Telecommunications standards (wire and wireless) are the underlying "laws" that govern the emerging Global Information Highway and the existing telephone system. Telecommunications networks in every country in the world utilize formal telecommunications standards to physically interwork. Without public agreements and the telecommunications standards that codify such agreements, wide-area voice and data communications would not be possible. Communications Standards Review (CSR) reports on formal telecommunications standards work-in-progress (US and International) covering multimedia and wire line access technology standards. It is often difficult to tell whether a standards committee is a formal one. In the US, formal standards committees are accredited by American National Standards Institute (ANSI). The accreditation process is complex but offers some specific values to potential users and implementers of standards: ⦁ Standards work is coordinated to avoid two different standards committees creating different standards for the same functions. ⦁ Standards committees must maintain their standards so long as there is a minimal level of use. ⦁ The standards process is designed to prevent domination by any group and to allow all reasonable technical input to be heard. ⦁ Intellectual Property Rights (IPR, i.e., patent or pending patents) are identified (but not resolved) during the standards creating process. Today there are some non-accredited standards groups (e.g., ATM Forum and Frame Relay Forum) that develop their work and then introduce it into formal standards groups. This can be a good balance. And very rarely, as in the case of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), informal standards work is so desirable that it becomes acknowledged as formal by force of use. However, the IETF now has ties to formal standards organizations. But the rest of the non-accredited standards groups are often attempting to drape a manufacturer's proprietary approach in finer garb. The proprietary approach may be desirable (e.g., Microsoft MAPI), but it cannot meet the four values of formal standards work outlined above. At CSR, the term "Telecommunications Standard Body" refers to formal authorized telecommunications standardization bodies.

1. Amity Institute Of Telecom Technology
And Management
Topic
International Telecom Standardization Bodies
Submitted by:
Santanu Mukhopadhyay
B-Tech, 3rd Year (E&T) (2011-15)
Section: A, En No: A1607111013
AITTM
Amity University
Uttar Pradesh, India

2. In-house Project
First Topic
International Telecom Standardization
Bodies
In-House Project Location: Raniganj, West Bengal

3. Table of Contents
1. Introduction.
2. Overview of Formal Telecom Standards Organizations.
3. Relevant Standard Bodies.
4. DOSTI.
5. ITU-T in brief.
6. Global Standard Collaboration (GSC-8).
7. Global M2M Initiative.
8. Working together across different Nations to Develop
Standards.
9. India needs umbrella body on telecom standards to foster
creation of IPR and develop indigenous products.
10. Issues for Standards Development Being Pursued for the
Emergency Telecommunications Service.
11. Conclusions.
12. Bibliography & Appendix.

4. Introduction
What is Telecommunications Standard??
Telecommunications standards (wire and wireless) are the underlying "laws" that govern the
emerging Global Information Highway and the existing telephone system. Telecommunications
networks in every country in the world utilize formal telecommunications standards to physically
interwork. Without public agreements and the telecommunications standards that codify such
agreements, wide-area voice and data communications would not be possible.
Communications Standards Review (CSR) reports on formal telecommunications standards
work-in-progress (US and International) covering multimedia and wire line access technology
standards.
It is often difficult to tell whether a standards committee is a formal one. In the US, formal
standards committees are accredited by American National Standards Institute (ANSI). The
accreditation process is complex but offers some specific values to potential users and
implementers of standards:
 Standards work is coordinated to avoid two different standards committees creating
different standards for the same functions.
 Standards committees must maintain their standards so long as there is a minimal level of
use.
 The standards process is designed to prevent domination by any group and to allow all
reasonable technical input to be heard.
 Intellectual Property Rights (IPR, i.e., patent or pending patents) are identified (but not
resolved) during the standards creating process.
Today there are some non-accredited standards groups (e.g., ATM Forum and Frame Relay
Forum) that develop their work and then introduce it into formal standards groups. This can be a
good balance. And very rarely, as in the case of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF),
informal standards work is so desirable that it becomes acknowledged as formal by force of use.
However, the IETF now has ties to formal standards organizations. But the rest of the non-
accredited standards groups are often attempting to drape a manufacturer's proprietary approach
in finer garb. The proprietary approach may be desirable (e.g., Microsoft MAPI), but it cannot
meet the four values of formal standards work outlined above.
At CSR, the term "Telecommunications Standard Body" refers to formal authorized
telecommunications standardization bodies.

