IEEE P-1622
Voting Systems
Electronic Data Interchange
February 8–9, 2011 Meeting
at the US Election Assistance Commission
Arthur M. Keller, Ph.D., P-1622 Chair
Welcome
• Call the meeting to order.
• Appoint a secretary.
• Thanks for participating in an issue of national
import.
• Thanks to James Long of EAC for hosting this
meeting.
• Thanks for John Wack of NIST for helping to
organize this meeting.
February 8, 2011
IEEE P-1622 WG Meeting
1
Welcome
• Belinda Collins, Director of NIST Technology
Services.
February 8, 2011
IEEE P-1622 WG Meeting
2
Welcome
• James Long, U.S. Election Assistance
Commission. Our host.
February 8, 2011
IEEE P-1622 WG Meeting
3
IEEE Matters
• Attendance. In person attendees, make sure
you sign the attendance list each time.
• Remote attendees, we will take attendance
periodically. You need to attend at least half
of the meeting in order to count as attending
the meeting.
February 8, 2011
IEEE P-1622 WG Meeting
4
IEEE Patent Policy Instructions
The IEEE-SA strongly recommends that at each WG meeting the chair or a designee:
– Show slides #1 through #4 of this presentation
– Advise the WG attendees that:
• The IEEE’s patent policy is consistent with the ANSI patent policy and is described in
Clause 6 of the IEEE-SA Standards Board Bylaws;
• Early identification of patent claims which may be essential for the use of standards
under development is strongly encouraged;
• There may be Essential Patent Claims of which the IEEE is not aware. Additionally,
neither the IEEE, the WG, nor the WG chair can ensure the accuracy or completeness
of any assurance or whether any such assurance is, in fact, of a Patent Claim that is
essential for the use of the standard under development.
– Instruct the WG Secretary to record in the minutes of the relevant WG meeting:
• That the foregoing information was provided and that slides 1 through 4 (and this
slide 0, if applicable) were shown;
• That the chair or designee provided an opportunity for participants to identify
patent claim(s)/patent application claim(s) and/or the holder of patent
claim(s)/patent application claim(s) of which the participant is personally aware and
that may be essential for the use of that standard
• Any responses that were given, specifically the patent claim(s)/patent application
claim(s) and/or the holder of the patent claim(s)/patent application claim(s) that
were identified (if any) and by whom.
– The WG Chair shall ensure that a request is made to any identified holders of potential
essential patent claim(s) to complete and submit a Letter of Assurance.
– It is recommended that the WG chair review the guidance in IEEE-SA Standards Board
Operations Manual 6.3.5 and in FAQs 12 and 12a on inclusion of potential Essential
Patent Claims by incorporation or by reference.
February 8, 2011
IEEE P-1622 WG Meeting
5
Participants, Patents, and Duty to Inform
All participants in this meeting have certain obligations under the IEEE-SA
Patent Policy. 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
Quoted text excerpted from IEEE-SA Standards Board Bylaws subclause 6.2
Early identification of holders of potential Essential Patent Claims is strongly
encouraged
No duty to perform a patent search



SlideFebruary
#1 8, 2011
IEEE P-1622 WG Meeting
6
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/develop/policies/bylaws/sect6-7.html#6
IEEE-SA Standards Board Operations Manual
http://standards.ieee.org/develop/policies/opman/sect6.html#6.3
Material about the patent policy is available at
http://standards.ieee.org/about/sasb/patcom/materials.html
If you have questions, contact the IEEE-SA Standards Board Patent Committee
Administrator at [email protected] or visit
http://standards.ieee.org/about/sasb/patcom/index.html
This slide set is available at
https://development.standards.ieee.org/myproject/Public/mytools/mob/slideset.ppt
SlideFebruary
#2 8, 2011
IEEE P-1622 WG Meeting
7
Call for Potentially Essential Patents
• 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 (LOA):
– 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
SlideFebruary
#3 8, 2011
IEEE P-1622 WG Meeting
8
Other Guidelines for IEEE WG 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.
SlideFebruary
#4 8, 2011
IEEE P-1622 WG Meeting
9
Overview of the IEEE-SA Process
Malia Zaman
Program Manager
Voting Systems Electronic Data Interchange Committee
P1622 Working Group Meetings
Feb 8-9, 2011
A New Beginning for P1622
P1622 is important work.
