### Minutes of the Council and General Assembly Meetings

3-4 September 1997, Hotel Continental, Canela, Brazil

Contents

1. Action List GA'97

2. IFIP GA 97 Attendance List

3. Council Meeting
3.1 Approval of Council ’97 Minutes
3.2 TC Participation at March Council Meetings
3.3 Council Meeting at GA
3.4 Future Meetings

4. General Assembly Meeting
4.1 Call Meeting to Order
4.2 Proxies and Apologies
4.3 Approval of Agenda
4.4 Approval of Minutes, GA Canberra 96
4.5 President's Report
4.6 Secretary's Report
4.7 Executive Board Meeting Report
4.8 Elections
4.9 Telecommunications Project
4.10 Harmonization of Professional Qualifications
4.11 Congresses
4.12 Treasurer's Report
4.13 Technical Assembly
4.14 TC Forum
4.15 Member Society Issues and Reports
4.16 Strategic Planning
4.17 Activity Management Board
4.18 Technical Committees
4.19 Committee Reports
4.20 Affiliate Members
4.21 Appointments
4.22 Future Meetings
4.23 Other Business
4.24 Closing of Meeting

#### 1. Action List GA'97

WHO | WHAT
All GA Reps. | Assist Congress 98 promotion and marketing
All GA Reps. | Initiate discussion on the TC 11 Position on Cryptopolicies within Member societies with the aim of adopting this position as an IFIP statement by GA 98
All GA Reps., TCs and WGs | Continue to revise TC (and WG, resp. by TC and WG Chairs) Membership and advise Secretariat of changes
All GA Reps. | Contribute ideas to J. Rosenfeld about new activities and projects
All retiring Chairs | Ensure successor is adequately briefed
President, President Elect | In cooperation with CIE, progress WCC 2000 preparations and appointment of new IPC Chair
President | Allocate to Vice Presidents responsibility for liaising with clusters of Members
President | Discuss with TC 11 Chair high fees of IFIP/Sec conferences abd why IFIP/Sec 2000 will not be part of Congress
President, Secretariat | Send letters of thanks to retiring office holders
All budget holders | Submit 98 cash flow plan to Treasurer by 15 December 97
Standing Committees | Review charters, policy statements and rules and submit revisions, if necessary, for GA endorsement
EB | Consider issues associated with generating new conferences
FC, EB | Follow up on FC proposals as endorsed by GA 97
Secretariat | Produce and distribute Information Bulletin by December 97 including names of WG members
Secretariat | Continue to remind Members of the IFIP Web site and the availability of electronic version of the IFIP Newsletter and other IFIP documents
Secretariat | Write to Nigeria: a) a final reminder b) if no response, in January 98 cancel membership
Khakhar, Goldsworthy, Guy, Morris | Prepare basic model for future IFIP Congress contracts
Goldsworthy, Bobillier, Khakhar, Morris | Consider criteria for an IPS and report back to Council/GA
Goldsworthy, Bollerslev, Johnson, Brauer | Produce business plan for "New Conferences" proposal
Brauer, Glasson, Doumeingts, Spaniol | Analyze issues related to point 2 of Strategic Action plan and produce recommendations
Johnson, Khakhar, Nedkov | Negotiate publications agreement with Chapman & Hall for review and consideration by Council 98
MC | Invite alternative proposals and progress work with marketing leaflet
Nedkov | Advise IFIP Members on New Status with UNESCO
All TCs | Encouraged to make closer contact with IFIP Affiliates
Rosenfeld, Gottlieb, Kurki-Suonio | In close contact with the TA Chair identify new activities/projects of international interest
Glasson, Kurki-Suonio | Elaborate definition and procedures for introducing a new category of "Cooperative Events"
All TC Chairs | Ensure TC participation in future Council related meetings
All TC Chairs | Consider input to Congress 2000 program and report to C 98
TC 1 | Continue to revise membership to match specifications of a TC
TC 3 Chair | Regroup the activity on Harmonization of Professional Qualifications within TC 3 and report to Council 98 on progress
TC 5 | Progress the restructuring efforts
TC 7 | Work on establishing a new WG which will incorporate the topics of the former SG 15 on Fractals and Chaos
TC 12 | Redefine TC 12 priorities and activities and report to C/GA 98

#### 2. IFIP GA 97 Attendance List

    Members Present
    Australia              A. Goldsworthy	Vice President
    Austria                W.Grafendorfer
    Bulgaria               B. Sendov
    Brazil                 R. Reis
    Canada                 P. Glenn	 	(representing K. Brown)
    China                  X. Yan
    Czech Rep.             J. Dolezal
    Denmark                P. Bollerslev
    Finland & TC2 Chair    R. Kurki-Suonio
    France & TC 10 Chair   J.-C. Laprie	(representing G. Doumeingts)
    Germany                W. Brauer        Vice President
    Hungary                M. Toth          (representing C. Gergely)
    India                  M. Goyal
    Israel                 M. Gottlieb
    Japan                  T. Miura
    Korea                  K. Song		(representing C. Lee)
    Norway                 K. de Brisis
    Poland                 Z. Bubnicki
    Portugal               J. Granado
    Singapore              A. Siow
    South Africa           C. Guy
    Sweden                 D. Khakhar	Treasurer
    Switzerland            K. Bauknecht	President
    UK                     R. Johnson
    USA                    R. Aiken
    Zimbabwe               L. Gudza
    Individual Member      G. Morris	Secretary
    Individual Member      J. Rosenfeld
    IAPR/Affiliate Member  H. Freeman
    ICCC/Affiliate Member  P. Verma

    Members Represented by Proxy
    J. Navez 		to 	K. Bauknecht
    G. Sacerdoti  		to   	R. Johnson
    I. Privara  		to   	W. Grafendorfer
    J. Cuena   		to 	K. Bauknecht

    TC Chairs Present
    (In addition to those listed above)
    TC 3				B. Samways
    TC 7				P. Kall
    TC 8				B. Glasson
    TC 9				P. Jaervinen
    TC 13				J. Hammond