5. Overview of Formal Telecom Standards
Organizations
1. ITU
The International Telecommunications Union is a treaty organization of the United Nations
which has as members each country on the planet. It is also the oldest telecommunications
standards organization, dating back to 1865. It recently adopted the name ITU as the name of its
standards work, replacing the name International Telegraph and Telephone Consultative
Committee (in French the acronym was CCITT). As an organization of governments, the ITU is
also the most formal of the formal telecommunications standards organizations.
The standards work in the ITU is divided into two sections, ITU-Telecommunications (ITU-T)
and ITU- Radio communications (ITU-R). Each section is organized into Study Groups. Study
Groups are divided in Working Parties, and then further divided into Questions. The work in a
Question is led by a Rapporteur (French word meaning facilitator), and the working meetings are
termed Rapporteur meetings.
2. ETSI
The European Telecommunications Standards Institute (ETSI) was formed in 1988 by the
Commission of the European Communities to assist the process of technical harmonization in
telecommunications, broadcasting and office information technology. CSR reports on ETSI's:
 AT Access and Terminals Project.
 TIPHON Telecommunications and Internet Protocol Harmonization over Networks.
 TM6 Access Transmission Systems on Metallic Cables.
3. TIA
Telecommunications industry Association (TIA) is the formal organization responsible for the
standards of the telecommunications equipment that connects to the US telecommunications
network. The TIA is closely aligned with the Electronic Industries Association, an organization
tracing its origin back to 1944.

6. Relevant Standard Bodies
1. IETF
The Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) [unlike its umbrella organization, The Internet
Society (ISOC)] has no legal status and no defined membership. Nevertheless, for a nonexistent
(at least legally) organization, the IETF has done a remarkable job in producing stable and
widely implemented Internet standards. The IETF is divided into eight broad expertise areas: the
Applications Area, Internet Area, Operations and Management Area, Routing Area, Transport
Area, Security Area, User Services Area, and General Interest Area. Areas are in turn divided
into working groups, which focus on specific subjects of standardization. The decisions are
typically made online (by consensus—there is no voting in the IETF), and anyone with access to
the Internet can participate in any working group and get hold of any IETF documents for free.
The terminology involved in naming the IETF documents requires some further elucidation.
A contribution to the IETF takes the form of an Internet Draft. Anyone can submit his or her
ideas in such a document, which is published by the IETF upon request without prescreening for
relevance or technical accuracy. The publication of an Internet Draft implies no IETF
endorsement. The Internet Drafts are working documents, which are stored by the IETF for a
period of six months and then automatically removed. Some are working group documents, but
many are just individual publications whose authors want the IETF to take a look at them
RFCs are approved and published by the RFC editor (in many cases, the RFCs are developed by
respective working groups and then approved by the IETF) and stored permanently under unique
numbers. The term RFC, however, can denote a nonstandard document (such an RFC can be
either informational or experimental) as well as a standards track document. Unless otherwise
specified, the RFCs referred are always the standards track one. Finally, yet another subseries of
the standards RFC is called best current practice (BCP), which, according to RFC 2026, is
“Designed to be a way to standardize practices and the results of community deliberations.” RFC
2026, for example, is a BCP.
2. IEEE & ATM Forum
The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE). The IEEE has standardized local
area network (LAN) protocols, among many other things.
The ATM Forum has had a major influence on the work on broadband ISDN in ITU-T and
overall development of the concept and technology in support of quality of service.

