Re: [802SEC] Help on our scope work
Tony/Colleagues-
That being the case (at least in your opinion and mine) let's put the
text forth here for consideration. If we can't agree on it as our scope
statement (and I doubt that as a group we can) then we can at least pick
it apart and see what elements of it we can agree upon.
So, I'll take an initial crack at this thus:
But first, an annotation style note. I have made my notes red/italic in
style but I have my doubts that styling will survive multiple passes
through the EC reflector. Therefore I have delimited my comments (in a
manner extensible to other commenters) with
{GOT> comment text }
=======================
IEEE 802 refers to a family of IEEE standards dealing with local area
networks and metropolitan area networks.
/{GOT> Actually, I think the use of "geographic" terminology in our
scope is now out of date. We now span the range from "Personal Areas" to
networks that span the furthest reaches of our planet. Further, while
not specifically addressed by the scope of any of our Working Groups,
our technology is used or at least closely related to both satellite and
deep space communication. We may be better served by concentrating our
802 scope statement on what is discussed in the next paragraph. In the
midst of all of this, I am not suggesting a change in any of the titles
traditionally used for our groups.}
/
More specifically, the IEEE 802 standards are restricted to networks
carrying variable-size packets.
/{GOT> I believe "variable size packets" is the key differentiator,
especially when contrasted with circuit switched networks and cell networks}
/(By contrast, in cell-based networks data is transmitted in short,
uniformly sized units called cells. Isochronous networks, where data is
transmitted as a steady stream of octets, or groups of octets, at
regular time intervals, are also out of the scope of this standard.)
/{GOT> I also agree with this statement. We don't do synchronous
networks. We may use links that are synchronous at the physical layer
but we do not carry that synchronicity across the upper layers for any
of the MAC to MAC connectivity that we use to build our networks}/
The number 802 was simply the next free number IEEE could assign, though
"802" is sometimes associated with the date the first meeting was held
--- February 1980.
/{GOT> We should conclusively resolve the facts behind this urban legend
before everybody who knows anything about it is dead. The "next in
sequence" theory should be relatively easy to resolve. Assuming we do
not get torpedoed by the IEEE-SA records retention policy, we should be
able to look back through the minutes of NESCOM and the SASB minutes of
the day and see what the assignments were for the other projects at the
time.}/
The services and protocols specified in IEEE 802 map to the lower two
layers (Data Link and Physical) of the seven-layer OSI networking
reference model. In fact, IEEE 802 splits the OSI Data Link Layer into
two sub-layers named Logical Link Control (LLC) and Media Access Control
(MAC) , so that the layers can be listed like this:
- Data link layer
-LLC Sublayer
-MAC Sublayer
- Physical layer
/{GOT> I agree with this statement. I think we can use it with minimal
alteration.
I would delete the text "In fact," from the 2nd sentence.
At the end of the 2nd sentence I suggest changing "so that the layers
can be listed like this:" to "thus the layering can be described as:"}/
/{GOT> Then after the layering text description I would add something
like "Individual Working Groups may have further sub-layering
descriptions within each of their own standards.}/
=======================
Further comments welcome.
Best regards to all,
Geoff
On 7/22/09 8:14 AM, Tony Jeffree wrote:
That's actually pretty accurate.
Regards,
Tony
-----Original Message-----
From: ***** IEEE 802 Executive Committee List ***** [mailto:STDS-802-SEC@ieee.org] On
Behalf Of Geoff Thompson
Sent: 22 July 2009 04:51
To: STDS-802-SEC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [802SEC] Help on our scope work
Colleagues-
Yeah, I know you can't depend on the accuracy of Wikipedia for anything
but...
Take a look at:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IEEE_802
Their description may be better than anything we came up with. It is at
least worthy of consideration in our discussions
Geoff
----------
This email is sent from the 802 Executive Committee email reflector. This list is
maintained by Listserv.
----------
This email is sent from the 802 Executive Committee email reflector. This list is maintained by Listserv.