doc.: ieee 802.11-11/956r1 submission july 2011 andrew myles, ciscoslide 1 jtc1 ad hoc july 2011...

doc.: IEEE 802.11-11/956r1

Submission

July 2011

Andrew Myles, CiscoSlide 1

JTC1 Ad Hoc July 2011 agenda

18 July 2011

Name Company Phone email

Andrew Myles Cisco +61 284461010 [email protected]

Authors:

doc.: IEEE 802.11-11/956r1

Submission

July 2011

This presentation will be used to run the JTC1 Ad Hoc meetings in San Francisco in July 2011

• This presentation contains a proposed running order for the IEEE 802.11 JTC1 Ad Hoc committee meeting in July 2011, including– Proposed agenda

– Other supporting material

• It will be modified during the meeting to include motions, straw polls and other material referred to during the meeting


doc.: IEEE 802.11-11/956r1

Submission

July 2011


Participants have a duty to inform in relation to patents

• All participants in this meeting have certain obligations under the IEEE-SA Patent Policy (IEEE-SA SB Bylaws subclause 6.2). Participants: – “Shall inform the IEEE (or cause the IEEE to be informed)” of the identity of

each “holder of any potential Essential Patent Claims of which they are personally aware” if the claims are owned or controlled by the participant or the entity the participant is from, employed by, or otherwise represents— “Personal awareness” means that the participant “is personally aware that the holder

may have a potential Essential Patent Claim,” even if the participant is not personally aware of the specific patents or patent claims

– “Should inform the IEEE (or cause the IEEE to be informed)” of the identity of “any other holders of such potential Essential Patent Claims” (that is, third parties that are not affiliated with the participant, with the participant’s employer, or with anyone else that the participant is from or otherwise represents)

– The above does not apply if the patent claim is already the subject of an Accepted Letter of Assurance that applies to the proposed standard(s) under consideration by this group

• Early identification of holders of potential Essential Patent Claims is strongly encouraged; there is no duty to perform a patent search

doc.: IEEE 802.11-11/956r1

Submission

July 2011


There are a variety of patent related links

• All participants should be familiar with their obligations under the IEEE-SA Policies & Procedures for standards development.

• Patent Policy is stated in these sources:– IEEE-SA Standards Boards Bylaws

— http://standards.ieee.org/guides/bylaws/sect6-7.html#6

– IEEE-SA Standards Board Operations Manual— http://standards.ieee.org/guides/opman/sect6.html#6.3

• Material about the patent policy is available at – http://standards.ieee.org/board/pat/pat-material.html

• If you have questions, contact the IEEE-SA Standards Board Patent Committee Administrator at [email protected] or visit http://standards.ieee.org/board/pat/index.html

• This slide set is available at http://standards.ieee.org/board/pat/pat-slideset.ppt

doc.: IEEE 802.11-11/956r1

Submission

July 2011


A call for potentially essential patents is not required in the JTC1 Ad Hoc

• If anyone in this meeting is personally aware of the holder of any patent claims that are potentially essential to implementation of the proposed standard(s) under consideration by this group and that are not already the subject of an Accepted Letter of Assurance: – Either speak up now or

– Provide the chair of this group with the identity of the holder(s) of any and all such claims as soon as possible or

– Cause an LOA to be submitted

doc.: IEEE 802.11-11/956r1

Submission

July 2011


The JTC1 Ad Hoc will operate using general guidelines for IEEE-SA Meetings

• All IEEE-SA standards meetings shall be conducted in compliance with all applicable laws, including antitrust and competition laws. – Don’t discuss the interpretation, validity, or essentiality of patents/patent claims. – Don’t discuss specific license rates, terms, or conditions.

— Relative costs, including licensing costs of essential patent claims, of different technical approaches may be discussed in standards development meetings.

— Technical considerations remain primary focus

– Don’t discuss or engage in the fixing of product prices, allocation of customers, or division of sales markets.

– Don’t discuss the status or substance of ongoing or threatened litigation.– Don’t be silent if inappropriate topics are discussed … do formally object.

• See IEEE-SA Standards Board Operations Manual, clause 5.3.10 and “Promoting Competition and Innovation: What You Need to Know about the IEEE Standards Association's Antitrust and Competition Policy” for more details.

doc.: IEEE 802.11-11/956r1

Submission

July 2011


Links are available to a variety of other useful resources

• Link to IEEE Disclosure of Affiliation – http://standards.ieee.org/faqs/affiliationFAQ.html

• Links to IEEE Antitrust Guidelines– http://standards.ieee.org/resources/antitrust-guidelines.pdf

• Link to IEEE Code of Ethics– http://www.ieee.org/web/membership/ethics/code_ethics.html

• Link to IEEE Patent Policy– http://standards.ieee.org/board/pat/pat-slideset.ppt

doc.: IEEE 802.11-11/956r1

Submission

July 2011


The JTC1 Ad Hoc will operate using accepted principles of meeting etiquette

• IEEE 802 is a world-wide professional technical organization

• Meetings are to be conducted in an orderly and professional manner in accordance with the policies and procedures governed by the organization.

• Individuals are to address the “technical” content of the subject under consideration and refrain from making “personal” comments to or about the presenter.

doc.: IEEE 802.11-11/956r1

Submission

July 2011

The JTC1 Ad Hoc has a very general proposed agenda for the San Francisco meeting

Tuesday PM2

• Call to Order

• Select recording secretary

• Conduct meeting according to agenda

• Recess

Thursday AM2

• Call to Order



• Recess


Wednesday AM1

• Call to Order



• Recess

Monday PM2

• Call to Order


• Approve agenda


• Recess

Session is late addition to agenda for week

doc.: IEEE 802.11-11/956r1

Submission

July 2011

The JTC1 Ad Hoc has a detailed list of agenda items to be considered

• Welcome to guests

• Approve agenda

• Approve minutes from May in Palm Springs

• Review extended goals

• Review SC6 meeting in San Diego– Review attendance

– Review agenda

– Discuss proposed 8802 series withdrawal (Monday)

