How Standards are Developed

I'm just a bill,
Yes, I'm only a bill,
And I'm sitting here on Capitol Hill.
Well, it's a long, long journey
To the capital city,
It's a long, long wait
While I'm sitting in committee,
But I know I'll be a law someday...
At least I hope and pray that I will,
But today I'm still just a bill.
- Dave Frishberg (Schoolhouse Rock)

Here is a simple diagram, see figure , diagraming the processes a Grid standard must go through in the GGF. Well actually, as you can see, the process of standardization is not really all that simple. The process of standardization is actually quite involved. However, the standardization process can be broken down into various stages.

The first stage begins when a group of people decide that a particular Grid related technology or process should be standardized. Usually this happens after field experience has shows the need for such a standardization. These brave souls then write up a document describing the standard they wish to propose and submit this document to the Grid Forum Document editor. The GFD Editor then puts the document through a 15-day review process where by the document is reviewed either by a GGF working group or a GGF research group and the GGF steering group. If the document passes this 15-day review, it can go on to the next stage; if the document does not make it out of this stage, it is sent back to the authors.

The second stage begins when the GFD editor puts the document into a 60-day public review process. During this stage of the document's trial-by-fire, the general public is made aware of the document and is invited to comment on the quality and utility of the proposed standard. In addition, during this second stage the GFD editor may invite experts outside of the GGF to review and comment on the document. At the end of this 60-day public review process, a member of the GGF with knowledge in the field of the proposed standard will collate the public commentary and will make a recommendation to the GFD editor on the publication of the document. If the GGF expert reviewer thinks that the document needs significant revision, it will be returned to the authors, they will revise the document, and the 60-day public review will begin anew. If the GGF expert reviewer thinks that the document is fine as-is, then the document moves of to the third stage.

The third stage begins when the GFD editor submits the document to the area directors and the GGF steering group. First, the area directors review the document, then the GGF steering group reviews the document. This third stage takes at least 6-months, and if for any reason the area directors or the GGF steering group decides to reject the document, its dead. But, if it makes it past this star-chamber, then it's on to stage four.

The fourth stage begins when the document is again put up for public review. This portion of the public review process is more stringent then the last, which was meant only to gauge general public feeling on the document. Within this review period, two interoperable implementations of the proposed standard must be created and operational experience with the proposed standard must be formally documented. After this is done, the implementations and the formal documentation of this operational experience must be sent to the GGF steering group. If the GGF steering group decides the implementations and operational experience are sufficient, then it gets sent to a formal review by the area directors, outside experts, and other relevant standards bodies. This review will take four months. The output of this review will be fed back to the GGF steering group and only after they hear all this evidence they might decide to make this document a GGF standard. So, as you can see it takes a good deal of tears, sweat, political know-how, and luck to get a document approved as a GGF standard.