Approaches from other SDOs to Conformity and Interoperability,

conformance databases

Paolo Rosa Head, Workshops and Promotion Division Workshops and Promotion DivisionTelecommunication Telecommunication Standardization Standardization BureauBureau

Regional ITU Consultation on Conformance Assessment and Interoperability

(Sydney, Australia, 16-17 September 2010)

2

Pros from Members to ITU DB• Interoperability as Mission for ITU (Res. 71 – Strategic Plan)

• Res. 76 intended to assist DCs and manufacturers should contribute to its implementation

• Examples of problems associated with interoperability and conformance of equipments and systems. Documentation submitted to TSB so far

• The conformance database would be exceedingly useful for operators and end users for whom equipment are manufactured. Good experience in this field is proven by existing DBs from other SDOs

• Confidence of users in the kind of equipment they buy is more important than how quickly they appear on the market

• ITU-T Recommendations must be studied in view of conformance assessment and interoperability testing as relevant

• Some of them already ensure interoperability of products provided by different

manufacturers. For these Recommendations conformance and interoperability testing are complementary considering that conformance is the first step to enable interoperability.

3

Cons from Members to ITU DB

• The database presents both legal and associated financial liability risks for the ITU and the ICT industry

• A step-by-step approach should be taken in order to take into account the concerns of the membership as ITU moves forward in implementing the action lines adopted by Council 2009

• The use of accredited test labs is time consuming and expensive, delaying users’ access to technology and slowing global trade

• TSB should first prepare a business plan to establish the real costs, potential liabilities and measurable benefits to society before launching the ITU-T Conformity Database

• Test centres in developing countries, according to one contributor, would lead to confusion in the market place

- reduce time-to-market- reduce testing costs thanks to Mutual Recognition Agreements and/or Arrangement (tested once tested

everywhere)- increase competition

- increase confidence of end users to products,- be a window available to vendors to show conform

products

Databases from other SDOs are populated by the same industries claiming for exactly opposite reasons …

Databases by SDOs and Forums able to:

Route 1Route 2

Conformity Assessm

ent / Certification

Implem

entation of the ITU

Conformity

Programm

e: procedure

ITU-T Recs & test suites

Supplier’s conformity

routedecision

Test lab (Certification Body /

Rec.A.5 SDO/Forum lab)accredited lab

(ISO/IEC 17025)

ITU Conformity Database

Test results(ITU-T X.290)

1st partyEvaluation

Supplier’s ConformityDeclaration

(ISO/IEC 17050)

Test results(ITU-T X.290)

Route 2 AAccredited

(ISO/IEC Guide 65) Certification Body

Evaluation

ConformityCertificate issued by

CertificationBody

ITU C&

I services

Supplier’s Request to ITU

Route 2 BProduct successfully tested

in a lab recognized byany Rec. ITU-T A.5

SDO / Forum

6

Supplier’s Declaration of Conformity – SDoC 1/2

8

9

The ITU Pilot Conformity Database:Example

Company ITU Ref. code

Prod. Name

Product category

ITU-T Recs/Edition

SDOs/ Forums

Date SDoC

Vendor A C-12345 AH-1234 VDSL 2 G.992.2,

G.995, GPONIEEE, IETF, OIF

DD.MM.AA “.pdf”

Vendor BVendor C

Single-multisearch facilities for any fields

10

A possible References data basefor conform products

Company Prod.

NameProduct category

Applications SDOs stand.s

Customers

Member A AH-1234 F.O. modem GPON, Access,

multilambdaITU,IEEE, IETF, OIF

A, B, C, E, F

Member BMember C

Single-multisearch facilities for any fields

11

Customers: looking for conformity as the main requirement to increase interoperability and confidence in vendors, to optimize investments and to benefit of improved quality of service

Conformity : necessary but not sufficient condition to increase the probability of interoperability and improve quality of service

Vendors : claiming for conformity to standards and interoperability as key elements able to create better business opportunities and to demonstrate the excellence of products with respect to the competitors in the marketplace

ITU Conformity Database showing products claimed as successfully tested for conformity is a “key tool” to:a)to help customers find best solutions for their needsb)to offer vendors a for-free additional opportunity to make business giving visibility to their conforming products

Transitive property for C&ITRUE

TRUE

TRUE

THEREFORE

12

Existing DBs from some other SDOs

• IEEE – ICAP Product Conformance Registry www.ieee-isto.org/icap-program/products

• Open Mobile Alliance – Products Listing www.openmobilealliance.org/Application/ProductListing/products

• FCC part 68 - www.fcc.gov/wcb/iatd/part68faqs.pdf “The rules also provide for the development and maintenance of a publicly accessible database of approved TE and for labeling TE that have been shown to comply with the technical criteria. All approved TE are required to be listed in the database and to be properly labeled”. The Administrative Council for Terminal Attachments (ACTA), joint sponsorship of the Alliance for Telecommunications Industry Solutions (ATIS) and the Telecommunications Industry Association (TIA), mandate “for maintaining a publicly accessible database of all approved TE”

• WiMAX Forum Spectrum and Regulatory Database: www.wimaxforum.org/resources/wimax-forum-spectrum-and-regulatory-database

• http://www.wimaxforum.org/certification/certified-product-showcase

• Wi-Fi certified products database: www.wifi.org/certified_products.php

• Global Certification Forum (GCF) (mobile phones and wireless devices based on 3GPP standards) GCF's guiding maxim is "test once, use anywhere."

http://www.globalcertificationforum.org/WebSite/public/home_public.aspx

The FCC Conformity DatabaseFCC – 00 – 171

NOTICE OF PROPOSED RULEMAKING Adopted: May 15, 2000 Released: May 22, 2000

• Item 68 : Declaration of Conformity.