We welcome the involvement of all
stakeholders.
IEEE is proud to be associated with this
effort.
Developing a standard to support voting
systems in the U.S. is critical.
Together, IEEE, NIST, and other
stakeholders must see the standard
through to completion.
11
February 8, 2011
In this Presentation we will cover:
Overview of the IEEE-SA Process
Project Approval Process
Development of Draft Standard
Sponsor Balloting Process
myBallot/myProject Access/Membership
Services
Standards Board Approval Process
Resources
12
February 8, 2011
IEEE—A Global Organization
IEEE is a non-profit organization for
scientific and educational advancement
IEEE is made up of international
technical professionals living around the
world who are fostering
technological innovation and
excellence for the benefit of
humanity
13
February 8, 2011
IEEE Standards Association
Oversees development of standards within IEEE
Global Membership
– Over 7 000 individual members
– Over 127 corporate members
– Approximately 20 000 participants
Broad Standards Portfolio
– Approximately 1 000 active standards
– Approximately 400 standards in development
Governed by volunteers
An independent organization
– Participants come together to develop
standards with many constituents
14
February 8, 2011
IEEE-SA Governance Structure
Board of Governors (BOG)
Legal & fiduciary, strategy, policy, finance,
Bus Dev, International,
Appeals, Awards
ISTO
Standards
Board (SASB)
Standards Process
SCC Oversight
Corporate Advisory
Group (CAG)
Corporate Program Strategy
Sponsor
Sponsors
Standards
Working
Groups/
Projects
15
February 8, 2011
Societies (Computer Society),
Committee (EASC), Standards
Coordinating Committees
(SCC’s) ,CAG, etc.
IEEE Standards Development
Five principles guide standards development
Ensuring integrity and wide acceptance for IEEE standards
IEEE standards reflect the standardization principles as
stated by the WTO
16
February 8, 2011
Societies and Technical Sponsor Committees
IEEE Aerospace and Electronic Systems
Society (AES)
IEEE Microwave Theory and Techniques
Society (MTT)
IEEE-SA Board of Governors (BOG)
IEEE Nuclear and Plasma Sciences
Society
IEEE Broadcast Technology Society (BTS)
IEEE Nanotechnology Council (NTC)
IEEE Computer Society (C)
• C/SAB Standards Activities Board
•
P1622 Voting Systems
Electronic Data Interchange
Working Group
IEEE Power & Energy Society (PE)
IEEE Power Electronics Society (PEL)
IEEE Consumer Electronics Society (CES)
IEEE Robotics and Automation Society (RAS)
IEEE Communications Society (COM)
IEEE Reliability Society (RS)
IEEE Electromagnetic Compatibility
Society (EMC)
IEEE-SASB Coordinating Committees (SASB)
17 Industry
February
8, 2011
IEEE
Applications
Society (IAS)
IEEE Vehicular Technology
Society (VT)
IEEE Sponsors –
Role of the Sponsor
Organization within IEEE that assumes
responsibility for a particular standards idea
Takes responsibility for the technical content
of the document and provides oversight
Responsible for determining the scope and
nature of the technical content
Not a financial sponsorship
IEEE already has a large number of Sponsors
– There are the various societies within the IEEE
– Within those societies, there are often many
committees that are active in standards development
18
February 8, 2011
IEEE Standards Development:
Process Flow
Idea!
Maximum of 4 years
Project
Approval
Process
19
February 8, 2011
Develop
Draft
Standard
Sponsor
Ballot
IEEE-SA
Standards
Board
Approval
Process
Publish
Standard
IEEE Standards Development:
Project Authorization
Idea!
Maximum of 4 years
Project
Approval
Process
20
Develop Draft
Standard
Sponsor
Ballot
IEEE-SA
Standards
Board
Approval
Process
Publish
Standard
•
A potential working group or study group gathers to work on
the Project Authorization Request (PAR), up to six months
before a PAR needs to be submitted.
•
With the support of the sponsor, submit a PAR to IEEE-SA
Standards Board (SASB) for an approval to start the project.
•
PAR is reviewed by New Standards Committee (NesCom)
and based on its recommendation, IEEE-SA Standards Board
(SASB) approves/disapproves the project
February 8, 2011
IEEE Standards Development:
Draft Development
Idea!
