jsh@usenix.org (Jeffrey S. Haemer) (08/16/90)
From: Jeffrey S. Haemer <jsh@usenix.org>
An Update on UNIX*-Related Standards Activities
August, 1990
USENIX Standards Watchdog Committee
Jeffrey S. Haemer <jsh@usenix.org>, Report Editor
USENIX Standards BOF
An anonymous correspondent reports on the June 12 meeting in Anaheim,
California:
If they find out who I am...
The snitch requests anonymity for several reasons, none of them
related to his alcohol consumption during the bof. (No officer, I
swear I wasn't going to log in and do system administration until I
sobered up.) The request actually relates to the snitch's employer --
a standards organization. Because I am paid neither to file snitch
reports nor to write opinions on standards, to submit this paper
through normal channels for official, outside publication, even if it
were entirely objective (or factual, for that matter), would require
endless rounds of exhaustive, organizational review.
On to the meeting.
As usual, the meeting was held immediately after the official USENIX
reception, which meant that the snitch continued to suck down his
third or fifth beer as the meeting opened.
John ``standards is politics'' Quarterman, of Texas Internet
Consulting (TIC), and Susanne Smith, of Windsound, chaired the
meeting, which was attended by about 40 people, including Larry
Wall -- nearly a standards body by himself. [ Editor: Larry is the
person responsible for such contributions to the community as rn,
patch, and perl. ] Jeff Haemer was absent because ``his wife is
having a baby any day and I just don't know where his priorities
are!?'' [Editor: Zoe Elizabeth Haemer, 6lbs. 10oz., after a forty-five
minute labor]
John started out by covering the usual stuff -- who he is, how to
reach him, what he does, [Editor: Sounds like it would have been
valuable for me to attend.] and so on. You should already know all
this since it is covered regularly in articles in the publication or
newsgroup in which you reading this article. John gave some updates
__________
* UNIXTM is a Registered Trademark of UNIX System Laboratories in
the United States and other countries.
August, 1990 Standards Update USENIX Standards BOF
- 2 -
for things that are probably already out-of-date, so I won't repeat
them. Susanne pointed out that TIC and Windsound have collaborated on
a calendar that includes all the latest dates of standards meetings,
which they were giving away for free at the meeting. [Editor: You can
request copies from tic@tic.com. They span July 1990-June 1991, and
cost $5.00, plus shipping, handling, and (Texans only) tax.]
John and Susanne briefly reviewed standards efforts of interest to
USENIX members, including P1003 (POSIX) and P1201 (Windowing).
John discussed whose standard (ISO? ANSI? FIPS? other?) was most
important but I was unable to draw any conclusions or coherently
summarize it, so I'll omit it here. Nonetheless he did get across two
points: 1) there is a lot of coordination between groups and 2) he is
very quotable. (``The IEEE standards board is baroque and
byzantine.'')
The crowd becomes surly
After this basic informational introduction, the meeting was thrown
open to the audience. The ensuing discussion was a mix of four
things:
1. Humor
A couple of examples will give the flavor.
+ An overheard conversation:
``Mach was the greatest intellectual fraud in the last ten years.''
``What about X?''
``I said intellectual.''
+ The announcement of the new Weirdnix contest:
a contest for a correct interpretation of P1003.1 or .2
furthest from the original intent. The state of Utah (I am
not making this up) is offering a trip for two to Salt Lake
City for the winner.
2. Opinion polling
John tried to discern whether attendees thought they were being
well-served by John, the USENIX Standards Watchdog Committee,
and the USENIX position on standards: to attempt to prevent
standards from prohibiting innovation. Indeed, at Snowbird, the
site of the April POSIX meeting, John was told that smaller
companies don't like our participation because of this position.
Think about this a while. (For a more detailed discussion of
the USENIX position on standards, see either ;login: 15(3):25 or
August, 1990 Standards Update USENIX Standards BOF
- 3 -
the periodic overview posting in comp.std.unix about the USENIX
Standards Watchdog Committee.)
