development Organization?
What differentiates a Standards Development Organization from an Industry Forumor testing
organization is that in a Standards Development Organization, the actual work of formulating, drafting,
and publishing a standard is accomplished. The individuals that compose the membership 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,
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:
Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers
The IEEE’s roots date back to 1884, 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 standardization 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 microand 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
© 2012 Cisco and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved.
11| P a g e
Appendix A: Demystifying the World of Standards Development Organizations and Industry Forums
for Ethernet and the IEEE 802.11 family of standards that define wireless Ethernet more
commonly known as Wi-Fi.
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 broadened 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 multi-vendor
interoperability today.
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 reflects 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 help 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.
© 2012 Cisco and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved.
12| P a g e
Appendix A: Demystifying the World of Standards Development Organizations and Industry Forums
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 the development of video
compression standards for use in video conferencing and broadcast video communication, such
as H.264 for video.
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.
World Wide Web Consortium
The World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) is an international community that works to develop
web standards with a mission to “lead the World Wide Web to its full potential by developing
protocols and guidelines that help ensure the long-term growth of the Web”. Through its work
with standards for the web, W3C is also leading the work to enable the web with real- time
communication through development of standards such as HTML 5 and WebRTC.
The Process of Creating a Standard
Given the broad range of topics and interests that are represented in most Standards Development
Organizations, working groups are typically formed to focus on a specific area of interest (example: IETF’s
SIMPLE working group for SIP Presence and Instant Messaging Extensions). These working groups draft
recommendations, often utilizing a process known as Request for Comments or RFCs in IETF, or draft in
other venues. A draft RFC is the working group’s way of formally socializing an approach for solving a
© 2012 Cisco and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved.
13| P a g e
Appendix A: Demystifying the World of Standards Development Organizations and Industry Forums
specific technical problem. Often, competing RFCs will be drafted supporting different approaches for
solving the same issue. The 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 its own unique interpretation
of the standard to its creation of technology (example SIP).
What are Industry Forums and Testing Organizations?
Industry Forums and testing organizations do not 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 organizations often serve to vet out the
application of a concept by 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:
International Multimedia Telecommunications Consortium
The IMTC, founded in 1993, is an organization consisting of several companies interested in realtime, rich-media communications. This includes voice and one-way (or two-way) data and oneway (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
© 2012 Cisco and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved.
14| P a g e
Appendix A: Demystifying the World of Standards Development Organizations and Industry Forums
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 feature parity, such as dual/role-based video streams, flow control and bandwidth
negotiation, between H.323 and SIP systems. Another important activity of IMTC is SuperOp, an
interoperability testing event with which vendors can test with one another in a neutral and noncompetitive environment to improve interoperability.
Wi-Fi Alliance
The Wi-Fi Alliance is a prime example of a singularly focused 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.
SIP Forum
The SIP Forum is an industry association whose members make up 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 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
© 2012 Cisco and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved.
15| P a g e
Appendix A: Demystifying the World of Standards Development Organizations and Industry Forums
holds regular testing events designed to insure the effective execution of product
interoperability in accordance with the IETF SIP standards.
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 use unified communication technologies that have been either individually or
collaboratively developed, thus promoting single-sided dialogue. 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.
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 specified implementation
guidelines (constrained profiles) for the H.264 SVC standard that has 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.
Open Visual Communications Consortium
The OVCC is an industry forum of communication technology vendors and service providers
focused on enabling video communication by connecting users through agreements with
interconnected service providers built on existing standards and best practices. OVCC aims to
achieve this through developing and supporting a marketplace by establishing highly secure,
quality-assured, and video-capable interconnections between service providers with a consistent
signaling and dial plan implementation. Cisco joined OVCC in June of 2012.
© 2012 Cisco and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved.
16| P a g e
Appendix B: Cisco’s Participation in Standards Development Organizations & Forums
Appendix B:
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 to create new telecommunications and
unified communications standards thus, helping to shape the way the world communicates and
connects.