Maximum of 4 years
Project
Approval
Process
•
•
•
•
21
Develop
Draft
Standard
Sponsor
Ballot
IEEE-SA
Standards
Board
Approval
Process
Publish
Standard
Working group (WG) is created/maintained under policies
and procedures (P&P) of the sponsoring committee
WG officers are designated to start the development of the
standard
Write the draft of the standard
Submit finalized draft for Mandatory Editorial Coordination
(MEC) to ensure conformance with IEEE requirements.
February 8, 2011
IEEE Standards Development:
Sponsor Balloting
Idea!
Maximum of 4 years
Project
Approval
Process
•
•
Publish
Standard
Composition of that balloting group cannot change when the ballot is initiated.
Needs 75% return response rate from the ballot group, and needs 75%
affirmative(approved) votes
WG reviews all the approved and disapproved votes with comments submitted by
the ballot group.
Make a reasonable attempt to resolve all negative votes
•
•
•
IEEE-SA
Standards
Board
Approval
Process
A sponsor ballot is initiated with the draft, to be reviewed, commented, and voted
by the ballot group.
•
•
Sponsor
Ballot
A ballot group is formed using an electronic balloting system called
myProject/myBallot™ .
•
•
Develop Draft
Standard
Add or revise materials as suggested
Submit responses to the comments
February 8,
2011revised draft standard and comments out to the ballot group .
Recirculate
the
22
Creating a Web Account and
MyBallot/myProject
Access/Membership Services
Accessing the myProject system requires an
IEEE Web Account:
https://webapps1.ieee.org/WebAccount/Registration
MyBallot /MyProject Link:

https://development.standards.ieee.org/my-site/home
Membership Services:
http://standards.ieee.org/membership/index.html
23
February 8, 2011
IEEE Standards Development:
Approval Process to Publication
Idea!
Maximum of 4 years
Project
Approval
Process
•
•
•
•
•
24
Develop Draft
Standard
Sponsor
Ballot
IEEE-SA
Standards
Board Approval
Process
Publish
Standard
Submit the final draft standard to Standard Review Committee
(RevCom).
RevCom reviews the submitted documents and materials, and
makes a recommendation to IEEE-SA Standards Board for an
approval of the draft standard.
IEEE-SA Standards Board reviews the recommendation and
approve the draft standard.
Publish Standard
Complimentary copies sent to the WG.
February 8, 2011
Resource Links
Additional Information:
http://standards.ieee.org/develop/index.html
25
February 8, 2011
Comments/Questions:
26
February 8, 2011
For more information…
Contact:
Malia Zaman
Program Manager
Technical Program Development
Phone: +1 732 562 3838
Email: [email protected]
27
February 8, 2011
IEEE
• Sue Vogel, Director of Technical Committee
Programs, IEEE Standards Association.
February 8, 2011
IEEE P-1622 WG Meeting
28
Review Agenda
Today
• Ratify goals for the meeting.
• Common data format (CDF) and discussion of
requirements.
• Discussion of use case strategy.
• CDF requirements from an election analysis perspective.
• Presentation on OASIS EML.
Wednesday
• Election system manufacturer presentations.
• Agreement on issues.
• Schedule next meeting.
• Adjourn.
February 8, 2011
IEEE P-1622 WG Meeting
29
Goals for the Meeting
1. Endorse and build upon the use case strategy
for developing a CDF.
2. Decide which existing data format to utilize
as the basis for CDF development.
3. Determine scope of a CDF for
standardization.
4. Agree on timeline, next steps, and schedule
next meeting.
February 8, 2011
IEEE P-1622 WG Meeting
30
P-1622 WG Status and Overview
• WG created a draft in 2007 that never
proceeded to ballot.
• SCC 38 voted to reconstitute P-1622 for
review of draft and revision or redraft as
necessary.
• P-1622 has a new PAR (Project Activity
Request).
• P-1622 also wrote a new P&P document.
• At this meeting tomorrow, we will decide how
to proceed with standard drafting process.
February 8, 2011
IEEE P-1622 WG Meeting
31
15 minute break
• Resume at 10:30am.
February 8, 2011
IEEE P-1622 WG Meeting
32
CDF Overview and Requirements
• Introduction to a CDF – John Wack, NIST.
• EAC CDF requirements – James Long, EAC.