7. 3. TIPHON
In the Project TIPHON work, the requirements for the ETS have been successfully introduced
and adopted. TIPHON works in progressive stages called Releases. Release 3 has just been
completed and includes identification of the basic provisions for the ETS in their technical
specification 1008/1009, requirements, and 3016, protocol profiles. A major Work Item (WI) has
been approved for the ETS issues in Release 4 and Release 5. The ETS WI calls for development
of a two-part document
Part 1 specifies the requirements for a comprehensive and global.
Part 2 will be a detailed systems description of how the ETS requirements are being fulfilled by
specific standards.
Work on Release 4 has now begun. Specific contributions have been provided on ETS in ENs,
ETS security, and ETS quality of service. The issue of protocol profiles and templates for ETS
will also be pursued in Release 4.
4. 3GPP
The Project 3GPP work is a very intensive and extensive activity to develop a new family of
standards for the next-generation wireless capabilities. The NCS successfully introduced the ETS
requirements into a 3GPP work item. Work is progressing on a feasibility study. Upon
completion of this work, it is anticipated that change requests to existing GSM and 3G standards
and work items will be initiated to satisfy ETS requirements.
DOSTI
DOSTI “Development Organization of Standards for Telecommunications in India” is a SDO
that aims at developing and promoting India-specific requirements, standardizing solutions for
meeting these requirements and contributing these to international standards, contributing to
global standardization in the field of telecommunications, maintaining the technical standards
and other deliverables of the organization, safe-guarding the related IPR, helping create
manufacturing expertise in the country, providing leadership to the developing countries (such as
in South Asia, South East Asia, Africa, Middle East, etc.) in terms of their telecommunications-
related standardization needs.
A consensus based approach is followed towards standards development by involving all stake
holders - Government, Academia and Industry. DOSTI follows the principles of Openness,
Transparency, Fairness, Consensus and Due Process in conducting its activities. It maintains
technology neutrality and provides a uniform playing field for all of its members.

8. ITU-T in brief
The Study Groups of ITU’s Telecommunication Standardization Sector (ITU-T) assemble
experts from around the world to develop international standards known as ITU-T
Recommendations which act as defining elements in the global infrastructure of information and
communication technologies (ICTs). Standards are critical to the interoperability of ICTs and
whether we exchange voice, video or data messages, standards enable global communications by
ensuring that countries’ ICT networks and devices are speaking the same language.
International ICT standards avoid costly market battles over preferred technologies, and for
companies from emerging markets, they create a level playing field which provides access to
new markets. They are an essential aid to developing countries in building their infrastructure
and encouraging economic development, and through economies of scale, they can reduce costs
for all: manufacturers, operators and consumers.
From its inception in 1865, ITU-T has driven a contribution-led, consensus-based approach to
standards development in which all countries and companies, no matter how large or small, are
afforded equal rights to influence the development of ITU-T Recommendations. From its
beginnings as a body standardizing international telegraph exchange, through standards body .Its
formative role in telecommunications, and in today’s converged ICT ecosystem, ITU-T has
provided the world’s best facilities to the global standardization community and remains the
world’s only truly global ICT.
Based at ITU’s headquarters in Geneva, the Telecommunication Standardization Bureau (TSB)
provides secretariat support to ITU-T Study Groups through sophisticated electronic working
methods and state-of-the-art facilities in Geneva accommodating the six official languages of the
Union – Arabic, Chinese, English, French, Russian and Spanish. Headed by an elected official
with the title Director, it is the body responsible for providing cohesion to ITU-T’s standards
development process.

9. Global Standard Collaboration
At GSC, the world’s leading telecommunications and radio standards organizations meet to
promote innovation and collaboration on a broad spectrum of standards topics. Some hundred
participants from Participating Standards Organizations (PSO) and ITU attend, along with
observers from additional groups.
Mandate of GSC
The mandate of GSC is to provide a venue for the leaders of the Participating Standards
Organizations and the ITU to: Freely exchange information on the progress of standards
development in the different regions and the state of the global standards development
environment; and Collaborate in planning future standards development to gain synergy and to
reduce duplication.
Further, the mandate of GSC is to provide a venue for the leaders of the Participating Standards
Organizations to: Support the ITU as the preeminent global telecommunication and radio-
communication standards development organization.
The GSC today includes the Global Telecommunications Standards Collaboration (GTSC) and
the Global Radio Standards Collaboration (GRSC, formerly Radio Standardization (RAST)).
Members of GSC
 ITU TelecommunicationStandardization Sector(ITU-T).
 ITU Radio-communicationSector(ITU-R).
 Alliance for Telecommunications Industry Solutions (ATIS).
 AssociationofRadio Industries and Businesses(ARIB) of Japan.
 China Communications Standards Association(CCSA)of China.
 European Telecommunications Standards Institute (ETSI).
 ICT Standards Advisory Council of Canada (ISACC).
 Telecommunications Industry Association(TIA).
 Telecommunications TechnologyAssociation(TTA)of Korea.
 Telecommunications TechnologyCommittee (TTC)of Japan.