    Observers Present
    Brazil				R. T. Price
    Brazil				F. R. Wagner
    China 				Q. Sun
    Japan				K. Tabata
    Japan				H. Sakai
    Korea				W. Suh
    New Zealand			I. Mitchell
    USA				H. Funk
    USA				B. Shriver
    C & H				M. Hammond

    IFIP Secretariat
    P. Nedkov			UNESCO Liaison & Contracts Officer
    D. Hayden			IFIP Secretariat

    Regrets
    Honorary Member			R. Tanaka
    Honorary Member			P. Bobillier
    Honorary Member			H. Zemanek
    Albania				G. Beqiraj
    Andorra				D. Bastida
    Armenia				F. Sarkissian
    Belgium				J. Navez
    Canada				K. Brown
    Greece				S. Katsikas
    Hungary				C. Gergely
    Ireland				D. Dolan
    Italy				G. Sacerdoti
    Malaysia			S. Masduki
    Netherlands			A. Melief
    Spain				J. Cuena
    Syria				M. Farah
    Thailand			S. Charmonman
    TC 1 				G. Ausiello
    TC 6				O. Spaniol
    TC11				B. von Solms
    TC12				L. Carlucci-Aiello
    CLEI				R. Cardoso
    INFORMS				C. Bullen
    IASC				J. Brosveet

    No news from
    Belarus, Egypt, Nigeria, Russia, the Philippines, other Corresponding
    and Affiliate Members

#### 3. Council Meeting

3 September 1997, Hotel Continental, Canela, Brazil

The President opened the meeting by welcoming Council members. He drew attention to the proposed Agenda.

#### 3.1 Approval of Council ’97 Minutes

Council unanimously APPROVED the Minutes of the last IFIP Council Meeting held on 5 and 6 March 1997 in Bratislava, the Slovak Republic.

#### 3.2 TC Participation at March Council Meetings

The President shared with Council that following the March 97 Council meeting in Bratislava many Council members were left with the impression that TC Chairs are hesitant to attend two administrative IFIP meetings per year. However, following consultations in Canela it appears that the majority of TC Chairs wish to maintain TC participation in future March Council meetings. Mr. Bauknecht believed that the issue of participation should be left freely to Technical Committees to decide, while taking in account specific realities within these committees. If the TC Chair cannot attend an appropriate substitute - a TC Officer or a WG Chair - would be very acceptable.

Mr. Brauer informed that TC Chairs wish to hold a TC forum during March Council meetings and an abridged Technical Assembly meeting for which no reports should be submitted but where issues of importance, as they occur during the year, can be decided.

Mr. Johnson felt that the attendance is both a matter of time and money and wondered to what extent TC Chairs can find funds to support their attendance in three annual IFIP meetings. The Treasurer stressed that in principle outside sources should be sought to fund such travels. However, TC Funds can be used to fund their participation in Council and GA meetings. This does not apply to TC meetings where TC Chairs take part as representatives of their societies. Mr. Morris recalled that the TC 11 Chair first raised this issue as a "time", rather than a "cost" problem.

Mr. Gottlieb wondered whether the TC Forum is a formally established IFIP body with a charter and terms of reference, which should be treated by the IFIP Statutes and Bylaws. Mr. Brauer responded that it is a loose organization for discussion and consultations among TC Chairs and for input to Technical Assembly.

#### 3.3 Council Meeting at GA

The Secretary stressed that there is little value in holding September Council meetings prior to GA. Apart from approving the Minutes of the March Council Meeting and taking decisions on future meetings there is little other business which is not covered during the ensuing GA meeting. Since these items can be handled during General Assembly, it seems unnecessary to hold this meeting and Mr. Morris proposed in future not to organize September Council meetings.

Council unanimously AGREED.

#### 3.4 Future Meetings

The Secretary informed that invitations were received from:

Malaysia for GA or Council in 1999
India for GA in 1999 or Council in the year 2000
Italy for Council in 1999
China for Council or GA in 1999

Bearing in mind geographical balance, Mr. Morris informed that the Executive Board’s preference would be to hold Council ’99 in India and Council 2000 in Italy.

The President requested Council to take note of this tentative sequence of future Council meetings. Following further consultation with Italy, the plan will be confirmed during the March Council meeting in Manchester, 1-5 March 1998.

Closing of the Meeting

The President thanked the participants for their contributions and declared the Meeting closed.

# 4. General Assembly Meeting

3-4 September 1997, Hotel Continental, Canela, Brazil

#### 4.1 Call Meeting to Order

The President opened the General Assembly meeting and welcomed all participants. He extended IFIP's warm appreciation and thanks to Mr. F. Wagner, Vice-President of the Brazilian Computer Society, to Mr. R. Price, Director of the Institute of Informatics at the Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul, and to Mr. R. Reis, Brazilian GA representative, for the generous hospitality arrangements. Mr. Bauknecht commended Mr. Reis for the excellent local organization.

Mr. Wagner welcomed General Assembly on behalf of the Brazilian Computer Society (SBC) which was founded in 1978 and now represents 5 regional divisions with more than 90 chapters. SBC is dedicated to organizing important events and publications and there is a major drive towards the international scene. In this respect, hosting the IFIP General Assembly in Brazil is another step towards establishing further international contacts. Mr. Price wished General Assembly fruitful discussions and hoped that most participants will visit the Institute of Informatics after the close of GA 97 for the scheduled tutorials.

