1 / 5

IEEE- P2600 PP Validation Suggested Process and Update

IEEE- P2600 PP Validation Suggested Process and Update. Members: Ron Nevo, Brian Smithson , Alan Sukert, Lee Farrell, Nancy Chen, Carmen Aubry, Peter Cybuck June 2008. Lexmark -Yes HP- Yes Canon- Yes Ricoh- Yes Sharp- Yes Konica Minolta- Yes Toshiba- Yes OKI-Yes Oce-Yes

allen-perez
Download Presentation

IEEE- P2600 PP Validation Suggested Process and Update

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. IEEE- P2600PP Validation Suggested Process and Update Members: Ron Nevo, Brian Smithson , Alan Sukert, Lee Farrell, Nancy Chen, Carmen Aubry, Peter Cybuck June 2008

  2. Lexmark -Yes • HP- Yes • Canon- Yes • Ricoh- Yes • Sharp- Yes • Konica Minolta- Yes • Toshiba- Yes • OKI-Yes • Oce-Yes • Kyocera-Yes • Xerox- Yes • Fuji-Xerox – Yes • InfoPrint- Yes • Samsung - Yes • Total 14 companies Who are the Sponsors

  3. IPA policy is to accept any PP that was validated by the CC scheme and was recognized by CCRA since Japan is a member of CCRA. • - So, if the P2600 PP is evaluated by Atsec, validated by NIAP and recognized by CCRA, IPA will accept it. • - However, when a vendor submits the ST that claims conformance to the P2600 PP, the evaluation body will evaluate it and IPA will validate it with the interpretation that, they believe respectively, conforms to the CC language. (in App Notes and in Guide) • The biggest concern is that the interpretation is different from the one that Atsec, NIAP, (or IEEE P2600 WG member) believe. (in App Notes and in Guide) • For example, according to IPA, the P2600 PP still specifies some HCD functions, so TOE shall be an MFP with full function. • Any other Updates? Canon ? Ricoh? IPA Update (From Sharp members)

  4. Sponsors Process start 8/2007 • We have 14 sponsor companies-2-4/2008 • Decision to go with Atsec 2/5/2008 - • Atsec provided S.O.W to IEEE by 2/29/08 • Formal discussions with NIAP on 3/2/08 – • IEEE provided Contract - 4/1/08 • Start formal evaluation (with family of P.Ps) 4/14/2008 • P2600 Backgrounder- finished 4/20/08- • IEEE- Press release -selecting Atsec 4/29/2008 • New style of PP (Packages/options) (based on Atsec review) 5/2008 Process past activities

  5. Do we may need to buy the PP rights from IEEE ?? • Are we submitting production PP ? • IEEE P.R – Release of Standard 8/2008 ???TBD • Complete PP- (Packages) by 8/29/2008 • Submit PP-A to NIAP (for review) –US Scheme 9/2008 • Submit PP-A,B,C,D to German Scheme 9/2008 (for review) • Review two scheme comments and implement them if we can by. 10/2008 • Formal submit of PPs to US scheme and to Germen scheme (BSI) 11/2008 • Final comments from two schemes 12/2008 • IEEE P.R – PPs were approved by US and Germen schemes 1/2009? • IEEE P.R release of PPs 3/2009? Process new activities

More Related