10. Subjects given particular priority in the meetings were:
 Beyond 3rd generation mobile networks;
 Next Generation Networks;
 Fixed and wireless access networks;
 Public protection and disaster relief;
 Generic regulation of radio products;
 Electromagnetic Radiation;
 Intelligent transportation systems;
 Quality of service;
 Measurement uncertainty; and
 Consumer and user issues.
The GSC-8 meeting Produced SeveralResolutions including those Dealing
with:
 Emergency Communications.
 Global Cooperation and Collaboration on Lawful Access And Interception.
 Mapping Standards for "Beyond IMT 2000.
 Facilitating Liaison in Relation to Measurement Methodologies for Assessing Human.
 Exposure to RF Energy.
 Radio Microphones.
 Global Radio Standards Collaboration on RLAN standardization.
 Standards for wireless access systems including Radio Local Area Networks operating in
the 5 GHz range.
 Broadband Services in Rural and Remote Areas.
 Next Generation Networks.
 Patent Policies.
 User Interests.
The participating organizations agreed to increase the exchange of information (including
information relating to work plans), principally by electronic means and meetings between the
heads of each organization. They agreed to build upon their efforts to distribute information
electronically and to conduct 'virtual meetings' as a means of continuing their work. Emphasizing
the importance of user input into the standardization process, a major area of discussion was
challenges facing consumers in participating in the development of standards. Further avenues
for collaboration and consultation were proposed which could provide valuable and timely
insight into consumer needs in future standardization. The group is also concerned with special
communication needs of people with disabilities and the aged community.

11. Global M2M initiative
LONDON – Seven standards developments organizations have agreed to work together on
common global standards for machine-to-machine (M2M) communications. The seven SDOs are
ARIB, ATIS, CCSA, ETSI, TIA, TTA, and TTC (see below for expansion of the abbreviations).
The seven SDOs have taken initial steps to form a global initiative for M2M Standardization,
according to ETSI (Sophia Anti polis, France).
In meetings held over the last few months the seven have identified the need for a common, cost-
efficient, widely available M2M service layer in communications protocols, ETSI said. This
needs to be available to be embedded in M2M application servers and in within various pieces of
hardware and software.
The M2M initiative will seek to develop end-to-end specifications for M2M communications
with an initial focus on the service layer using common use cases and architecture principles
across multiple M2M applications.
In addition, the initiative will focus on cooperative efforts with other standards organizations and
forum, including those representing specific aspects of M2M applications.
The M2M global initiative is to be open allowing other organizations and parties to participate at
various levels, ETSI added.
The global initiative is expected to get up and running early in 2012.
The global initiative has currently gathered representatives from: the Association of Radio
Industries and Businesses (ARIB) and the Telecommunication Technology Committee (TTC) of
Japan; the Alliance for Telecommunications Industry Solutions (ATIS) and the
Telecommunications Industry Association (TIA) of the USA; the China Communications
Standards Association (CCSA); the European Telecommunications Standards Institute (ETSI);
and the Telecommunications Technology Association (TTA) of Korea.

12. Working together across the different
Nations to Develop Standard
Developing telecoms standards and supporting documents is an expensive and time-consuming
business. Leveraging the standards of other standards development organizations and
collaborating with them on developing new standards are ways to not only reduce costs, but also
to contribute to timely, useful and harmonized standards for the industry as a whole.
Since the creation of the TM Forum, the number of SDO’s both accredited and non-accredited
has increased considerably, making the management of liaisons between organizations and the
TM Forum more difficult, but no less important. The Forum is a strong believer in the value of
liaison, and has had and still has many important relationships with other standards
organizations.
These are organizations conducting important work that in some way intersects with the work of
the Forum. The research uncovers potential liaison opportunities for leveraging standards,
contributing expertise or collaboratively developing standards.
• ATIS: Alliance for Telecommunications Industry Standards.
• BBF:Broadband Forum.
• DMTF:Distributed ManagementTask Force.
• ETSITISPAN: EuropeanTelecommunications Standards Institute-
TISPAN.
• ITSMF:IT Service ManagementForum.
• MEF: Metro Ethernet Forum.
• NIST: NationalInstitute of Standards and Technology;
• OASIS: Organization for the Advancement of Structured Information
Standards;
• OMG: ObjectManagementGroup.
and that of the DMTF and We found that considerable overlap continues to exist between the
work of the TM Forum and that of the larger, communications-oriented standards bodies such as
3GPP considerable opportunities for liaison of one sort or another.
In both cases, the TM Forum has strong, historical liaison relationships and these continue.
Reflecting the convergence between communications and the enterprise, a good degree of
overlap continues among the work of TM Forum and ITU-T. Although the Forum takes a
business-oriented approach to its work, focusing on validation with stakeholders and practical
evaluation, there are ITSMF. The TM Forum can boast strong, ongoing liaison relationships with
the two organizations.