Mr. Bauknecht once again thanked Messrs. Wagner and Price for the warm welcome and cordial hospitality and introduced the newcomers to the IFIP General Assembly:

  Mr. P. Bollerslev, GA representative of Denmark
  Mr. R. Kurki-Suonio, GA representative of Finland
  Mr. T. Miura, GA representative of Japan
  Ms. K. de Brisis, GA representative of Norway
  Mr. A. Siow, GA representative of Singapore
  Mr. R. Aiken, GA representative of the USA
  Mr. L. Gudza, GA representative of Zimbabwe
  Mr. B. Samways, TC 3 Chair
  Mr. J.-C. Laprie, TC 10 Chair

The President welcomed the representatives of IFIP's Affiliate Members:

  IAPR Mr. H. Freeman
  ICCC Mr. P. Verma

Mr. Bauknecht was happy to introduce Mr. I. Mitchell, President of the New Zealand Computer Society (NZCS) - former IFIP Member applying to rejoin IFIP.

The President extended IFIP's grateful thanks to Mr. H. Funk in appreciation of the many services he rendered to IFIP during his term as FOCUS representative and IFIP Vice-President. Mr. Funk, who attended his last Executive Board meeting in Canela as FOCUS representative, was instrumental in promoting electronic communications in IFIP and had overseen, among many things, the Auerbach Award and Congress matters. Mr. Funk had facilitated the establishment of strong bonds between FOCUS and IFIP.

#### 4.2 Proxies and Apologies

The Secretary announced the GA attendance, proxies and apologies (please refer to the Attendance List). 25 Full Members were present and 4 Members were represented by proxy. The Chinese delegate was on his way to Canela.

Currently, 36 IFIP Members hold voting rights.

Quorum - 18
Present and proxies - 29

Mr. Morris advised that the IFIP General Assembly can proceed with its deliberations.

#### 4.3 Approval of Agenda

General Assembly unanimously ADOPTED the Agenda.

The Secretary informed that Executive Board requested Mr. B. Shriver to make a presentation to GA on a new IFIP Full Member category of International Professional Societies (please refer to Agenda item 4.23).

#### 4.4 Approval of Minutes, GA Canberra 96

General Assembly unanimously APPROVED the Minutes.

The Secretary recalled that the Minutes come with action lists that should be observed by GA representatives and officers. Further, there are individual responsibilities for any actions to which representatives are individually committed.

#### 4.5 President's Report

The President reported that since Canberra there have been positive developments such as further progress in improving event management, overall satisfactory market performance of IFIP books and a healthy financial performance and result. These will be covered in detail under the appropriate Agenda items. The President had attended several TC meetings and conferences. TC 1 is in process of establishment to meet the specifications of a TC. There are new chairs for TC 3 and TC 10. Mr. Bauknecht had received the TC 12 Chair's resignation with a proposal for the appointment of a new Chair. The restructuring process of TC 5 is underway. Preparations for Congress 98 are going well. IFIP held several major conferences, among them SEC 97, INTERACT 97, VLSI 97 and other. Following serious efforts of the TC 5 Chair, CAPE 97 is saved and will convene as scheduled.

In Mr. Bauknecht's opinion, an increased interest in IFIP was observed during the reported period. Online information and communications of the IFIP Secretariat facilitated contacts. Canada, Denmark, Finland, France, Japan, the Netherlands, Norway, Singapore, Syria, Tunisia, USA and Zimbabwe have new GA representatives. This is a significant turnover and a flow of fresh blood to IFIP. New Zealand has applied to rejoin. The President has held discussions and meetings with representatives of a number of IFIP Member societies. These were very constructive with clear support extended to IFIP. The President felt that more feedback from GA representatives to their Member societies is needed and he encouraged all to better and more profoundly report back on issues of importance. This is vital for IFIP's functionality. In this respect, Mr. Johnson suggested Executive Board to consider assigning a cluster of countries to each Executive Board member so as to maintain a two-way contact. IFIP Vice Presidents should assist the President in keeping direct contact with Members. The President agreed to consider this proposal.

The President had attended the 1996 GA meeting of ICSU in Washington, D.C. and the UNESCO - IIP meeting in December 1996 in Paris. One very positive development in IFIP's relationship with UNESCO is the Formal Consultative Relations status that was offered by UNESCO to IFIP. This is a serious recognition of IFIP as a leader in the IT field. Executive Board had discussed this and decided to acknowledge acceptance. (Please also refer to Agenda item 4.19.6)

Mr. Bauknecht further informed that the Telecommunication project work was completed and documented in time. A second phase is envisaged. A presentation will be made during this General Assembly meeting. Finally, the President expressed his thanks to the IFIP Secretariat and congratulated the staff for their hard and efficient work.

Mr. Rosenfeld wondered about the proposal for an ICSU Union for Informatics. The President recalled that the initiative was briefly discussed during the October 96 ICSU General Assembly. ICSU work is organized in a 3-year cycle and he is not aware of any further development. He had invited an ICSU Vice-President and one of the promoters of this initiative, Prof. I. Palis, to attend the IFIP GA meetings in Canela. Unfortunately, no response was received. There will be an Extraordinary ICSU meeting in Vienna next year and the President has requested Prof. Brauer to attend. Mr. Sendov informed that during his term as ICSU Vice-President he had produced several reports to ICSU for the recognition of Informatics as a separate discipline around which an ICSU Union could be established. Unfortunately, the response at that time of the International Mathematical Union (IMU) was not in favor of his proposal.

#### 4.6 Secretary's Report

Mr. Morris reported that Ireland and the Russian Federation have lost voting rights as they have outstanding dues from 1996. In the case of Armenia, all but a marginal amount of its first year's dues (1995) are paid but its representative has not yet attended a Council or a GA meeting and, therefore, the Academy is still not formally admitted to Membership.

Albania, Greece and Tunisia have outstanding dues from 1995 and face suspension. At the end of this year Nigeria will have outstanding dues for three years and its membership will be cancelled unless it takes immediate remedial action. The Secretariat will send a final reminder.

The Philippines (an Associate Member) have outstanding dues from 1996. In 1996 GA agreed to extend until December 1998 the period required satisfying the admission criteria by Belarus. Payment has not been received nor has Belarus been represented at GA.

