Can Axis Be Kicked Out Of ONVIF?

Along time ago there was this language called Java which Sun Microsystems developed. Open source was becoming popular and Sun had promised to eventually release Java to the world. But they never really did and instead formed various pseudo-open communities, which were ultimately under Sun's control.

The question then would be, can any or all of the founding members of ONVIF be forced out, or is there some part of the charter that guarantees the founders' ultimate control?


Huh?

Here are the ONVIF Rules of Membership. It looks like the full members vote for steering member elections. I don't know enough about the mechanics but perhaps they could vote Axis off the steering committee.

Huh?

I thinks it's a fair question.

Imagine you were learning about some other industry, like LED lighting, and came across an ONVIF like entity and were trying to assess its independence from manufacturers.

You might ask, is this ONVIF thing really controlled by Phillips or...

Alliances and "open" consortiums come in various degrees of manufacturer autonomy, from thinly disguised marketing efforts to completely independent entities.

I'll read up the bylaws.

"I thinks it's a fair question.

Imagine you were learning about some other industry, like LED lighting, and came across an ONVIF like entity and were trying to assess its independence from manufacturers."

1. This 'consortium' is comprised primarily of manufacturers, and founded by 3 of the largest of these.

2. Why would the other members of ONVIF wish to vote Axis out?

3. What is your point?

To play devil's advocate, a lot of manufacturers are not happy with ONVIF and feel Axis has not done enough to make ONVIF work as well as it could. I don't think they would or could kick Axis 'out' but I could see them be incented to change things.

This 'consortium' is comprised primarily of manufacturers, and founded by 3 of the largest of these.

Let me restate, independence from any particular manufacturer.

Take for instance the TIA:

The Telecommunications Industry Association (TIA) is accredited by the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) to develop voluntary, consensus-based industry standards for a wide variety of Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) products, and currently represents nearly 400 companies. TIA's Standards and Technology Department operates twelve engineering committees, which develop guidelines for private radio equipment, cellular towers, data terminals, satellites, telephone terminal equipment, accessibility, VoIP devices, structured cabling, data centers, mobile device communications, multimedia multicast, vehicular telematics, healthcare ICT, machine-to-machine communications, and smart utility networks.

Overall, more than 500 active participants, communications equipment manufacturers, service providers, government agencies, academic institutions, and end-users are engaged in TIA’s standards setting process. To ensure that these standards become incorporated globally, TIA is also engaged in the International Telecommunication Union (ITU), the International Organization for Standardization (ISO), and the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC).

If I were to tell you that Cisco had veto rights (they don't) to any standards specification, would that change your view of them as an independent body?

Why would the other members of ONVIF wish to vote Axis out?

This is a good question.

Here's one reason: Bias

Let's say that the founders have designed in a dejure or defacto method of eternally controlling decisions of the committees. (Note: I am only assuming this is true for the sake or argument; actually this is THE question).

What method? Right off the bat I can see that the founders are entitled to 1 seat each on every committee, 3 in total. I see that at least some of the committees are limited to 7 voting members. I also see that 2/3 majority is necessary. Therefore it would appear that the founders could veto any measure raised in these committees.

For what purpose?

Let's say a founder had a compression technology, say Z-stream, whose value would remain high to the degree that competing alternatives, say h.265, were not in wide deployment.

Such committees could effectively stifle innovation.

What is your point?

My point is shown by your questions. You don't know. I don't know either.

We should know, I think.

Otherwise, I am wondering why there are new Access Control Profile standards with little demand for them, and yet there is no profile for h.265.

I search and found 0 references to h.265 on ONVIF's site.

Yet, in a year's time, when h.265 starts to kick in, ONVIF compatibility will still most likely be only h.264.

And to who's advantage is that? Not mine.

Thank you for highlighting these "veto" clause.

As for your worry about H.265, hope everything will be fine.

Please follow these links:

2nd generation media service - http://www.onvif.org/onvif/ver20/media/wsdl/media.wsdl#op.GetVideoEncoderConfigurationOptions

as you can see, they are saying: Encoding [string] Mime name of the supported Video format. For name definitions see tt:VideoEncodingMimeNames and IANA Media Types.

So, they are now moving wheels to some standard names.

what is tt:VideoEncodingMimeNames? Please look into http://www.onvif.org/onvif/ver10/schema/onvif.xsd and search for VideoEncodingMimeNames

<xs:enumeration value="JPEG"/>

<xs:enumeration value="MPV4-ES"/>

<xs:enumeration value="H264"/>

<xs:enumeration value="H265"/>

Bingo!

Good find!

Thanks!

Alexander, in your opinion does a new profile still need to be created, referencing the core spec?

That seems to be the implication here.

Related: Hello H.265, Goodbye ONVIF?

Point 2: Axis is now owned by Canon, which owns Milestone as well.

Fujio may have a different vision in mind for ONVIF than Axis had.

Another interesting tidbit, one might think that Axis could count on voting support from Canon and Milestone, but the way I'm reading it, they should be consolidated into one member.

Each Member may have its Affiliates involved in the activities of the Forum on behalf of itself. For the avoidance of doubt, each group of companies, which are Affiliates to each other, shall only be entitled to one (1) membership in the Forum. Each Member shall accordingly only have one (1) vote in any election or voting procedure to be performed in accordance with these Rules.

Maybe they have already done this, or Affiliate has a definition which doesn't apply to common ownership.

Otherwise, I am wondering why there are new Access Control Profile standards with little demand for them, and yet there is no profile for h.265.

Pessimist says that Axis has not released its h.265 roadmap. It has released a Profie C compliant door controller, though.

Which is exactly half of all (2 total) profile c compliant units. The current work on profile a, access control configuration, would not seem to be that urgent.