13. Cloud computing standards
Our last report, two important standardization initiatives have emerged: cloud computing
standardization involving the ITU-T, NIST, DMTF, ATIS and IEEE and an initiative to develop
a federated network information model involving the IETF, 3GPP, and DMTF.
TM Forum has much to offer these initiatives in terms of assets and expertise and is proactive in
doing so. In the area of cloud services, it has a close working relationship with DMTF and is
active in the NIST discussions. The TM Forum is also leading the federated network information
model initiative.
In addition to contributing assets, the TM Forum has been an enthusiastic proponent of
leveraging standards from other organizations in its own work. The TM Forum has had a long
history of liaison with other SDOs that are using and developing standards. Many important
liaisons are ongoing, and in this report, a number of other important opportunities to develop
timely, useful, cost-effective, and harmonized standards are identified.
Standards evolution
During the last decade, the number of organizations that develops standards and agreements for
the communications industry has increased substantially. This has led to the increased possibility
of overlap and duplication of effort, not to mention conflicting standards. Additionally, many of
the standards being developed are now becoming increasingly important to the TM Forum and
its members. Standards on service-oriented architectures (SOA) and modeling tools are cases in
point.
When the TM Forum first began its work, liaison amongst SDOs was fairly easy to manage.
Global telecommunications-management standards were approved by just a few large standards
bodies, such as the CCITT (now ITU-T), and implementation agreements were developed from
the standards on a sector-by- sector basis. During the two decades of TM Forum’s existence, the
convergence of voice and data, the appearance of new mobile and broadband technologies, and
the convergence of telecommunications and information technology have brought new players
into the space. This has made the liaison management more difficult, but no less important.
Making liaisons work
Liaison and collaboration amongst SDOs can take many forms, ranging from an arms-length
exchange of working documents, to collaborative work that can lead to the publication of
harmonized standards. Collaborative work is often best achieved by individuals who are
members of both SDOs. Other forms of liaison are the adoption of existing standards of one
SDO by another and implementation agreements. In all cases, the driving force is the need to
avoid overlap and duplication of work and to publish harmonized and useful standards.
The different working styles, intellectual property licensing regimes, and required deliverables of

14. SDOs can sometimes make collaboration difficult. Most SDOs have a hierarchical approval
process, where a managing committee of members approves standards for publication. Other
SDOs are popular in nature and rely on ratification by the user community. Most SDOs develop
their documents over a period of time from member contributions; however, there exists one
which issues requests for proposals to the industry as a basis for its standards.
All SDOs issue their standards in the form of text-based documents, but some additionally
require software implementations of interface standards and even test kits to test conformance.
SDOs develop a number of different types of standards including:
• Architectural documents that guide the overall systems design;
• Interface standards and data models and related conformance requirements
that enable interoperability betweensystems built by different organizations;
• Best-practicesguides and auditing guidelines that setthe business
framework;
• Vocabulary standards to provide clarity betweenproviders and suppliers.
Roadblocks to successful liaisons
One of the main roadblocks to successful liaisons between and, in some cases, within SDOs is
simply not knowing that what others are doing.
The TM Forum has started a project to address the issue by developing a visualization of the
management standards landscape. The visualization is a single graphic in the form of a railway
map, where:
• Railwaylines represent the work of the SDOs;
• Interchange stations represent a view of the sectors ofmanagement
standardization that would be widely recognizedin the industry; and
• Stops on the lines: circles that intersectthe railwaylines and stations —
indicate that an SDO has an interest or activity in that sectorstandardization.
The graphic is part of an interactive tool that allows a user drill down into the details of the work,
liaisons and existing collaborations amongst various organizations. The TM Forum is planning to
make the tool freely available to the industry to help identify areas of potential collaboration.
There is an increasing openness on the part of SDOs to make their work plans generally
available. While information on scope and mission of SDOs is generally available from their
respective websites, details of work plans, work progress, meeting reports and interim
deliverables are generally not. The situation is improving: ITU-T now makes the work plans of
all its study groups freely available, and the proceedings of the Global Standard Collaboration
meetings are similarly freely available. The ITU-T’s joint coordination activity on management
makes its all documents freely available