Mr. Morris was pleased to report that the IFIP Secretariat is in good shape and should be credited with dealing efficiently and effectively with the wide range of routine and ad hoc tasks that fall upon it. The Secretary was confident that GA would join in congratulating and thanking Plamen Nedkov and Dorothy Hayden for their efforts on behalf of IFIP.

General Assembly APPLAUDED.

The Secretary recalled that issue number 27 of the Information Bulletin was published in November 1996. Number 28 is planned to be published and distributed by the end of 1997 incorporating all changes made at GA as well as some editorial improvements. The electronic version is available at http://www.ifip.or.at and is frequently updated. The Statutes and Bylaws are also available from the IFIP WWW site and a new hard copy edition incorporating all changes during the last three years was printed and distributed.

Mr. Morris informed that Executive Board is responsible for approving changes to the Standing Orders that consist of a basic set of instructions for the efficient operation of IFIP's affairs together with a series of 14 supplements covering specific activities. These are:

- Event approval guidelines
- Policy on working conferences
- Publications Policy
- Guidelines for editors of working conference proceedings
- Working group Chairman's Handbook
- Guidelines for TC review committees
- Procedures for IFIP meetings
- Election procedures for Trustees and Officers
- Guidelines for Nomination Committees
- Voting procedures for congress site selection
- Procedures for TC funds
- Hosting an IFIP GA or Council meeting
- Job Charters
- TC and WG aims and scopes

Most of these are updated and available electronically from the IFIP ftp server while some are still under revision. EB has approved the last edition of the Standing Orders and a printed copy will be available soon. GA members are encouraged to familiarize themselves with these documents.

#### 4.7 Executive Board Meeting Report

Mr. Bauknecht informed that for the sake of expediency, issues and decisions of the IFIP Executive Board are to be communicated under the appropriate GA agenda items.

#### 4.8 Elections

4.8.1. Officers

President Elect

    P. Bollerslev/Denmark	ELECTED			(22 votes)
    			(President Elect 1997 - 1998;
    			 President 1998 - 2001)
    D. Khakhar/Sweden				(14 votes)

Vice Presidents

    C.Guy/South Africa	ELECTED *
    			(1997 - 2000)

    W. Grafendorfer/	ELECTED *
    Austria			(1997 - 1999)

* Elected by ACCLAMATION with terms determined by the toss of a coin

4.8.2 Trustees

    J. Granado/Portugal	RE-ELECTED for Trustee	(29 votes)
    			(1997 - 2000)

    R. Aiken/USA		ELECTED for Trustee	(26 votes)
    			(1997 - 2000)

    M. Goyal/India		ELECTED for Trustee	(22 votes)
    			(1997 - 2000)

    T. Miura/ Japan		ELECTED for Trustee	(21 votes)
    			(1997 - 1998)

General Assembly APPLAUDED the elected Officers and Trustees.

#### 4.9 Telecommunications Project

Mr. Nedkov delivered a PowerPoint presentation on the results of the Telecommunications Project. The project was geared towards the development of IFIP's information and communication infrastructure as a central piece of IFIP's management and organization. The objectives were to enhance the efficiency of the IFIP Secretariat's routine operations by offering extended information and communication services to IFIP's bodies, Members and partner organizations and by stimulating cost effective communications and manpower applications. Assistance to national and international organizations in developing their communication and information systems vis-a-vis the IFIP model and experience was considered as a spin-off effect.

The concept focused on the needs of the IFIP Secretariat as the clearinghouse of an open and interactive network. On the basis of available software products, central databases for communication data, events and publications were developed to generate data for standard reports, documents, administration and information. A transition from predominantly "paper" towards e-mail and Web/ftp communications was achieved with the introduction of list servers and the establishment of the IFIP Web pages in Austria. These form the IFIP information hub and gateway linked to decentralized electronic information sources of IFIP Members and bodies and to important IT information sites on the Internet.

Considering the disparity of information processing in various regions, the project supports options for alternative facsimile dissemination and retrieval of electronic information, thus aiming not to exclude non-Internet users from the Global Information Infrastructure. Support to the IFIP decision-making process is envisaged by offering possibilities for the organization of virtual meetings and conferences. The documentation of this part of the project was completed just prior to GA 97 and further experiments are forthcoming.

The project was based on the active involvement of the Austrian component in IFIP, namely the Austrian Computer Society and its IFIP activists at the University of Vienna and the University of Technology of Graz. It relied on the expertise of IFIP's Technical committees and IFIP's management. In the experimentation and application phases Austrian and foreign students were recruited thus giving an extra dimension for the dissemination of experience and results. Development and results went hand in hand. An obvious indication of achievement is the timeliness, quality and increased volume of information and communication exchange. IFIP Members, bodies, events and publications have gained visibility and popularization over the Internet. For example, the IFIP World Computer Congress, 31.08. - 4.09.1998, in Austria and Hungary, is receiving efficient and cost effective support in marketing and public relations via the new potential of the IFIP electronic media. The IFIP Web Gateway for a period of less than 2 years has become a bookmark for references in the IT field. The project results are now available electronically at ftp://ftp.ifip.or.at/pub/telecom/ and it is hoped that the gained experience would serve as a model for the operations and management of internationally oriented associations with limited financial and human resources. Interest in the project has already shown that further activities should be conducted. Electronic publications may prove to be an interesting area for a second phase.

General Assembly APPLAUDED.

Mr. Johnson congratulated the project participants and the IFIP Secretariat for the achievements and recommended that further work be conducted to give more visibility of IFIP Members' activities on the Internet. Messrs. Bauknecht and Nedkov responded that additional services are intended in future. This, however, should be regarded as a process keeping account of the available human resources at the Secretariat.

Mr. Rosenfeld wished to know whether it would be possible to have public access to the communication data of all IFIP volunteers. Mr. Nedkov advised that information about IFIP Officers and Member Societies is already available from the IFIP WWW pages. It is not intended to provide open access to the IFIP Address Database as this is a matter of ownership and a question of privacy.

General Assembly CONCURRED.