3GPP
o
Specification Working Group 1 (Services – Mobility) Contributor: Vojislav Vucetic,
Manager Technical Marketing Architecture Development, Cisco Systems, Inc.
o
Specification Working Group 2 (Architecture – Ipv6) Contributor: Frank Brockners,
Technical Leader, NOSTG Architecture, Cisco Systems, Inc.
o
Specification Working Group 2 (Architecture – EPC, VoIP, LIPA, SIPTO) Contributor:
Maulik Vaidya, Manager Technical Marketing, Starnet Software, Cisco Systems, Inc.
o
Specification Working Group 3 (Security – Single Sign On) Contributor: Klaas Wierenga,
Consulting Engineer, Cisco Systems, Inc.
o
Specification Working Group 4 (Codec - HTTP Streaming) Contributor: Ali Begen,
Technical Leader, VCPBU, Cisco Systems, Inc.
o
Core Network & Terminals Working Group (2G/3G, EPC) Contributor: Nirav Salot,
Software Engineer, Starlet Software, Cisco Systems, Inc.
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.
ATIS
© 2012 Cisco and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved.
17| P a g e
Appendix B: Cisco’s Participation in Standards Development Organizations & Forums
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.
Cloud Security Alliance
o
Security Working Group Contributor: Steinthor Bjarnason, Consulting Engineer,
Borderless Networks, Cisco Systems, Inc.
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.
DMTF
© 2012 Cisco and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved.
18| P a g e
Appendix B: Cisco’s Participation in Standards Development Organizations & Forums
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.
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.
o
Wireless Working Group Contributor: Dave Stephenson, Technical Leader, WNBU, Cisco
Systems, Inc.
GSMA
Homeplug Alliance
o
Homeplug Alliance Working Group Director: Product Manager, WNBU, Cisco Systems,
Inc.
IEEE
Wireless Technology
o
802 Working 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, Principal Engineer, WNBU Strategic
Initiatives, Cisco Systems, Inc.
© 2012 Cisco and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved.
19| P a g e
Appendix B: Cisco’s Participation in Standards Development Organizations & Forums
o
802.11ad Working Group Officer: Brian Hart, Principal 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.
IETF
IETF Leadership
o
IETF Chair: Fred Baker, Cisco Fellow, Cisco Systems, Inc.
IETF Applications Area
o
Telnet TN3270 Enhancements (tn3270e) Working Group Chair: Michael Boe, Principal
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,
Cisco Fellow, Cisco Systems, Inc.
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, Cisco 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,
Principal Engineer, Starent Engineering and MITG, Cisco Systems, Inc.
IETF Operations and Management Area
o
ADSL MIB (adslmib) Working Group Co-Chair: Benoit Claise, Distinguished Engineer,
NOSTG Architecture, Cisco Systems, Inc.
© 2012 Cisco and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved.
20| P a g e
Appendix B: Cisco’s Participation in Standards Development Organizations & Forums
o
Address Resolution for Massive numbers of hosts in the Data center (armd) Working
Group Co-Chair: Benson Schliesser, Principal 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, Technical 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.
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,
Cisco Fellow, Cisco Systems, Inc.
o
Dispatch (dispatch) Working Group Co-Chair: Cullen Jennings, Cisco Fellow, Cisco
Systems, Inc.
o
Emergency Context Resolution with Internet Technologies (ecrit) Working Group CoChair: 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.
© 2012 Cisco and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved.
21| P a g e
Appendix B: Cisco’s Participation in Standards Development Organizations & Forums
o
Multi-party 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, Cisco 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, Principal 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.
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, Principal
engineer, Cisco Systems, Inc.
o
IS-IS for IP Internets (isis) Working Group Area Director: Steward Bryant, Principal
engineer, Cisco Systems, Inc.
o
IS-IS for IP Internets (isis) Working Group Co-Chair: David Ward, VP.SP Chief Architect &
CTO, Cisco 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, Principal
Engineer, SP Chief Architects Office, Cisco Systems, Inc.
© 2012 Cisco and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved.
22| P a g e
Appendix B: Cisco’s Participation in Standards Development Organizations & Forums
o
Layer 3 Virtual Private Networks (l3vpn) Working Group Co-Chair: Steward Bryant,
Principal 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, NOSTGRSGXR Routing, Cisco Systems, Inc.
o
Open Shortest Path First IGP (ospf) Working Group Co-Chair: Abhay Roy, Principal
Engineer, NOSTGNX-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.