• TGDC perspective on CDF standard timeline –
Patrick McDaniel, IEEE Rep to the TGDC
(Technical Guidelines Development
Committee).
February 8, 2011
IEEE P-1622 WG Meeting
33
Use Case Strategy
• Use cases drive requirements.
• Requirements drive data formats.
February 8, 2011
IEEE P-1622 WG Meeting
34
UOCAVA Use Case
• Joel Rothschild, FVAP.
• John Wack, NIST.
February 8, 2011
IEEE P-1622 WG Meeting
35
Post-election Tabulation Auditing
Use Case
• Neal McBurnett.
February 8, 2011
IEEE P-1622 WG Meeting
36
Other Use Cases
•
•
•
•
•
Blank ballot export.
Remote ballot printing. (new)
Import of remotely printed ballots for canvass.
Automated testing of voting systems.
Interoperability of voting systems components
and devices.
• Other suggestions?
February 8, 2011
IEEE P-1622 WG Meeting
37
Blank Ballot Export
• Important for UOCAVA.
• Data mapping address and jurisdiction to
ballot style.
• Descriptions of ballot measures, contests and
candidates.
• Information on presentation and layout.
February 8, 2011
IEEE P-1622 WG Meeting
38
Remote Ballot Printing
• Print ballot with voter’s selections or print
blank ballot where voter hand-marks
selections.
• Ballot in local jurisdiction format or in FWAB
format.
• Issue: Local or statewide contests.
• Also print Voter’s Declaration/Affirmation.
• Follow FWAB instructions (even if not using
FWAB).
February 8, 2011
IEEE P-1622 WG Meeting
39
Import Remotely Printed Ballots
for Canvass
• Also an interoperability issue.
• Useful for UOCAVA.
• Relates to above use case.
February 8, 2011
IEEE P-1622 WG Meeting
40
Automated Testing of Voting Systems
• Black-box testing vs. code review.
• Standard test cases and files vs. randomly generated test
cases and files.
• Test cases and files that “cover” the space of alternatives.
• Interaction of test cases and code path analysis.
• Generating test decks for Logic and Accuracy Testing.
• Beyond “black box testing.” Why not have testing using
constraints and specifications and based on knowledge of
source code paths and boundary conditions?
February 8, 2011
IEEE P-1622 WG Meeting
41
Interoperability of Voting Systems
Components and Devices
• Equivalence of the output of a re-export with
the previously imported file.
• Retention of data provenance information,
important for auditing.
• Supporting ancillary systems and services
(e.g., third-party blank ballot printing,
auditing)
• Consider an “Interop” for Voting Systems.
February 8, 2011
IEEE P-1622 WG Meeting
42
Use Case Discussion
• Other proposed use cases?
• Priority for use case development.
• Volunteers?
February 8, 2011
IEEE P-1622 WG Meeting
43
Lunch (on your own)
• Return at 1:15pm.
February 8, 2011
IEEE P-1622 WG Meeting
44
Use Case Discussion (cont’d)
• Other proposed use cases?
• Priority for use case development.
• Volunteers?
February 8, 2011
IEEE P-1622 WG Meeting
45
CDF Requirements:
an Election Analysis Perspective
• Kim Brace, President, Election Data Services.
February 8, 2011
IEEE P-1622 WG Meeting
46
Presentations on OASIS EML
• Technical overview – David Webber, OASIS EML.
February 8, 2011
IEEE P-1622 WG Meeting
47
15 minute break
• Resume at 3:30pm.
February 8, 2011
IEEE P-1622 WG Meeting
48
Presentations on OASIS EML
(cont’d)
• Initial technical analysis
of EML suitability for UOCAVA use case –
Carmelo Montanez-Rivera, NIST.
February 8, 2011
IEEE P-1622 WG Meeting
49
Discussion on OASIS EML
• Comments and questions.
February 8, 2011
IEEE P-1622 WG Meeting
50
Wrap Up for Day One
• IEEE.
• UOCAVA.
• OASIS EML.
Tomorrow:
• Vendor presentations.
• Agreements on how to proceed.
• Think about what role you want to play.
February 8, 2011
IEEE P-1622 WG Meeting
51
Adjourn
• Return back here at 9am Wednesday morning.
February 8, 2011
IEEE P-1622 WG Meeting
52