#### 4.10 Harmonization of Professional Qualifications

Ms. Glenn informed GA that the Task Force had an excellent meeting in Canela. There are currently about 30 members. The Task Force is with open membership and participation will be sought from CEPIS, SEARCC and other international bodies.

A survey will be developed and sent out to the Task Force Members and IFIP Member Societies with a request to forward it to the appropriate people/organizations in their respective countries. The feedback will be analyzed and a draft document on criteria for the qualification of an IT practitioner will be sent out for comment. A more detailed draft will be elaborated. Discussion with ISO and WTO will continue with respect to IFIP becoming the standardizing body of ISO for the development of IT practitioner standards. The Task Force will not duplicate any work carried out by TC 3, which will be involved in the interrelationship between the process of recognition and curriculum content.

Following the Task Force meeting a Business plan was prepared. A key proposal is to establish a "writing party" of four persons with contacts to IFIP Members and regional organizations such as SEARCC, CEPIS and other. They would be responsible to develop a survey, coordinate contacts, identify views and levels of consensus, prepare discussion drafts, report on developments and issue a final "circulation draft" of standards for IT practitioners for ISO after seeking wide consensus from IFIP Member Societies.

Mr. Johnson informed GA that CEPIS would be very supportive of the project and would be interested to nominate a representative for the Working Party. Mr. Sendov inquired whether there is a relation between this project and the ECDL and Mr. Johnson responded that while the ECDL is for PC users, the Task Force activity would be targeted at harmonization of professional qualifications, hence there is no connection. Mr. Rosenfeld confessed that he has never clearly understood what is the basic objective of this project. Mr. Mitchell shared that one objective is to identify the process by which a test is elaborated in order to confirm the qualifications of an IT professional to carry out job-related activities. Messrs. Aiken and Guy stressed the importance of this new initiative and encouraged IFIP to seize the chance as it would improve IFIP's image and would involve the Federation in a rather new area. Mr. Freeman referred to engineering accreditation and shared that it exists but has little meaning except for narrow areas. It would be difficult to set standards on a broad international scale.

Mr. Bauknecht wished to know whether GA considers the project direction important and would agree to IFIP's further involvement.

General Assembly AGREED.

The President informed GA that after serious consideration Executive Board decided to commission TC 3 to continue this project by bringing in the appropriate working groups and individuals. There should be no parallel activities and this work should find home within TC 3. To support this activity EB proposes a budget of CHF 15 K for 1998.

Mrs. Hammond wished to know if the TC 3 Chair was consulted and the President confirmed that Mr. Samways will be responsible to regroup the specialists in this activity and would have freedom in building an appropriate organization. The President thanked Ms. Glenn for all her work and requested Mr. Samways to start with arrangements and be available to report on the progress at Council 98.

#### 4.11 Congresses

4.11.1 Congress 96 Final Report

Mr. Goldsworthy reported that the only outstanding issue is the non-payment of the guaranteed sum of CHF 100,000 by the Australian Computer Society (ACS) to IFIP. As GA representative and Congress 96 Chair, Mr. Goldsworthy is in active discussion to resolve the matter in an appropriate way.

The President informed that several reminders were sent to ACS. Prior to the GA meeting a letter was again sent to the ACS Executive, requesting a payment plan and prompt action.

Mr. Rosenfeld wished to know what lessons should IFIP learn from Congress 96. The OC Chair responded that the membership of future IPCs should be widened towards the host Society. The reality is that nearly two thirds of the Congress attendance is from the host nation and this should be recognized by IFIP. Mr. Goldsworthy strongly recommends a review of the future IPC structure in order to target the Congress product at the local attendees. The second point he wished to make is that it is unreasonable for the host society to accept full responsibility for losses and to pay a fee of CHF 100,000 to IFIP. During the EB meeting a decision was made to form a Task Force consisting of Messrs. Khakhar, Goldsworthy, Guy and Morris who would review the current procedure and produce a basic model for future Congress contracts.

The President thanked Mr. Goldsworthy for his report and recalled that the CHF 100,000 guarantee in the case of Congress 96 was not mandatory and had been offered by ACS in its bid for Congress 96. A working group ( Messrs. Khakhar, Goldsworthy, Guy and Morris) was set-up by EB to produce a basic model for future WCC contracts.

4.11.2 Congress 98 OC

Mrs. M. Toth and Mr. W. Grafendorfer, Co-Chairs of the Organizing Committee, reported on the preparations for Congress 98 which proceed according to the following schedule:

First Announcement | August 1996
Call for Papers | May- June - July 1997
Deadline for submission of papers: | 16 January 1998
Notification of acceptance: | 27 March 1998
Preliminary program: | 10 April 1998
Deadline for camera-ready copies: | 8 May 1998
Early registration: | 12 June 1998
IFIP World Computer Congress 98 In Vienna and Budapest: | 31 August - 4 September 1998
Tutorials, Workshops | 30 August and 5 September 1998

Responsibilities for organizational assistance and support are split between the two computer societies. Subcommittees oversee special tasks. An Advisory Board, co-chaired by Mr. V. Risak, Austria and Mr. D. Sima, Hungary supervises the Organizing Committee.

The First Announcement (50.000 copies) and posters (5.000) served as the first promotion material of WCC 98. Almost all the available quantity was sent out to IFIP Member societies, TC and WG members, mailing lists of various previous conferences, special connections/partners of OCG and NJSZT board members, scientific events, Austrian and Hungarian representations around the world and foreign embassies in Budapest and Vienna.

It was decided to market the WCC at the level of separate conferences with individual call for papers. For financial reasons, the Calls for Papers are mainly posted in Hungary. It was further decided to prepare a Second Announcement by the end of October 1997. Distribution is planned before Christmas. The Second Announcement will contain information on invited speakers, special technical events within the conferences, information on tutorials, a call for exhibitors, sponsors, transportation, accommodation and registration fees. It would be targeted at potential congress participants and would also serve to attract new paper submissions.