– Review status liaisons to SC6

– Review technical comments from SC6 (802.11 specific)

– Receive HoD report

– Receive WAPI report (probably Wednesday)

• ...


doc.: IEEE 802.11-11/956r1

Submission

July 2011

The JTC1 Ad Hoc has a detailed list of agenda items to be considered

– Summarise non WAPI issues

– Receive 802.1X/AE replacement report (Tuesday)

– Receive 802.11 replacement report (Thursday)

– Receive 802.16 security replacement report (Wednesday)

• Consider other matters– Plan for SC6 teleconference in August

• Consider any motions (Thursday)

• ...


doc.: IEEE 802.11-11/956r1

Submission

July 2011

The IEEE 802 JTC1 ad hoc committee would like to welcome a special guest

• Paul Nikolich (802 Chair) has invited the Chair of ISO/IEC JTC1/SC6 to participate this week

• The IEEE 802 JTC1 ad hoc committee welcomes Dae Young (DY) Kim

• DY was also the stand-in convenor of WG1 in San Diego


doc.: IEEE 802.11-11/956r1

Submission

July 2011


The JTC1 Ad Hoc will consider approving its agenda

Motion to approve agenda

• The JTC1 Ad Hoc approves the agenda for its meeting in San Francisco in July 2011, as documented on pages 9-11 of <this slide deck>

• Moved:

• Seconded

• Result

doc.: IEEE 802.11-11/956r1

Submission

July 2011

The JTC1 Ad Hoc will consider approval of previous minutes

Motion to approve minutes

• The JTC1 Ad Hoc approves the minutes for its meeting in Palm Springs in May 2011, as documented in 11-11-0955

• Moved:

• Seconded

• Result


doc.: IEEE 802.11-11/956r1

Submission

July 2011


The JTC1 Ad Hoc reaffirmed its general goals in Sept 09, but they were extended in Nov 2010

Agreed (with changes from Nov 2010) goals

• Provides a forum for 802 members to discuss issues relevant to both:– IEEE 802– ISO/IEC JTC1/SC6

• Recommends positions to ExCom on ISO/IEC JTC1/SC6 actions affecting IEEE 802– Note that 802 LMSC holds the liaison to SC6, not 802.11 WG

• Participates in dialog with IEEE staff and 802 ExCom on issues concerning IEEE ’s relationship with ISO/IEC

• Organises IEEE 802 members to contribute to liaisons and other documents relevant to the ISO/IEC JTC1/SC6 members

Extensions

• The extensions to our goals came out of the 802 ExCom ad hoc held in November 2010 on the Friday evening

doc.: IEEE 802.11-11/956r1

Submission

July 2011

ISO/IEC JTC1/SC6 met in San Diego in June 2011 and will meet in Guangzhou, China in Feb 2012

• SC6 has a F2F meeting every 9 months or so

• The last meeting has held on 20-24 June 2011 in San Diego– All WGs met in San Diego

— WG1: Physical and data link layers— WG7: Network and transport layers (also known as Future Network)— WG8: Directory— WG9: ASN.1 and registration

• The next meeting is in Guangzhou, China in February 2012– Currently planned for week starting 20 Feb 2012, but hopefully will move to week

starting 6 Feb 2012

– Only two WGs are planning to meet— WG1: Physical and data link layers— WG7: Network and transport layers

– The IEEE 802 will need to send a delegation again!— Please start planning to attend!


doc.: IEEE 802.11-11/956r1

Submission

July 2011

Attendance at the SC6 meeting in San Diego in June 2011 included a large IEEE 802 contingent

• The IEEE 802 contingent at the SC6 meeting included:– Bruce Kraemer (HoD)

– Bill Carney (802.11)

– Brian Weis (802.1)

– Mick Seaman (802.1)

– Lei Wang (802.16)

– Rolf De Vegt (802.11)

– Jodi Haasz (staff)

• Two participants had to withdraw at the last moment but contributed significant material for the meeting – Dan Harkins (802.11)

– Dorothy Stanley (802.11)

• This is the largest IEEE 802 delegation for some years


doc.: IEEE 802.11-11/956r1

Submission

July 2011

Attendance at the SC6 meeting in San Diego in June 2011 included a large IEEE 802 contingent

• NBs represented included– US (Andrew Myles, Jerry Thrasher, plus 3 others)

– China (11 participants)

– UK (Robin Tasker, plus 1 other)

– Korea (19 participants)

– Japan (2 participants)

– Netherlands (1 participant)

– Spain (1 participant)

– Switzerland (1 participant)

– Germany (1 participant)

– HK (proxy to China NB) - Observer

– Austria (1 participant) - Observer

• Of these NB only a few were focused on topics related to IEEE 802– US, China, UK, Switzerland


doc.: IEEE 802.11-11/956r1

Submission

July 2011

SC6/WG1 dealt with a variety of PHY/MAC related issues on its agenda

SC6 agenda extract

• 6.1. Magnetic Field Area Network (ISO/IEC 15149)– Magnetic area network, particularly for mining applications

– Sent to FDIS ballot

• 6.2 Wireless Powering Control Protocol– Proposed control protocol for wireless power

– No action

• 6.3 Amendment Proposal of ISO/IEC 24771– Proposal to modify Picocast, which is “a new short range wireless

communication service that provide one to one communication, group communication, broadcasting and security communication in a small area of pico-cell.”