15. Interoperability
SDOs or contributing its own agreements to accredited standards bodies.
TM Forum projects are currently engaged in a large number of standardization activities
including the use of SOA and web services, the management of NGNs (including IP services)the
development of software-enabled services, and the convergence of IT and telecoms In summing
up last year’s report we noted that there are many SDOs, some large and some small, some
accredited and some not, that are developing interoperability standards and supporting
architectures and information models for telecoms management remains an expensive and time-
consuming activity, and the potential for duplication and ove. We see no reason to change that
conclusion.
Although some working groups have completed their work and closed down, others, especially
in the area of cloud computing, have sprung up. Standards development rlap, and the publication
of conflicting standards should continue to be a concern to the industry.
TM Forum has had a long history of fruitful liaison activities with other SDOs in terms of
collaborative working, leveraging the standards of other services.

16. India needs umbrella body on Telecom
Standards to foster creation of IPR and
develop Indigenous Products
Despite being rocked by scandals like the 2G spectrum scam, the fact remains that the Indian
Telecom has been a success story with more than 900 million mobile phone subscribers.
Only 15 years back, getting a landline phone seemed like a daunting task. Today, India has
achieved an impressive telecom-density of more than 75 and ours is the SECOND LARGEST
TELECOM MARKET IN THE WORLD.
However, the sad part is that our growth story has been largely scripted with significant
dependence on import of equipment. In 2009-10 alone, the demand for telecom equipment was
worth 54,75crore and it is estimated to cross a whopping 90,000crore in five years.
Telecom trade deficit amounts to 70% of the total demand, thereby resulting in a high outflow of
foreign exchange reserves. Even in cases where some equipment is manufactured or developed
in India, the components and devices are almost always 100% imported and there is hardly any
Indian intellectual property.
It is believed that if this trend continues, the telecom equipment import bill may soon touch the
oil import bill - the highest import for any segment.
When there is a huge domestic market, why is there a dearth of Indian Telecom technology
companies? Telecom technology development is heavily driven by intellectual property rights
(IPR), innovations, patents and contributions to standards.
With an ever-increasing awareness of IPR, several countries are proactively using IPR reserves
to realign their trade policies and influence international standards. For example, China has been
working on its home- grown technology called TD-SCDMA since 1998.
TD-SCDMA, blessed by the Chinese government, has now evolved into the TD-LTE standard, a
4G technology standard likely to be adopted by Indian operators. In earlier technologies, such as
2G or 3G, most of the IPR has been held by companies from the western world. In contrast, in
4G technology, a significant fraction of the IPR is being held by Asia-Pacific organizations