Two Congress 98 homepages are maintained -
http://www.ocg.or.at/ifip98.html
http://www.njszt.iif.hu/ifip98.html

A number of list servers are used to distribute information and congress press releases and the IFIP Secretariat is particularly helpful in this respect. Several IFIP and CEPIS Member societies have provided links from their WWW pages to the URLs of Congress 98 for which OC expresses its grateful thanks. Thanks are also due to the Newsletter Editor for covering the latest Congress news in the IFIP Newsletter. Advertisements are and will be published in journals and there are plans for press conferences.

So far, 620 persons from 61 countries have expressed interest in the Congress by either returning the completed information request form in the First Announcement (72,2%), or by using the online information request forms (27,8%).

Main Congress sponsors are the Austrian Federal Ministry for Science and Transport, the Ministry for Culture and Education of Hungary, the City of Vienna, Oracle and the Vienna Tourist Board. The list of other sponsors includes the Hungarian Post Office (special stamp in Hungary announcing WCC '98), the National Committee for Technological Development, Hungary, Post & Telekom Austria (telephone card in Austria announcing WCC '98) and Sony DADC Austria (production of the CD ROM with the conference proceedings).

The formal Opening of the 15th IFIP World Computer Congress will be sponsored by Oracle and will take place on Monday, 31 August 1998, 9.30 a.m. at the Musikvereinssaal in Vienna, the home of the world renowned New Year's concerts of the Wiener Philharmoniker.

The Austrian Airlines (AUA) and the Hungarian Airlines (MALEV) are Official Carriers of the 15th IFIP World Computer Congress and will provide a 15% reduction on their prices to Congress participants. MALEV is considering discounts on one-way flights while AUA will provide reductions on return flights only.

In Vienna, Congress will convene at the Vienna University of Technology while in Budapest meetings will take place at the University of Economic Sciences. Conference halls have a seating capacity of 600 - 800 persons at both venues. There will be technical equipment to audio and video relay presentations of Keynote speakers to adjacent rooms.

The originally planned one-day boat trip from Vienna to Budapest on 2 September will be replaced by a cheaper and faster combination of train and boat trips, as follows:

10.00 - 12.30 hrs. Vienna - Komarom (by train)
Customs and passport control are arranged on the train. (A list of nationals who need visas to enter Hungary or Austria will be included in the Second Announcement.)

12.30 - 13.30 hrs. Boarding.
(Luggage will be transferred directly to Budapest together with those, hopefully few participants, who do not want to join the boat trip).

13.30 - 20.00 hrs. Boat trip on the picturesque part of the Danube

Three big ships will transfer the participants from Komarom to Budapest. Each ship has conference facilities with over 100 places.

In view of the fact that many people from Central Europe will arrive to Vienna by car Mr. Dolezal advised OC to take this into account and to provide adequate travel instructions.

An attractive social program will include welcome cocktails, a reception by the Lord Mayor of Vienna in the City Hall, Heuriger (typical Viennese wine tavern), Hungarian folk art and the Gellert thermal bath. Approximately 1,500 hotel rooms are reserved in different categories in Vienna and Budapest. Prices range from ATS 200 (Budapest) and ATS 300 (Vienna) to ATS 1850.

OC will announce the final registration fee by the end of this year. It intends to introduce a common participation fee for the whole Congress.

The President congratulated Mrs. Toth and Mr. Grafendorfer for the excellent report and suggested OC to publish monthly a Congress 98 Newsletter with information on Congress 98 preparations and developments. Mr. Rosenfeld recalled that Mr. T.W. Olle will be at Congress 98 and will remain the only person who has participated in IFIP Congresses. This fact could be appropriately marked during Congress 98.

4.11.3 Congress 98 IPC

Mr. W. Grafendorfer reported on behalf of the IPC Chair, Mr. Egon Hoerbst. Congress 98 will convene under the general topic "The Information Society on the way to the Next Millennium" and will consist of the following conferences:

- SEC ´98 - 14th International Information Security Conference
  PC co-chairs: G. Papp (H), R. Posch (A)
  http://www.ocg.or.at/sec.html
  http://www.njszt.iif.hu/sec.html
- ICCHP ´98 - Int. Conference on Computers Helping People with Special Needs
  PC-chair: A. Edwards (UK), vice-chairs: A. Arató (H), W. Zagler (A)
  http://www.ocg.or.at/icchp.html
  http://www.njszt.iif.hu/icchp.html
- KnowRight ´98 - Int. Conference on Intellectual Property Rights and Free Flow of Information
  PC-chair: K. Brunnstein (D) vice-chairs: G. Oberrecht (H), P. Randle (GB), P. P. Sint (A)
  http://www.ocg.or.at/knori.html
  http://www.njszt.iif.hu/knori.html
- Fundamentals - Foundations of Computer Science
  PC-chair: K. Mehlhorn (D), Kall (CH), Lovács (H)
  http://www.ocg.or.at/fund.html
  http://www.njszt.iif.hu/fund.html
- IT KNOWS - Information Technology and Knowledge Systems
  PC-chair: J. J. Cuena (E), Markús (H), A. M. Tjoa (A)
  http://www.ocg.or.at/itk.html
  http://www.njszt.iif.hu/itk.html
- Teleteaching ´98 - Distance Learning, Training and Education
  PC-chair: J. Wibe (N), vice-chairs: T. Lajos (H), E. Riedling (A)
  http://www.ocg.or.at/tteach.html
  http://www.njszt.iif.hu/tteach.html
- Telecooperation - Global Office, Teleworking, Communication Tools
  PC-chair: R. Traunmüller (A), vice-chairs: A. Siegler (H), D. Vogel (USA),
  http://www.ocg.or.at/tcoop.html
  http://www.njszt.iif.hu/tcoop.html

Tutorials will convene on Sunday, 30 August in Vienna and on Saturday, 5 September in Budapest (four to five tutorials at each venue). They will consist of a full day of lectures on specific topics. The tutorial chair, Mr. B. Shriver, is currently reviewing 18 proposals. Topics include electronic commerce, software agent technology, high-speed networks, intellectual property rights, electronic publishing, system design methodologies, the engineering and re-engineering of information systems, simulation systems, design of communication infrastructures, information anxiety (managing the overload).