– Working Draft will be developed


doc.: IEEE 802.11-11/956r1

Submission

July 2011


SC6 agenda extract (continued)

• 6.4. Review of 8802 Standards– See report later

• 6.5. WAPI– 802.11i replacement, although China NB assert it is just providing another

choice

– See report later

• 6.6. IEEE 802 Liaison– Reviewed various liaison between 802.11 and SC6

– Provided overview of 802.11 standardisation plans

– Provided overview of IEEE-SA


doc.: IEEE 802.11-11/956r1

Submission

July 2011



• 6.7.1 Access Control

• 6.7.3 Further Enhancement on LAN Security– 802.1X/AE replacements


• 6.7.2 PHY MAC Spec– 802.11 replacement called N-UHT


• 6.7.4 MAC Security Specifications– 802.16 security replacement



doc.: IEEE 802.11-11/956r1

Submission

July 2011



• 6.8. Underwater Acoustic Communication– Proposal for new underwater acoustic network

– No action

• 6.9. NFC


doc.: IEEE 802.11-11/956r1

Submission

July 2011

The SC6 meeting in San Diego discussed a proposal from UK NB to withdraw the ISO/IEC 8802 series

• At the SC6 meeting in San Diego the UK NB made a proposal to withdraw a number of standards including the 8802 series– 8802-2:2001 (based on IEEE 802.2-1998)

– 8802-3:2000 (based on IEEE 802.3-1996)

– 8802-5:1998 (based on IEEE 802.5-1998)

– 8802-11:2005 (based on IEEE 802.11-2003 + 802.11g-2003, 802.11h-2004, 802.11i-2004)

• The proposal was based on the observation that the ISO versions of these standards are either obsolete or significantly out of date– This is less true for the 8802-11 series

• The proposal also noted that IEEE 802.3 WG has explicitly requested that 8802-3:2000 be withdrawn

• After some discussion it was agree to postpone any decisions on this proposal until Feb 2012 to give IEEE 802 an opportunity to consider associated issues


N14713

doc.: IEEE 802.11-11/956r1

Submission

July 2011

The proposals to withdraw the ISO/IEC 8802 series raises a variety of general issues for the IEEE

Issues include:

• Is it important for an IEEE 802 standards to be recognized as “international” and thus protected by international trade treaties– Does the WTO consider an IEEE 802 standard to be international?

– Do all countries recognise the an IEEE 802 standard as international?

• Is there any additional value in submitting IEEE 802 standards to ISO/IEC JTC1 for ratification?– What is the value to IEEE 802 and ISO/IEC JTC1 NBs?

– Do we expect any technical value?

– Are the answers different for each 802 WG?

• How should IEEE 802 submit standards for ratification?– Using the PSDO?

– Using the traditional fast track method?

• …


doc.: IEEE 802.11-11/956r1

Submission

July 2011

The proposals to withdraw the ISO/IEC 8802 series raises a variety of specific questions for the IEEE

Specific questions include:

• Should the IEEE 802.11 WG execute its plan to send 802.11-2012 to ISO/IEC JTC1 for ratification?

• Should the IEEE 802.11 WG send 802.11-2007 to ISO/IEC JTC1 in the meantime to bring the ISO/IEC series “up to date”?

• Should the IEEE 802.1 and 802.3 WGs send their latest standards to ISO/IEC JTC1?

• Should the other IEEE 802 WG’s consider sending standards to ISO/IEC?– Note: 802.16 is working with ITU-T instead


doc.: IEEE 802.11-11/956r1

Submission

July 2011

The Chair of the IEEE International ad hoc will provide a “discussion starter”

• Phil Wennblom (Intel) is the Chair of the IEEE International ad hoc

• This committee has been considering similar issues

• Phil will provide a presentation that:– Describes the importance of international standards

– Provides an overview of the PSDO

– Summarises the IEEE experience with the PSDO

• Afterwards the IEEE 802 JTC1 ad hoc will have a discussion

• There is probably no need to make decisions this week for most of the questions; however, decisions will be required by the November plenary


802 July 2011_PSDO Presentation-rev2.ppt

doc.: IEEE 802.11-11/956r1

Submission

July 2011

Should the 802.11 WG execute its plan to send 802.11-2012 to JTC1 for ratification?

Pros’s Con’s


doc.: IEEE 802.11-11/956r1

Submission

July 2011

Should the 802.11 WG send 802.11-2007 to JTC1 to bring the ISO/IEC series “up to date”?

Pros’s Con’s


doc.: IEEE 802.11-11/956r1

Submission

July 2011

Should the 802.1 WG send their latest standards to JTC1?

Pros’s Con’s


doc.: IEEE 802.11-11/956r1

Submission

July 2011

Should the 802.3 WG send their latest standards to JTC1?

Pros’s Con’s


doc.: IEEE 802.11-11/956r1

Submission

July 2011

Should the other IEEE 802 WG’s (15/17/19/20/21/22/23) consider sending standards to ISO/IEC?

Pros’s Con’s


doc.: IEEE 802.11-11/956r1

Submission

July 2011

Summary of discussion on sending documents to SC6

• There was consensus that it was important for 802 standards to have “International” status

• There was an understanding that 802 standards are not considered to be “International” by many countries

• On that basis, 802 WGs should probably consider on what basis and under what conditions they might send 802 standards to ISO/IEC for “registration”

• 802.1 reps expressed concern about method 1 & 3 in the PSDO agreement; they would like ISO/IEC to agree to not modify the 802 standards except through 802 processes

• It was thought possible that such an agreement could be negotiated between SC6 and 802


doc.: IEEE 802.11-11/956r1

Submission

July 2011

Summary of discussion on sending documents to SC6

• There was also discussion about how to avoid SC6 duplicating 802 functionality

• It was agreed that this was a more difficult issue because NBs always have the right to make standards

• One idea was that discussed was that SC6 standards should avoid adding functionality to 802 standards without agreement from IEEE 802– WAPI would come under this rule


doc.: IEEE 802.11-11/956r1

Submission

July 2011

The 802.11 WG has liaised various Sponsor Ballot drafts to ISO/IEC JTC1/SC6

• 802.11s D11.0 was not liaised to SC6 because draft finished SB process

• 802.11mb D9.0 has not yet been liaised


Task Group

Liaised afterLA

Liaised after

Orlando

Liaised after

Beijing

Liaised afterSD

Liaised after

Hawaii

Liaised after

Dallas

Liaised afterLA

Liaised afterSing.

