1 / 11

IEEE Standardization Issues for SPIRIT

Options, Costs, Impacts. IEEE Standardization Issues for SPIRIT. Victor Berman, 28 July 2005. IEEE basic process. Initiate the formation of a working group Need sponsor group approval CAG (Corporate Advisory Group and DASC (Design Automation Stds. Comm.) Develop PAR and have it approved

halle
Télécharger la présentation

IEEE Standardization Issues for SPIRIT

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Options, Costs, Impacts IEEE Standardization Issues for SPIRIT Victor Berman, 28 July 2005

  2. IEEE basic process • Initiate the formation of a working group • Need sponsor group approval • CAG (Corporate Advisory Group and DASC (Design Automation Stds. Comm.) • Develop PAR and have it approved • PAR based on SPIRIT scope and purpose • To be reviewed for approval by NesCom • Develop Standard • Do the technical work – get WG consensus • Go to Ballot • Form ballot constituency • Vote with comments • Respond to comments • Recirculate until done • Open Champagne

  3. IEEE WG types • Individual based • One person = one vote • Entity based • One entity = one vote • Entity may be company, university, standards body etc. • Working Group Sets its own rules subject to IEEE overall policies and procedures • Voting, membership, fees • Working group could take a specification and ballot it unchanged • Could be interpreted as lack of openness

  4. IEEE WG Examples • SystemVerilog P1800 • Formed in July 2004 • Spec based on Accellera SV 3.1a donated to IEEE • Currently completing ballot • Fully funded • Funded %50 by Accellera %50 by member dues – roughly $7k for large cos. Sliding scale.

  5. IEEE WG Examples • SystemC P1666 • Based on OSCI 2.1 LRM donated April 25, 2005 • Currently in ballot – estimate complete end of August • Entity based but no IEEE services • Cost for tech editor $30k paid by OSCI • No dues - management done by volunteers • WG small and focused on standardizing existing spec. • Only feasible when spec is stable, uncontroversial • OSCI continues to do other work • TLM, SCV, Publicity … • Pro: allows base group to control direction • Con: IEEE standard may be perceived as “rubber stamp”

  6. IEEE WG Examples • VHDL 1076 and Verilog 1364 • Individual based WGs • Initially successful, failed in later updates • VHDL based on Intermetrics 7.2 specification Extensive redesign done but heavily funded • No dues – management, design and documentation subsidized by government contract • Verilog based on Cadence donation including OpenSim reference simulator • Mostly volunteer, some funding from Open Verilog for tech editor • Later revs of VHDL, Verilog not well received • No clear industry requirements inputs • Difficult to get funding and maintain focus.

  7. Cost for Entity Based WG • The new "cover charge" for entity balloted working groups: $3750 (per company/per project/per year) • Covers IEEE cost to provide basic services to ensure integrity of standard i.e. • IEEE services $44,390 • Tech Editor >$20k

  8. What costs are covered • NesCom • RevCom • Standards Board • Acquisition Costs • Staff Liaison • Project Website Area • Review of Drafts • Balloting support • Minimal PR Support • Publication Support

  9. What costs are not covered • Project Management $24,750 • Enhanced Draft Document Support $6,460 • Expedited publication support to publish in one month $8, 400 • Travel $4,780 • Additional optional services can also be contracted e.g. enhanced e-ballot support, additional draft reviews, technical writer services, international adoption support, additional Marketing and PR support, meeting planning, meeting attendance by staff, website development, and maintenance. • FOR SPIRIT, we need to deal with hosting of XML on IEEE web site • Estimated charge $15k per year

  10. Current Status and planning • Request for WG approved by CAG and DASC – P1685 • PAR Drafted based on SPIRIT scope and purpose • Was approved by NesCom in September • Given new requirement for “cover charge” we need to make decision on committing to this WG format • Who will be members? • Who is IEEE-SA member, required to vote in entity ballot • Currently ARM, Cadence, Mentor, Synopsys are members • Decisions • Move ahead? Other alternatives? Postpone formal std? • If IEEE what structure? Relationship to SWG? • Does it make sense to do 1.x before 2.0 is solid? • Goal setting: what do we expect to gain by IEEE std? • Publicity? Stability? Adoption? Improved specification?

  11. Recommended Action • Begin operation of P1685 WG with Steering Committee as members • Develop policies and procedures and approve them • Transfer 1.2 specification in Feb 2006 • Contract with IEEE for minimal services $44k Will require members to pay $3750 per year and Join IEEE-SA

More Related