Workshops will convene on Sunday, 30 August in Vienna and on Saturday, 5 September in Budapest. Workshops on topics of general interest are planned. Further suggestions and proposals should be submitted to the OC Co-chairs not later than 16 January 1998.

Each congress day will start with a Keynote presentation at a Plenary session. The following distinguished speakers have confirmed their availability:

- Prof. Andries van Dam, Professor of Computer Science at Brown University, Providence, USA
- Dr. George Metakides, Director of the European Program for Research and Development in Information Technology (ESPRIT)
- Dr. Gordon Moore, Chairman of the Board, Emeritus, Intel Corporation
- Prof. Yunhe Pan, Zhejang University, Director of Artificial Intelligence Institute, Director of Industrial Design Institute, PR China

Program Committees are expected to invite Speakers for their specific conferences. IPC recommends two invited speakers per conference.

A contract for the Congress proceedings was signed in March 1997 between IFIP, Chapman & Hall and the host societies (OCG and NJSzT). A CD-ROM containing all conference proceedings will be produced by the organizers and published by Chapman & Hall. Sony DADC Austria will sponsor its production. All congress participants will receive a copy. The printed version of the proceedings of the six conferences will be published under IFIP copyright in the book series of the Austrian Computer Society and will be given to the participants of the conference. Chapman & Hall will publish the printed version of the SEC 98 proceedings. Abstracts of all accepted papers will be available on the WWW prior to Congress. A password for online access to the full papers will be provided to Congress registrants.

Mr. Rosenfeld was unhappy to see that the IPC Chair did not attend GA 97 and that Chapman & Hall is not publishing all the proceedings of the IFIP Flagship Event. He wished to know whether there is a list of invited speakers. Mr. Grafendorfer responded that the list will be finalized by May 98.

4.11.4 Congress 2000

Mr. Bauknecht informed GA that Mr. Shriver visited China for discussions. After his visit he had expected a reaction to his proposal. Prior to the GA 97 in Canela, Mr. Shriver reconsidered his engagements as IPC Chair and submitted his resignation to the IFIP President. Since this will be the President Elect's Congress, Mr. Bauknecht wished to involve Mr. Bollerslev directly in all further contacts and arrangements of which the selection and appointment of a new IPC Chair is of prime importance.

Mr. Q. Sun delivered a presentation on behalf of the Organizing Committee Chair, Mr. Z. Sha. Following IFIP's decision to hold its 16th WCC 2000 in Beijing, significant support was promised to Chinese Institute of Electronics by central and regional authorities. An IFIP Chinese Committee was established involving leading computer specialists and organizations - the Chinese Institute of Electronics (CIE), China Computer Federation (CCF), China Institute of Communications (CIC), China Association for Science and Technology (CAST) and the National Natural Science Foundation of China. It has the objective to assist the Congress IPC and OC and to widely promote Congress 2000 in China.

Mr. Shriver visited Beijing in June 1997 to present his model for WCC 2000. A Chinese model was presented on behalf of the Chinese committee. Further discussion was planned to take place during GA 97 and later in Beijing in order to finalize the basic framework of the Congress program and organization.

The Beijing International Convention Center will be the Congress venue. The week of August 21 would be a convenient time for Congress 2000 considering the weather conditions and vacation patterns. The First Announcement and Call for Papers should be ready for distribution by 1 August 1998.

Mr. Bauknecht thanked Mr. Sun for his presentation. A meeting was scheduled with the Chinese representatives after the close of GA 97. Further contacts will include a visit by the IFIP President, President Elect and other IFIP officials to Beijing by the end of this year.

4.11.5 Congress 2002

Mr. Guy advised GA that an invitation for Congress 2002 bids was sent out. The deadline for submissions was 30 January 1998. After Council 98, Congress Committee will visit the proposed sites and will report to GA 98, which will choose the lieu of Congress 2002. This will give the successful bidder 4 years to prepare. So far interest has been expressed from Malaysia and Israel.

Mr. Glasson shared an opinion that the IFIP terminology should substitute "bids" by "offers to host" an IFIP Congress.

#### 4.12 Treasurer's Report

Mr. D. Khakhar drew attention to his report and informed GA that the 1996 accounts were finalised and the Auditor's Report was submitted to IFIP on 18 February 1997.

The 1996 Result, after amortisation and depreciation according to approved policies and before Special Funds Provisions, is a surplus of 300.908 CHF. This is a satisfactory result for IFIP, as it makes a significant improvement from the budgeted deficit of 25.000 CHF. This Result moves IFIP's funds to a new peak level.

Compared to 1995, the 1996 Result is particularly encouraging as Income increased 7% while Expenses declined 23% (mainly due to a reduction in Administrative Secretariat and Support expenses).

The Final Result, after Special Funds Provision of 25 K CHF, is an increase in IFIP's General Fund by 275 K CHF, or 24%, to 1.400 K CHF. The latter amount equals 4 times the actual - and reduced - expense level in 1996 and is well above the target of 2 times established several years ago.

Key figures for the last five years are:

    (Amounts in K CHF)      1996     1995     1994     1993     1992
               Income        646      606      513      567      545
               Expenses      345      447      576      569      612
               Result        300      159      -63       -2      -67

               Assets       1889     1520     1380     1421     1450
               Liabilities   126       58       77       55       82
               Funds        1763     1462     1303     1366     1368

The Total Income of 646 K CHF represents a slight increase compared to 1995 but is much better than the budgeted 500 K CHF. Income from Return on Assets, managed by SBC London as a CHF based bond portfolio since 1990, is 29 K CHF and is far less than the actual return of 71 K CHF in 1995. Dues from Members were slightly below budget as dues were waived by GA 96 for one Member and the membership of another was terminated after budget approval. Royalties from Publications increased by 27 K CHF, or 17%, to 184 K CHF. Proceeds from TC Events, however, declined again from 93 K CHF in 1995 to 41 K CHF. Even though there were a number of reminders, no response was received from the organisers of WCC 96 and the guaranteed fee of 100 K CHF is not yet paid to IFIP.