Liaiased after

Palm Sp

Jan 10 Mar 10 May 10 July 10 Sept 10 Nov 10 Jan 11 Mar 11 May 11

TGmb - - - - - D6.0 - D8.0 -

TGs - - - - - D8.0 - D10.0 -

TGu D8.0 - - D11.0 - D13.0 - - Ratified

TGv D9.0 - D11.0 D13.0 D15.0 - - - Ratified

TGz D7.0 - D9.0 D12.0 D13.0 - - - Ratified

doc.: IEEE 802.11-11/956r1

Submission

July 2011

The only technical comments on any liaised draft have been received from the Swiss NB & China NB

China NB commented on 802.11s D10.0

• Comments were received from China NB on 11 May 2011

• Response from IEEE 802.11 WG were generated at the Palm Springs meeting

Swiss NB rep commented on 802.11 Dx.0

• Comments were received from Swiss NB rep in 29 June 20– See next page for detailed comments

• These comments have been sent to TGmb for processing by 802.11 Chair


N14708

N14784

doc.: IEEE 802.11-11/956r1

Submission

July 2011

Comments on 802.11mb D?.0 were received from a Swiss NB rep in 29 June 20

Comments from Swiss NB rep

• Normative reference to 802.1X-2004, but 802.1X-2010 version has been published.

• Clause 11.5.4 specifies 4-way handshake for PTK and STK, clause 11.5.9 specifies 5-way process for STK establishment.

• In 11.5.4 and 11.5.9 I suggest to use the acronyms ANonce, INonce and PNonce consequentially.

• 11.5.9 fails to specify when the STAs should generate the STK.

• Considerations similar to those in 11.5.4.8 would nicely round out 11.5.9.

• 11.5.6 (particularly 11.5.6.5) appears before 11.5.9. It would be more logical to move 11.5.9 after 11.5.5.

• While WEP and TKIP are deprecated in 5.1.2, in some other context they might appear to be still fully valid. It might be worthwhile to check all occurrences to moderate the wording where needed.

• To make the specification even clearer and enhance readability you might consider to introduce a terminology to distinguish neighboring stations (peer-PHY-entities) from others, and to indicate which key and other relationships and message exchanges are confined to neighbors and which are not. The term peer-STA becomes clear from the context, but lacks precision as all STAs (AP and non-AP) are peer-MAC entities, with the possible exception of pairs of APs connected to the DS.

• For consistency, TKIP should be subsumed under pre-RSNA in 11.1.2.

• One question: Can the DS be an IBSS, connecting a couple of STAs, each operating its own BSS as an AP? But cannot be a BSS, because messages are only routed by the BSS' single AP?


doc.: IEEE 802.11-11/956r1

Submission

July 2011

Head of delegation reportfrom SC6 meeting in San Diego

2011-07-18 IEEE 802.16-11/003537

doc.: IEEE 802.11-11/956r1

Submission

July 2011

The IEEE 802 head of delegation will provide a high level report of the SC6 meeting

• Bruce Kraemer was the IEEE 802 head of delegation

• The delegation provided a number of general presentations to SC^– N14788 - Overview of IEEE 802.11 Wireless Local Area Networks

— Presented by Bruce Kramer

– N14792 – IEEE presentation— Presented by Jodi Haasz

• Bruce will provide a brief report on his perspectives of the overall meeting


doc.: IEEE 802.11-11/956r1

Submission

July 2011

WAPI report from SC6 meeting in San Diego

Andrew Myles

39

doc.: IEEE 802.11-11/956r1

Submission

July 2011


It was recognised by the ad hoc in September 2009 that WAPI is of vital interest to the JTC1 Ad Hoc

• It was agreed by the JTC1 ad hoc in Hawaii in Sept 09 that WAPI remains an important and constant issue for consideration

• This is the case for a variety of reasons, possibly including:– WAPI appears to duplicate functionality of 802.11i

– The promoters of WAPI continue to assert that 802.11i is insecure

– It is unclear how or whether 802.11i and WAPI can coexist

– The issues related to WAPI are similar to those for the proposed 802.1X/AE and 802.16 security replacements

– …

doc.: IEEE 802.11-11/956r1

Submission

July 2011

The formal WAPI NP proposal process started in October 2009 …

N14123 Text for NP ballot … for use with ISO/IEC 8802-11

N14228 Summary of Voting on 6N14123, …for use with ISO/IEC 8802-11

N14436 Disposition of Comments on the ISO/IEC NP 20011

9-Oct-09

1-Feb-10

6-Oct-10

N14435 ISO/IEC WD 20011 Alternative security mechanism for use with ISO/IEC 8802-116-Oct-10

IEEE 802 submitted comments (N14142)

Renumbered draft responding to UK NB comment

Multiple NBs submitted comments

6N14123_Text for NP ballot[1]_WAPI

N14142

ISO-IECJTC1-SC6_N4435_ISO_IEC_WD_20011_A

10 of 18 NB’s voted “yes” (10 required) & 5 NB’s stated they would participate (5 required)

Invited NBs to submit comments on proposed

disposition (closing Jan 11)

IEEE 802 comments ignored in proposed

disposition

ISO-IECJTC1-SC6_N4436_Disposition_of_Com

doc.: IEEE 802.11-11/956r1

Submission

July 2011

… and the WAPI NP approval process is still continuing in July 2011

N14620 Disposition of Comments on 1st WD 2001117-Mar-11

IEEE 802 submitted comments on proposed

disposition (N14551)

USNB submitted comments on proposed disposition

(N14549)

Inappropriately changed title so document is no longer a

disposition of NP ballot comments

Dismisses all substantive USNB comments on basis the process is

beyond the NP stage

Responds to most comments with assertions & false statements

rather than reasoned arguments

Dismisses all (but one) substantive IEEE 802 comments on basis the

process is beyond the NP stage

N14551 N14549

N14620

N14770 Revised disposition of Comments on 1st WD 200118-Jun-11 N14770

US NB asserts NP process incomplete & summarizing

situation (N14742, N14743)

IEEE 802 submits document asserting security of 802.11i

(N14778)N14778

N14742 N14743

doc.: IEEE 802.11-11/956r1

Submission

July 2011


SC6 decided that the WAPI project was still at NP stage; and not WD stage

• Most discussion at the SC6 meeting related to WAPI was focused on process; was the WAPI project at New Project or Working Draft stage?– US NB asserted that the WAPI project was still at NP stage because the

comments on the ballot had not been resolved and approved by SC6

– China/Swiss NB asserted the WAPI project was at WD stage because the ballot passed and that SC6 had sent a working draft out for comment in Sept 10

• It was ultimately determined the WAPI project is at NP stage– Based on ruling by SC6 Chair that was confirmed by JTC1 Secretariat

• China NB indicated that they would be appealing– There has been no appeal so far

doc.: IEEE 802.11-11/956r1

Submission

July 2011

The WAPI NP comments must be resolved to progress the project to WD stage

• The ruling that WAPI is at NP stage means that the comments made during the NP ballot process (in Jan 2010) must be resolved and agreed by SC6 before the WAPI project formally progresses

• There will be a series of teleconferences starting on 10 August that will attempt to resolve the comments– IEEE 802 has been invited, along with interested NBs

– More detail later ...