(omissis)……DoC is a procedure under which the party responsible for the equipment's compliance with specific technical parameters, the manufacturer, importer, or assembler, causes measurements to be made of equipment performance with regard to those parameters. The party performing such measurements must be accredited for doing so by an authorized accreditation body based on the International Organization for Standardization and International Electrotechnical Commission ("ISO/IEC") Guide 25. (omissis)

• Item 76 Database of Approved or Certified Equipment • Currently, the Commission maintains a data base of terminal equipment registered

pursuant to Part 68……..a private entity be responsible for sponsoring and maintaining a similar database.

• ……….entities using either DoC or verification be required to submit pertinent information regarding their identity and approved equipment to a database administrator. (omissis)

The FCC-Administrative Council for Terminal Attachment

ACTA (TIA-ATIS) DatabaseRef. FCC 00-400 of 21 December 2000

• (item 108) the database “will permit interested parties such as the Commission, providers of telecommunications, and consumers to track and identify suppliers or importers of non-compliant equipment. As such, the database should ameliorate concerns regarding the potentially adverse impact of non-compliant terminal equipment on the PSTN by ensuring that suppliers are held accountable for any damage their equipment may cause to the PSTN”

Registration Numbering and Labeling • (Item 81) As stated previously, when the Commission determines that a piece of terminal

equipment meets the technical requirements for that equipment, the Commission assigns a unique registration number to that piece of equipment. We tentatively conclude that although the Commission will no longer be responsible for CPE registration, some form of unique identifying label must be applied to all terminal equipment. This identifying label is necessary to adequately identify CPE as an approved piece of terminal equipment that customers are entitled to connect to the PSTN (omissis)

• The ICAP website (www.ieee-isto.org/icap) is the externally facing “storefront” for the ICAP program

• Providing a home base for industry groups involved with conformity programs associated with IEEE standards– Includes Laboratory Services Listing– Includes Registry of Conforming Products

IEEE Interoperability & Conformity Assessment Program (ICAP)

Is ITU C&I DB creating confusion on the marketplace? The GCF – Certific. explained

• Manufacturers who certify their mobile devices to GCF rules and procedures are assured that:

– their products will benefit from a high degree of interoperability– time-to-market for new products is reduced using this respected 'one-stop' verification

process – expensive and time-consuming duplication of testing effort can be avoided

• With GCF's 'tested once, use anywhere' maxim, manufacturers can significantly reduce the requirement for operator acceptance testing if presenting GCF certified devices.

• GCF Certification delivers extra confidence throughout the mobile value chain by demonstrating that a mobile phone or wireless device:is compliant with requirements agreed by GCF, which in turn reference core and test specifications published by recognised standards organisations and other industry forums

• will interoperate correctly when used on a variety of digital mobile networks

Just an example from WiMax Forum…

Or better two examples…the GCF DB

The parallel TSB step-by-step approachRes. 76 (WTSA-08)

Conformity and interop toolsS-by-S STND

Standardization needsS-by-S FIN

Financial issuesRes.47 WTDC-10

Capacity building / test centres

Conformity Data Base available to the public immediately

SDoC completeness & liability advices, database layout, criteria to reduce costs

Comparison and evaluation of certified vs non-certified testing costs (%)

Analysis of the results of the ITU-D Questionnaire on C&I labs in the regions

Promote conformity / interop testing and the ITU-T database(s)Inputs from any vendor and free access by end users

Continue monitoring of main C&I requirements from developing countries linked to applications and technology, neutrality

Comparison of financial impact of certification testing on final manufacturing costs of products and final cost to the end users (%).

Creating a conformity testing and interoperability culture in the regions: workshops & Capacity Building opportunities

Create a C&I portal managed by ITU to provide a general overview on C&I and links to activities of other SDOs/Industry/regulators/Governments and to Labs

Comparison of test methods, creation of ITU reference test methods and alternative test methods (ITU SGs/SDOs).Overlapping/duplication issuesStimulate MRAs in the regions

Analysis of the status of MRAs worldwide.Benefits of MRAs in terms of time to access markets and savings on unnecessary repeated testing worldwide.

Status of the existing labs in regions. Type of testing labsDevelopment of criteria to establish test centres in the regions

Coordination with ILAC, IAF, BIPM, UNIDO, Financial Institutions and other SDOs / Forums

Study new / adapt existing test suites where needed and still not available SGs, JAC-CIT

Evaluate costs incurred by end users and vendors due to the lack of C&I. Services, image, market, competition

Establishment of costs for the establishment / enhancement of labs in the regions and creation of regional networks

Review the conformity data base and procedures according to vendors / users needs. SDO/Forums Labs

Review the existing market surveillance tools

Evaluation of possible financial contributions by non members to input data in the ITU Conformity Database

Establishing capacity building programs in the regions creation of labs networks

Review interop capabilities / technologies and C&I portal

Create synergy users/vendors/regulators/SDO to improve the C&I program

Preparation of the long-term Business Plan based on the dynamics of the C&I process

Create criteria and procedures to prepare RFPs for private and public entities (e.g. the Germany Project)

Periodical review of whole implementation of Res.76 din function of the S-by-S parallel approach

Study new tools to parallel the database and to give feedback to ITU-T SGs for standards review and studies.

The open consultations demonstrated a strong support to the ITU-T C&I programme, the contributions received and the demonstration of the databases produced by other SDOs / Forums urged the TSB to:

• not delay anymore the implementation of Res. 76 and of the action lines endorsed by the council-09

• Made publicly available the ITU conformity database• Create an interoperability database• Set up a C&I portal for information, links to other SDOs and to

Labs institutions• Implement the “parallel” step-by-step approach where the

views of the industry are taken into account• Contributions from stakeholders to enrich the contents of the

ITU C&I Portal are welcome

Conclusions

Thank you