IETF Security Area
o
Application Bridging for Federated Access Beyond web (abfab) Working Group CoChair: Klaas Wierenga, Consulting Engineer, CTO Consulting, Cisco Systems, Inc.
o
EAP Method Update (emu) Working Group Co-Chair: Joseph A. Salowey, Technical
Leader, SNSBUEPM, 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, SNSBUEPM, Cisco Systems, Inc.
© 2012 Cisco and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved.
23| P a g e
Appendix B: Cisco’s Participation in Standards Development Organizations & Forums
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.
o
ISO/IECJTC1/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.
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.
ISO
IMTC
© 2012 Cisco and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved.
24| P a g e
Appendix B: Cisco’s Participation in Standards Development Organizations & Forums
ITU
ITU NGN
o
SG13 Author/Editor: Benoit Claise, Distinguished Engineer, Cisco Systems, Inc.
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, Principal Engineer, CTO Consulting,
Cisco Systems, Inc.
o
SG 9 Rapporteur (Chair): Gale Lightfoot, Program Manager, SP CTO Office, Cisco
Systems, Inc.
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.
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 Internet Business Unit,
Cisco Systems, Inc.
o
SG 16 Question 12 Rapporteur (Chair): Paul Jones, Director of Internet Business Unit,
Cisco Systems, Inc.
o
IPTV-GSISG 16 Question 13 – Chair Audience Measurement: Philip Jacobs, Technical
Leader, SP CTO, Cisco Systems, Inc.
ITU Cloud
ITU Video
© 2012 Cisco and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved.
25| P a g e
Appendix B: Cisco’s Participation in Standards Development Organizations & Forums
o
SG 16 Video Coding Experts Group – key contributor: Gisle Bjontegaard, Cisco Fellow,
Cisco Systems, Inc.
NIST Smart Grid
o
Smart Grid Working Group Coordinator: Jennifer Sanford, Manager Government Affairs,
Cisco Systems, Inc.
o
OVCC Board of Directors: Sandeep Vohra, Senior Director and General Manager, Cisco
Systems, Inc.
o
Cloud Storage Working Group CDMIV1.0 Specification Author: Mike Siefer, Consulting
Engineer, Cisco Systems, Inc.
OVCC
SNIA
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.
o
WebRTC 1.0 Editor and Contributor: Cullen Jennings, Cisco Fellow, Cisco Systems, Inc.
W3C
© 2012 Cisco and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved.
26| P a g e
Appendix B: Cisco’s Participation in Standards Development Organizations & Forums
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, Principal 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.
WiGIG Alliance
o
WiGig Alliance Working Group Contributor: Brian Hart, Principal Engineer, WNBU
Strategic Initiatives, Cisco Systems, Inc.
Wireless Broadband Alliance
o
Wireless Broadband Alliance Working Groups Contributor: Andrew Myles, Technical
Leader, WNBU Engineering, Cisco Systems, Inc.
o
XEP-0184 (Collaboration Message Delivery Receipts) Standard Author: Joe Hildebrand,
Principal Engineer, Jabber Engineering, Cisco Systems, Inc.
o
XEP-0198 (Collaboration Stream Management) Standard Author: Joe Hildebrand,
Principal Engineer, Jabber Engineering, Cisco Systems, Inc.
XSF
© 2012 Cisco and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved.
27| P a g e
Appendix B: Cisco’s Participation in Standards Development Organizations & Forums
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.
© 2012 Cisco and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved.
28| P a g e
Appendix B: Cisco’s Participation in Standards Development Organizations & Forums
The Cisco implementation of TCP header compression is an adaptation of a program developed by the University of California, B erkeley (UCB) as
part of UCB’s public domain version of the UNIX operating system. All rights reserved. Copyright © 1981, Regents of the University of California.
Cisco and the Cisco Logo are trademarks of Cisco Systems, Inc. and/or its affiliates in the U.S. and other countries. A listi ng of Cisco's trademarks
can be found at www.cisco.com/go/trademarks. Third party 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 phon e numbers.
Any examples, command display output, network topology diagrams, and other figures included in the document are sho wn for illustrative
purposes only. Any use of actual IP addresses or phone numbers in illustrative content is unintentional and coincidental.
© 2012 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved.
© 2012 Cisco and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved.
29| P a g e