• It appears the earliest the comments can adopted by SC6 is at their F2F meeting in February 2012

• In the meantime, it is likely the China NB and other interested NBs will continue to develop the WAPI Working Draft


doc.: IEEE 802.11-11/956r1

Submission

July 2011

The ISO Project portal lists an incorrect stage for the WAPI project

• It was noted during debate that the official ISO database has the WAPI project marked as WD stage– Document title: Information technology -Telecommunications and information

exchange between systems - Local and metropolitan area networks - Specific requirements- Part XX: Alternative security mechanism for use with ISO/IEC 8802-11

– Registration date of project: 6 Oct 2010

– Current stage of project: 20.60 (Preparatory – Complet. of main action)

– Date of current stage: 5 Jan 2011

– Limit date for next stage: 6 Apr 2012

• The SC6 Chair stated that this entry in the ISO database is incorrect and he did not know how it happened; the project should be at NP stage

• At this time, the error has not been corrected, and it is unclear whether it will be corrected by the ISO Directorate


doc.: IEEE 802.11-11/956r1

Submission

July 2011

The timeframes relevant to the WAPI project are unclear

• The SC6 Chair also noted that the WAPI project is at risk of being cancelled because it is supposed to meet certain deadlines

• It is not clear what those deadlines are from a reading of the JTC1 Directives, particularly given the disagreement about the current stage

• The ISO project portal currently lists a “Limit date for next stage” as 6 April 2012– At the time of SC6 meeting it was listed as 6 Oct 2011; it is unclear why it

subsequently changed

• It is not definitively known how this date was determined– It is 18 months after the “registration date” for the project, which happened to

align with the date of the first proposed comment resolution (N14436)

– This gives 6 months to develop a Working Draft (in NP stage)

– ... and an additional 12 months to develop a Committee Draft (in WD stage)


doc.: IEEE 802.11-11/956r1

Submission

July 2011

There was very little technical discussion at the SC6 meeting in relation to WAPI

• There was very little technical discussion at the SC6 meeting in relation to WAPI– Or the security related proposals to replace 802.1X/AE and 802.16 security

• This was partially because neither China NB technical expert or the WAPI project editor were in attendance– The Chinese NB have submitted a document protesting that these individuals

were unable to attend because they were denied visas by the USG

• It is interesting to note that the only security experts in attendance were with the IEEE 802 delegation– It is unclear how SC6 can make good decisions about security issues with so

few security experts participating from NBs, even assuming the China NB experts had been in attendance


doc.: IEEE 802.11-11/956r1

Submission

July 2011

The IEEE 802 delegation explained why 802.11i was secure and provided mutual authentication

• The presentation was N14778– Embedded on a previous page of this presentation

• It was presented in San Diego by ???

• There was only limited discussion afterwards


doc.: IEEE 802.11-11/956r1

Submission

July 2011

Limited discussion highlighted the basic disconnect between the IEEE 802 & China/Swiss NBs


IEEE 802 perspective China/Swiss NB perspective

IEEE 802 asserts that 802.11i based systems are secure and can flexibly meet the needs of a variety of user scenarios, including protection against “fake APs”.

It also asserts that WAPI duplicates the functionality of a subset of an 802.11i based system, and therefore standardisation is contrary to ISO and WTO principles that encourage one standard world wide

China/Swiss NB asserts that 802.11i systems are insecure (based on the definition of WEP and TKIP) and cannot provide mutual authentication

Similar claims are made about 802.16 security and the 802.1 security architecture

Disconnect

doc.: IEEE 802.11-11/956r1

Submission

July 2011

An attempt was made to resolve the comments on the WAPI NP proposal; but it failed!

• The SC6 Chair directed interested parties to meet on the Monday night to attempt to resolve the comments on the WAPI NP proposal

• Reps from US NB, China NB, Swiss NB, UK NB and IEEE 802 met for three hours from 6pm to 9pm

• At the end of that time a number of agreements were struck and there was also an agreement to disagree on the issue of the (in)security of 802.11i

• Unfortunately, the following morning the China NB reps informed SC6 that they had been told by China they did not have the right to make any such agreements

• As a result, no further action was taken with respect to resolving the comments on the WAPI NP proposal


doc.: IEEE 802.11-11/956r1

Submission

July 2011

There was disagreement on whether WAPI is justified if no additional functionality

Summary of (unauthorised) discussion at Monday evening ad hoc

• All parties agreed that WPA2 is secure; the remaining question is mutual authentication

• If it ultimately determined that 802.11i can be used in a system that provides mutual authentication then WAPI and 802.11i are functionally equivalent, albeit with different mechanisms

• Given the well accepted principle that standards should avoid duplication without good reason, the US NB stated it believed the proponents of WAPI need to justify its standardisation by articulating any additional functionality provided by WAPI

• The China NB reps believe a different mechanism is sufficient justification, particularly one that has already been approved by SC27

51

doc.: IEEE 802.11-11/956r1

Submission

July 2011

There was agreement that there is market demand in China


• All parties agreed that:– There is some market demand for WAPI in China

— The China NB will provide documentary evidence— eg reference to the number of WAPI hotspots deployed and planned