John explained how USENIX came to its current policies and why
it does not endorse standards of its own. Some audience members
were unhappy with extant standards bodies and said they wouldn't
mind if USENIX played a more active role. Susanne reminded us
that UniForum working groups, which she praised, play such a
role.
You are encouraged to tell John and the USENIX Board what you
feel the USENIX position on standards should be, how much money
USENIX should budget for standards activities, or anything else
that's on your mind. (The current USENIX standards budget is
$45K/yr.)
On a related note, BOF attendees were quite eager to be kept
informed on standards issues. In the snitch's opinion, this is
probably the standards-related area in which USENIX most excels,
and its contribution overshadows that of any other source that
this snitch is aware of. The USENIX Standards Watchdog
Committee publishes copiously in both ;login: and the usenet
newsgroup comp.std.unix. (The level of detail can certainly not
be said to be too high, but USENIX Board meetings continually
propose reducing it.)
While the newsgroups get the information more quickly, ;login:,
in particular, remains the official voice of USENIX, and
standards issues now fill 1/3 to 1/2 of each edition. Many
non-UNIX aficionados who want to stay current on related
standards join USENIX simply to get ;login:. Both John and the
Board believe that although the newsgroup has been quite active
this past year, hard copy still circulates more widely.
Some attendees wanted increased coverage of standards currently
outside of ;login:'s bailiwick, such as RS-232 and CD-ROM
format. Unfortunately, following any and all computer-related
standards would exceed USENIX's budget and resources. [Editor:
The alert reader will have noticed Andrew Hume's fine report on
WORM-based file system standards last quarter. Send me a
report. I'll edit it. ]
John raised the possibility of breaking out the standards
information of ;login: into a separate publication. This was
also discussed at the USENIX Board meeting during the week.
Stay tuned.
John and Susanne revealed that they are writing a book on UNIX-
related standards (which will not be posted electronically). No
suggestion was made for how it could possibly stay up to date.
August, 1990 Standards Update USENIX Standards BOF
- 4 -
3. Government-bashing (Who the hell is NIST and why are they so out
of control?)
As soon as we determined that NIST wasn't represented in the
room and couldn't defend itself, it became fair game. (There
were no OSF reps either -- their BOF ran concurrently with
ours -- but no one knew what OSF was doing so we skipped
insulting them.)
John fanned the flames by giving an example where NIST had
pushed too hard, in his opinion: System Administration. ``Dot
seven shouldn't exist,'' he said, but NIST pushed for it.
Because government agencies view FIPS so favorably that a system
administration FIPS would quickly become a de facto standard for
non-government users as well, the IEEE said ``ok, let's look at
it.''
John said things didn't turn out as badly as they could have.
Unfortunately there is little common practice or prior art in
the area; fortunately, dot seven is coming along so slowly that
there may be by the time it is ready to go to ballot. Moreover,
dot seven's work has encouraged several companies and
universities to work on the parallels between system
administration and network management. Still, he reminded us
that a standard should neither create nor innovate but only
standardize, quoting Dennis Ritchie's compliment to X3J11 in his
keynote address: ``The C committee took something that wasn't
broken, and tidied it up without breaking it.''
The audience asked, ``How do we control the activities of
NIST?'' NIST is a part of the government. If you are a U.S.
citizen, your tax dollars fund it, so you can write your
congressperson. While you can communicate directly with NIST's
standards representatives, John asked that we not bug them in
the name of USENIX, ``because I have to work with these guys.''
If you feel bold, you can actually talk to John Lyons, the
director of NIST -- <lyons@micf.nist.gov> -- who lies midway
between the scutpuppy standards reps and the demonically
powerful congresscritters. He really does read and answer his
email (and his signature does say that his opinions represent
those of his organization).
John ended by defending, or at least rationalizing, NIST's pro-
active stance: ``The primary reason is money.'' A familiar
example is the Air Force's AFCAC-251 RFP (Request For Purchase).