17. companies. Despite this amiable trend in favor of the Asia-Pacific region, India's contribution to
global telecom standards is practically non-existent.
India is the only top telecom market in the world with no umbrella body focusing on telecom
standards. All other countries with sizeable telecom market have their own national standards
development organizations (SDO) and participate in the global standards process.
There is no common interface to represent Indian industry and Indian requirements in global
standards. Our growth story is that of a large consumer of imported technology rather than being
innovators of the same. We could also not leverage the success of C-DoT formed in 1984 to its
full potential.
The need of the hour is to impel IPR and promote standards participation in order to catalyze
technology development and manufacturing in India. The government needs to allocate
significant resources and give a big push towards reflecting Indian IPR and Indian requirements
into the global standards. The government needs to immediately form an Indian telecom SDO
with active participation from all stakeholders. Being a potent telecom force, development of
such an SDO would help India to incorporate some of its specific requirements into the new
global telecom standards. Here, academic research also has a big role in leading IPR-driven
innovations.
Imported telecom equipment not only has direct economic implications, but it also has the
potential of Serious National Security. Today, telecom networks are a part of nation's strategic
infrastructure. Equipment deployed in such networks could have potential malware, which could
even be triggered from outside India.
In case of such an attack on the national telecom network, India's responses to any other sort of
aggression would be seriously crippled. Needless to say, failure of such a vital aspect of
infrastructure would damage the economy beyond repair. Apart from a large domestic market,
we have a strong talent pool as well. We, however, lack a vibrant entrepreneurial ecosystem. We
need to create an ecosystem to promote companies to design and develop products the creation
of IPR .The government has garnered enough funding through spectrum auctions, spectrum
usage and licensing charges, and is likely to earn more. Thus, it would be opportune to create a
fund where part of spectrum and license earnings can be used to provide financial support and
incentives to operators for buying products from Indian telecom companies. In the beginning,
Indian companies developing products will require state financing support and even other fiscal
incentives to compete with global companies.
We do not have to create preferential market access, but without initial proactive support from
the state, we will not be able to solve the perennial chicken-and-egg situation. This will also
drive participation in global standards. Eventually, such a measure would be a shot in the arm for
the economy by reducing imports as well as by saving precious foreign exchange. We have the
potential to create a vibrant ecosystem that can compete globally. We have missed the 2G, the
3G and the 4G technology bus. Time is just ripe for India to jump on to the bandwagon of the
next-generation (beyond 4G) technology.

18. Issues for Standards Development Being
Pursued for the Emergency
Telecommunications Service
The NCS N2 Division, Technology and Programs, is pursuing the task of establishing a
comprehensive family of standards for an Emergency Telecommunications Service (ETS) in
Evolving Networks (ENs). This effort is being worked in cooperation with the
telecommunications industry in major national and international standards bodies. This effort
addresses the issues of mechanisms in the new protocols and signaling systems to support
priority services for preferential handling of ETS communications. This is a multidimensional
effort addressing myriad issues that will ensure the provision of a comprehensive and effective
ETS in future networks. The issues for transition during a period of convergence from today’s
telecommunication services to all packet-based infrastructure of the future are also being
addressed. The figure below summarizes the standards activities and issues of focus that are
being pursued.
Issues being pursued
ITU-T
1. Functional requirements.
2. Telephony Call control.
3. Backbone signaling.
4. Quality of service.
5. Architecture & Framework.
6. Customer service & Management.
7. Customer Support(SG 2, 4, 9, 11, 13, 16, SSG).

19. ETSI
1. Functional Requirements.
2. ProtocolProfiles & Templates.
3. Quality of service.
5. Architecture & Framework.
6. Security (ETSI, TIPHON, 3GPP).
TM FORUM
1. Service Level Agreements.
2. Security Essentials.
3. Customer Satisfaction.
4. Market Policies.
IETF
1. Telephony Call Control.
2. Backbone Signaling.
3. Quality of Service.
4. ProtocolFramework.
5. Security.
6. Multimedia Services.
7. Architecture & Framework.

20. Conclusion
The multidimensional effort addresses myriad issues in many industry activities to establish a
comprehensive family of industry standards for an effective ETS. Over the past year
considerable progress has been made.
The basic groundwork has now been laid. However, there is still much to be done through
effective use of limited resources and good cooperation with industry. The process of developing
standards is one of consistent participation in the work, persistence to put forth and promote the
issues, and patience for the details to be worked out and agreed upon through industry consensus.

21. Bibliography
1. Google.
2. Wikipedia.
3. www.aits.org
4. www.csrstds.com
5. simple-telecom.blogspot.com
6. www.itu.int
7. www.pcadvisor.uk
8. www.gs1.org
9. Newspapers.
10. Magazines.

22. Appendix
1. Collecting Information: 5 days.
2. Noting down in a Notepad: 7 days.
3. Editing & Selecting Useful Information: 6 days.
4. Working in Microsoft Word: 2 days.
5. Re-arranging Information: 7 days.
6. Final Touchand Printing: 3 days.
Total: 30 days
Thank You