– Future market demand outside China is currently uncertain — Current demand for WAPI outside China is negligible today— There is no evidence yet that it will increase in the future

• The US NB noted the demand in China today is primarily driven by the regulatory requirement for WAPI in handsets, and that although WAPI is implemented in many devices in China it rarely deployed

• The China NB reps believe demand for WAPI outside China will be driven by education/marketing programmes being put in place by the Chinese Government

Slide 52

doc.: IEEE 802.11-11/956r1

Submission

July 2011

A article published since the SC6 meeting confirms the concern that WAPI is rarely used even in China

Rumor: China's Homegrown WAPI Standard Remains Unused

IT-Times, 7/04/11

• An IT Times reporter found recently that although China's own WLAN Authentication and Privacy Infrastructure (WAPI) wireless networking standard is available as a standard option for wireless equipment, it is seldom actually used. A source in the wireless division of a provincial-level telecom operator said that while WAPI is supported in all of its public wireless internet access equipment and the wireless equipment it provides to customers, the feature had not been activated in practice.

• A technician surnamed Hou at Ruijie Networks, one of the members of the WAPI Industry Alliance, said that the company's wireless networking products for enterprise and operator customers all supported WAPI -- but that "essentially none" of the clients he had dealt with had ever used WAPI security. Most, Hou said, used the competing WPA or WPA2 security standards.

• Miao Yan, a networking products department employee at IP technology provider H3C Technologies, said that some of the access points for "Wireless City" projects being developed by telecom operators currently had no encryption. If operators were to use WAPI for security, it could change users' security habits.

• A technician at an overseas wireless networking products manufacturer, meanwhile, said that the lack of WAPI support on many terminals meant that "nobody" used the technology.

• Recent data from the WAPI Industry Alliance showed that a total of more than 1 bln new WLAN chips worldwide had implemented hardware support for WAPI. Over 79 members belong to the WAPI Industry Alliance at present, and over 1,000 products, including the iPhone 4, support the standard.


doc.: IEEE 802.11-11/956r1

Submission

July 2011

There was agreement that there are known regulatory requirements for WAPI in China


• All parties agreed– There are known examples of specific regulatory requirements for WAPI in

China— The China NB will provide references to all known examples— The US NB noted this list should include the Type Approval regulation for handsets

– There may be a variety of other regulations that apply to WAPI (and 802.11i) in China and elsewhere

doc.: IEEE 802.11-11/956r1

Submission

July 2011

There was agreement that WAPI maturity may be demonstrated by reference to deployed systems


• All parties agree that WAPI can be shown to be mature by enumerating the number of deployed systems in China– China NB will provide text to justify WAPI is mature based on the number of

deployed and used (not just implemented) systems in China

– Maturity is also shown by that fact that WAPI authentication is based on TEPA

• It was agreed that integration with CAPWAP/11n/11r/11e/11w etc is not an issue of maturity– The US NB requested this issue be addressed somewhere in the NP proposal

• The US NB also requested that references be included to security reviews

doc.: IEEE 802.11-11/956r1

Submission

July 2011

Progress on WAPI NP comment resolution may continue to be made at a series of CRM teleconferences

• The US NB proposed that progress could be made on resolving the WAPI NP comments by teleconference

• SC6 subsequently agreed to hold a weekly teleconferences using Webex starting on 10 August (at 6pm PT on 9 August)– Yes: US, UK, Japan

– No: Switzerland, China

– Abstain: others


doc.: IEEE 802.11-11/956r1

Submission

July 2011

SC6 agreed to conduct a series of CRM teleconferences to resolve the WAPI NP comments

SC6 motion

• SC 6 resolves that interested stakeholders, including NBs and the IEEE 802, be authorized to participate in a series of CRM’s by teleconference and Webex to resolve the comments on the WAPI NP proposal

• The first teleconference shall be held on Wed, 10 Aug 2011 at 9am Beijing time (Tues, 9 Aug 2011 at 9pm New York time), for two hours

• The primary topic of the first conference shall be to discuss the Purpose and Justification section of the WAPI NP proposal

• The SC 6 Chair shall appoint an independent convener for the first conference

• Subsequent conferences may be held weekly as determined by the convener

• The output of the process should be a draft disposition of comments on the WAPI NP proposal


doc.: IEEE 802.11-11/956r1

Submission

July 2011

The details and the likely attendance at the CRM teleconference are not yet clear

• Attendance at the teleconference is unclear– The China NB stated at the time that they would not attend

— It is not clear whether that is still the case

– Swiss NB rep stated that he would attend

– The IEEE 802 should send a delegation

• All the teleconference details are not yet available:– 9 August 2011 @ 6pm PT

– Webex details: TBD but provided by ISO

– Chair: Dr. Ihm (KETI)

– Agenda : TBD


doc.: IEEE 802.11-11/956r1

Submission

July 2011

The IEEE 802 should authorise IEEE 802 participation in the CRM teleconferences

• It is in IEEE 802’s interest for a delegation to attend the CRM teleconference

• It is suggested that the IEEE 802.11 WG Chair be given the authority to appoint the delegation and any materials used by the delegation

• Volunteers for the delegation so far include– Bruce Kraemer

– Brian Weis

– ...


doc.: IEEE 802.11-11/956r1

Submission

July 2011

The IEEE 802 should authorise IEEE 802 participation in the CRM teleconferences

• Proposed motion– The IEEE 802 JTC1 ad hoc recommends that the IEEE 802.11 WG Chair be

authorised to appoint a delegation to the ISO/IEC JTC1/SC6/WG1 teleconference series to resolve comments on the WAPI NP proposal, and to approve any materials used by the delegation and positions proposed by the delegation

– Moved:

– Seconded:

– Result:


doc.: IEEE 802.11-11/956r1

Submission

July 2011

IEEE 802 members are encouraged to get involved in their SC6 NBs

• IEEE 802 members are important stakeholders in the WLAN industry around the world

• You are encourage to participate in the NB activities in whatever country your employer operates and ensure your view is reflected in the NB position