This five-to-ten-billion-dollar request for SVR3-conforming
systems created a heap of trouble by specifying a vendor brand
name. After official protests, the procurement had to be
reworded at great expense -- ultimately to you, the taxpayer. A
vendor-independent, POSIX FIPS would have prevented this.
August, 1990 Standards Update USENIX Standards BOF
- 5 -
One of the few questions John couldn't answer was, ``Why did NBS
change its name anyway?'' This snitch scraped away at the dirt
and uncovered the explanation:
The U.S. Department of Commerce under which NBS resides had
wanted to change the name for many years because NBS has long
performed activities quite unrelated to standards. As usual,
it was politically bobbled for quite some time until a
sufficiently obvious expansion of responsibilities came up for
funding at which time (1/89, Reagan) the following
announcement was issued:
the new name, ``National Institute of Standards and
Technology,'' reflects the broadened role and new
responsibilities assigned to the agency which will include
the traditional functions of providing the measurements,
calibrations, data, and quality assurance support to U.S.
commerce and industry, together with several new programs to
support the aggressive use of new technologies in American
industry. NIST's new purpose is ``to assist industry in the
development of technology and procedures needed to improve
quality, to modernize manufacturing processes, to ensure
product reliability, manufacturability, functionality, and
cost-effectiveness, and to facilitate the more rapid
commercialization ... of products based on new scientific
discoveries.''
Several new programs have been created aimed at rapid transfer
of technology to U.S. industry. They are:
1. Regional Centers for the Transfer of Manufacturing
Technology;
2. assistance to state technology programs;
3. the Advanced Technology Program; and
4. the Clearinghouse for State Technology Programs.
Call (301) 975-3058 (NIST Technical Information) if you would
like more information on any of these programs or on NIST
itself.
4. John's usual exhortation/guilt-trip: get involved in standards!
This discussion went on for some time. UNIX is no longer guided
by a few bright individuals; it is now in the hands of vested
commercial interests, some of which don't give a damn about
innovation or good design.
August, 1990 Standards Update USENIX Standards BOF
- 6 -
For the most part, the committees themselves contain
intelligent, well-meaning people who really want to create
useful standards. But in a small committee, overlooked
unintentional flaws can ruin otherwise good work. Snitches help
forestall this by functioning as a community ear. If you don't
have time to be on a committee, get on the mailing list and
continue to read the newsgroups so you can comment on critical
issues when they arise. If you don't, you have have only
yourself to blame if the standards come out all wrong.
August, 1990 Standards Update USENIX Standards BOF
Volume-Number: Volume 21, Number 36sws@calvin.uucp (Susanne Smith) (08/22/90)
From: sws@calvin.uucp (Susanne Smith) >2. Opinion polling > > John tried to discern whether attendees thought they were being > well-served by John, the USENIX Standards Watchdog Committee, > and the USENIX position on standards: to attempt to prevent > standards from prohibiting innovation. Indeed, at Snowbird, the > site of the April POSIX meeting, John was told that smaller > companies don't like our participation because of this position. > Think about this a while. (For a more detailed discussion of > the USENIX position on standards, see either ;login: 15(3):25 or > the periodic overview posting in comp.std.unix about the USENIX > Standards Watchdog Committee.) > > John explained how USENIX came to its current policies and why > it does not endorse standards of its own. Some audience members > were unhappy with extant standards bodies and said they wouldn't > mind if USENIX played a more active role. Susanne reminded us > that UniForum working groups, which she praised, play such a > role. What I remember about this portion of the bof is a little bit different. John had been talking about the new procedures developed by the TCOS (IEEE Computer Society Technical Committee on Operating Systems) SEC (Standards Executive Committee) to limit the proliferation of standards groups and to make sure that groups in existence made acceptable progress (see Volume 19, Number 97). The question was asked as to what other forums are available for groups that do not gain SEC approval. The UniForum Technical Committees were mentioned as one forum for work that might be premature or inappropriate for TCOS. Volume-Number: Volume 21, Number 55