• Usually NB positions are set by a “mirror commitee” of some sort– In the US for example there is a Project 5 TAG that covers the MAC/PHY

activities of JTC1/SC6/WG1


doc.: IEEE 802.11-11/956r1

Submission

July 2011

IEEE 802 members are eligible to participate in the activities of many SC6 NBs

SC6 P-Members

• Korea - KATS

• Spain – AENOR

• France – AFNOR

• USA – ANSI

• UK – BSI

• Germany – DIN

• Greece – ELOT

• Russia - GOST R

• Luxemburg – ILNAS

• Tunisia – INNORPI

• Japan - JISC

• Kazakhstan – KAZMEMST

• Kenya – KEBS

• Belgium - NBN

• Netherlands – NEN

• China – SAC

• Canada – SCC

• Finland – SFS

• Switzerland – SNV

• Czech Republic - UNMZ


doc.: IEEE 802.11-11/956r1

Submission

July 2011

Non WAPI activities at SC6 meeting

doc.: IEEE 802.11-11/956r1

Submission

July 2011

A number of other items of particular interest to IEEE 802 continue to be discussed in SC6

• The Chinese NB made proposals in London (Sept 10) for alternatives to: – 802.11 – new PHY and MAC (NuFront)

– 802.1X – proposal is based on TePA (IWNCOMM)

– 802.1AE – proposal is TLSec (IWNCOMM)

– 802.16 security – proposal is TAAA (IWNCOMM)

• It was proposed in London that SC6 start Study Periods to examine these proposals before formal projects are started

• However, the documents were submitted too late for any formal resolutions to start Study Periods


802.11 802.1X 802.1AE 802.16 security

N14401 N14399 N14402 N14410

doc.: IEEE 802.11-11/956r1

Submission

July 2011

The Chinese NB security related proposals were all based on TePA

• SC27 has approved TePA (Triple-Element Peer Authentication )

• TePA is essentially the authentication part of WAPI

• TePA is defined as an amendment to 9798-3 (Information technology -- Security techniques -- Entity authentication -- Part 3: Mechanisms using digital signature techniques)

• The security proposals (replacements of 802.1X, 802.1AE and 802.16 security) are all directly or indirectly based on TePA


doc.: IEEE 802.11-11/956r1

Submission

July 2011

All the proposals of interest to IEEE 802 were at least mentioned in San Diego

• All topics from London were at least mentioned in San Diego

• There was very little new material from the China NB

• There was little technical discussion

• There were no motions related to any of the topics


doc.: IEEE 802.11-11/956r1

Submission

July 2011

802.1X/AE report of SC6 meeting in San Diego

Mick Seaman & Brian Weis

doc.: IEEE 802.11-11/956r1

Submission

July 2011

The 802 JTC2 ad hoc will hear a report on the proposed 802.1X/AE replacement

• Brian Weis presented a discussion of 802.1X/AE and the proposed replacements at the SC6 meeting in San Diego – See N14793 – 802.1 Security overview and comments on 14402 and 14399

– Mick Seaman provided support during Q&A and subsequent discussion

• Brian and Mick will provide a report on their perspectives of the meeting


N14793

doc.: IEEE 802.11-11/956r1

Submission

July 2011

Report on N-UHT discussionat SC6 meeting in San Diego

Rolf DeVegt

doc.: IEEE 802.11-11/956r1

Submission

July 2011

The 802 JTC2 ad hoc will hear a report on the proposed 802.11ac replacement; N-UHT

• Rolf DeVegt presented a discussion of 802.11ac and N-UHT at the SC6 meeting in San Diego– N14787 - IEEE 802.11’s perspectives on document 6N14746

• The China NB responded with a presentation at the end of the last day– The presentation did not get an official document number, and the version sent

to the IEEE 802 delegation was modified from that presented

– The Nufront rep wrote in an accompanying note— I think both MSR and 11 are good at data access applications, but only optimized for

different scenarios. So, we are also open to discuss and communicate.

• Rolf will provide a report on his perspectives of the meeting


N14787

China persspective of N14787

doc.: IEEE 802.11-11/956r1

Submission

July 2011

N-UHT is linked to opening of 5GHz spectrum in China

• Most of the 5GHz band in China is not open for WLAN

• However, recently there has been an effort within China led by Chinese SPs and supported by MIIT State Radio Regulatory Commission (SRRC) to open up 5GHz

• This effort has been going very well, until recently when it was asserted that the band may be opened up for N-UHT only

• The recently published 12th Five Year Plan for Wireless Radio Development provides support for this approach– The plan calls for China to make strategic use of its wireless spectrum

resources to support broadband, cloud computing, and IoT development

– It also calls for allocation of spectrum to indigenous Chinese technologies, and that it increase the amount of domestic IP in wireless radio equipment used in China


doc.: IEEE 802.11-11/956r1

Submission

July 2011

The standardisation status of N-UHT within China is currently unclear

• A recent meeting of CCSA members considered the standardisation of N-UHT in China

• A vote of some sort was held at the end of the meeting that indicated little support for N-UHT– Nufront voted yes

– A number of Chinese companies abstained

– A number of Chinese and non Chinese companies voted no

• The Nufront rep informed the SC6 meeting that N-UHT would now use an “alternate” process within CCSA– UHT (and 11n extension) also used this “alternate” process

– It appears “alternate” means “secret”

• It is unclear what the next steps are for N-UHT standardisation


doc.: IEEE 802.11-11/956r1

Submission

July 2011

Report on 802.16 security discussionat SC6 meeting in San Diego

Lei Wang

Slide 73

doc.: IEEE 802.11-11/956r1

Submission

July 2011

IEEE 802.16 Presentation Submission Template (Rev. 9) Document Number:IEEE L802.16-11/0035Date Submitted:2011-07-02Source:Lei Wang Voice: +1 858 205 7286InterDigital Communicaitons, LLC E-mail: [email protected]

Venue:IEEE 802.16 Session #74Base Contribution:None.Purpose:Report the participations in ISO/IEC JTC1 SC6 WG1 2011-06 San Diego Meeting.Notice:This document does not represent the agreed views of the IEEE 802.16 Working Group or any of its subgroups. It represents only the views of the participants listed in the “Source(s)” field above. It is offered as a basis for discussion. It is not binding on the contributor(s), who reserve(s) the right to add, amend or withdraw material contained herein.

Release:The contributor grants a free, irrevocable license to the IEEE to incorporate material contained in this contribution, and any modifications thereof, in the creation of an IEEE Standards publication; to copyright in the IEEE’s name any IEEE Standards publication even though it may include portions of this contribution; and at the IEEE’s sole discretion to permit others to reproduce in whole or in part the resulting IEEE Standards publication. The contributor also acknowledges and accepts that this

contribution may be made public by IEEE 802.16.

Patent Policy:The contributor is familiar with the IEEE-SA Patent Policy and Procedures:<http://standards.ieee.org/guides/bylaws/sect6-7.html#6> and <http://standards.ieee.org/guides/opman/sect6.html#6.3>.Further information is located at <http://standards.ieee.org/board/pat/pat-material.html> and <http://standards.ieee.org/board/pat >.

ISO/IEC/JTC1/SC6/WG1 2011-06 San Diego Meeting Report

doc.: IEEE 802.11-11/956r1

Submission

July 2011

ISO/IEC/JTC1/SC6/WG1 2011-06 San Diego Meeting Report

Lei Wang

7/02/2011

doc.: IEEE 802.11-11/956r1

Submission

July 2011

Outline

• Background

• 802.16 Related Work

• 802.16’s Participation in ISO/IEC/JTC1/SC6/WG1 2011-June San Diego Meeting

• SC6/WG1 San Diego Meeting Outcome

• What’s Next?

IEEE 802.16-11/003576

doc.: IEEE 802.11-11/956r1

Submission

July 2011

Background Information

• What’s ISO/IEC/JTC1/SC6/WG1?– ISO: International Organization for Standardization

– IEC: International Electrotechnical Commission

– JTC: Joint Technical Commission

– SC: SubCommittee

– WG: Working Group

– JTC1/SC6/WG1: PHY/DLL (i.e., Layer 1 &2) for Telecommunications and information exchange between systems

IEEE 802.16-11/003577

doc.: IEEE 802.11-11/956r1

Submission

July 2011

Background Information -- con’t

• Why does 802.16 get involved there?– A contribution (doc# N14410) was submitted to SC6/WG1 from China SC6

Mirror Committee in August, 2010;

– Pointed out Security issues in current LRWC (Long Range Wireless Communications) standards, including 802.16/WiMAX, LTE, etc.;

– Proposed in ISO/IEC JTC1/SC6 to establish a study period on MAC Security Specifications for LRWC.

– A follow-up contribution (doc# N14745) was submitted to SC6/WG1, with focus on 802.16/WiMAX in May, 2011.

IEEE 802.16-11/003578

doc.: IEEE 802.11-11/956r1

Submission

July 2011

802.16 Related Work

• Joined 802 WG level attentions / corporations about 802-related activities in SC6/WG1;

• Selected an 802.16 delegate in Session#72 (2011-03, Singapore) to join 802 delegate team, for SC6/WG1 2011-06 San Diego meeting;

• Prepared and submitted a contribution as 802.16’s response:– 802.16 document #: L80216-11_0034

– SC6/WG1 document #: N14789

• Participated in the preparation activities of the 802 delegate team;

• Participated in SC6/WG1 SD meeting in the week of June 20 in San Diego, CA, as a member of 802 delegate team

IEEE 802.16-11/003579

doc.: IEEE 802.11-11/956r1

Submission

July 2011

802.16’s Participation in SC6/WG1 2011-06 San Diego Meeting

• As a member of 802 delegate team, participated in the SD meeting;

• Presented 802.16 contributions and delivered the following main messages:– 802.16 has been adopted by internationally, including ITU and WiMAX; no

security concern arisen so far!

– 802.16/Mobile WiMAX release 1.0 has been commercially deployed/used in many countries; no security concerns arisen so far!

– Direct response to the assertions given in SC6/WG1’s document N14745, none of the assertions are valid!

– 802.16/WiMAX security is sound! no problems/bugs need to be fixed!

– Welcome any enhancement proposals, but please submit them directly to 802.16 WG.

IEEE 802.16-11/003580

doc.: IEEE 802.11-11/956r1

Submission

July 2011

SC6/WG1 San Diego Meeting Outcome

• Related to 802.16:– No resolutions / no action to the related contributions;

– similar or new contributions to ISO/SC6 in the future don’t know!

• Related to other 802 WGs– No action taken with regard to 802.1.

– One motion relevant to 802.11, about WAPI New Project.

– One motion that affects the whole of 802.

– One motion relevant to P1901 (Broadband over Power Line Networks).

IEEE 802.16-11/003581

doc.: IEEE 802.11-11/956r1

Submission

July 2011

What’s Next?

• the 802 Delegate team will hold FtF meetings in SFO during the week of 802 July Plenary;

• monitor any future relevant contributions/proposals in ISO/SC6 with regard to 802.16;

• Next ISO/SC6 meeting will be in Feb., 2012, in Guangzhou, China;

• 802.16 WG needs to select a new delegate, if decide to participate in next ISO/SC6 meeting.

IEEE 802.16-11/003582

doc.: IEEE 802.11-11/956r1

Submission

July 2011

Other matters

2011-07-18 83

doc.: IEEE 802.11-11/956r1

Submission

July 2011

Planning for SC6 teleconference in August


doc.: IEEE 802.11-11/956r1

Submission

July 2011

All decision and positions related to China will be reviewed by the IEEE International Ad-hoc

• The IEEE SA BoG has determined that the IEEE International ad hoc committee is required to review:– any documents related to China that will be represented as an IEEE position

– any decisions related to China


doc.: ieee 802.11-11/956r1 submission july 2011 andrew myles, ciscoslide 1 jtc1 ad hoc july 2011...

Documents

jtc1 standards

isoieee psdo agreement

development of standards

jtc1ieee standards

trade agreement

ieee psdo overviewhistory4

international standardsif

tbt agreement