Total Expenses were 345 K CHF or 34% below budget and 23% below the 1995 level. This is due to savings in communications expenses, President's Reserve and Technical Support. The total Secretariat expenses for 1996 were 235 K CHF or 14% below the allocated budget.

Expenses of the 13 Technical Committees were in total only 15% below the budgeted amount but show considerable variations. 10 TCs had positive TC Fund balance available for 1996, and 6 TCs spent part of this balance during 1996. 8 TCs increased their Funds balance during 1996 while 3 TCs decreased it. For 1997, 10 (not including SG 15) TCs have a positive Fund balances available, totalling 344 K CHF. The Technical Support expenses were 16 K CHF, or 73% below budget relating to AMB, TA and DCSC.

General Assembly unanimously APPROVED the 1996 audited accounts.

The Treasurer informed GA that following the Bratislava 97 Council he was in touch with the Swiss Bank Corporation, London which manages the IFIP CHF based bond portfolio. As a result of the meetings the bank has produced a report, distributed to Executive Board members and to the Finance Committee Chair. The report suggests that if IFIP should expect improved return on its assets it should take more risk and make investment in other equities than CHF bonds only. However, with respect to the bond market, the Swiss bond market is the strongest with a yield of 2.2%. To improve IFIP's return of assets, the report suggests different strategies and a choice of the risk level.

The report was considered by EB in Canela and it was agreed to continue to invest around two-thirds of IFIP's assets in the traditional way and the other third in the slightly more risky but potentially more profitable vehicle of mutual funds.

Mr. Khakhar informed that the financial status for 1997 as at 31 July shows an income of 429 948 CHF. This represents membership dues (283 500 CHF), royalties from publications from last quarter of 1996 (112 394 CHF), proceeds from activities (21 329 CHF) and return on assets (CHF based bond portfolio - 12 724 CHF). The guaranteed fee of 100 K CHF from WCC 96 is not paid to IFIP. Total expenses for the period were 110 K CHF and were mainly of administrative character. No other major expenses have occurred.

For the remaining part of the year the expectations are to receive income from royalties (50 K CHF), proceeds from activities (25 K CHF) and return on assets (12 K CHF). On the expense side, administrative secretariat expenses (200 K CHF) are estimated. Expenses for administrative and technical support have been reduced and are expected to be much less than the 1996 levels. Estimates show that IFIP should make a surplus of above 100 K CHF.

In preparing 1998 Budget the Treasurer took account of the 1996 Actual Result and the 1997 Budget Approved. He had also considered the requests of the IFIP budget holders. The 1998 Budget (Proposed) implied a total income of 559 K CHF and total expenses of 504 K CHF. The suggested budget result was a surplus of 55 K CHF.

In Canela, following the recommendations of the FC and the decisions of the General Assembly with respect to

  FC proposals
  Project on Harmonisation of Professional Qualifications
  Marketing Committee
  IFIP Bulletin
  [please refer to the discussion under the respective agenda items]

the 1998 draft Budget, as AMENDED, implies total income of 571,800 CHF and total expenses of 521,000 CHF and a budgeted result of 50,800 CHF. On the income side 280.8 K CHF represent Membership dues, 60 K CHF - Return on Assets, 140 K CHF - Royalties from Publications, and 91 K - Proceeds from Activities. On the expense side 274 K represent Administrative Secretariat expenses, 104 K - Administrative Support, 93 K - TC expenses and 50 K - Technical Support.

With these clarifications, the Treasurer moved that the proposal for the 1998 budget, as amended, is approved.

General Assembly unanimously APPROVED.

Finally, Mr. Khakhar requested all IFIP budget holders to submit a cash flow plan related to their specific activity not later than 15 December 1997.

#### 4.13 Technical Assembly

Mr. W. Brauer drew attention to his report and summarized issues which are raised in the TC reports as follows:

TC 1: The Committee convened a excellent inaugural meeting also attended by the TA Chair. Developments are promising.

TC 2: The establishment of an advisory board of TC2 is welcomed and supported. New Aims and Scope were approved for WG 2.6 with a proposal to intensify contacts with WG8.1. An appropirate new name for WG2.6 should be found.

TC 3 reports favorable development

TC 5: TA approved the new name for WG 5.10 as "Computer Graphics and Virtual Worlds". It supports the proposal of the TC Chairman to discontinue WG5.9 and to consider a redefinition of its activities in future.

TC 6 is faring well. O. Spaniol's second term as TC 6 Chair is coming to an end and the IFIP President is requested to write a letter of thanks and of recognition of Mr. Spaniol's contributions to IFIP. Similarly, TA proposes letters to be sent to other IFIP Officers whose their terms of office come to an end.

TC 7: TA supports the TC 7 Chair in his activities to form a new WG incorporating the topics of the former SG15.

TC 8 is in good shape.

TC 9: Change of name of WG9.5 to "Applications and Social Implications of Virtual Worlds" was accepted. No support was extended to the (unclear) proposal to create a newsgroup. The TC 9 Review was completed.

TC 10 is in good shape.

TC 11: TA was surprised to learn that the fees for the SEC Conferences are extraordinarily high and the attendance is rather low. A change in TC11 policy with respect to future SEC conference fees is requested.

TC 12: The current TC Chair resigned. B. Neumann (current Secretary) was elected as new TC 12 Chair on August 25 at a regular TC12 meeting in Nagoya, Japan. Attendance was low. Neumann will try to reorganize the TC and its WGs. A review process is pending and TA took a decision that this will be the last chance for TC12. Concrete activities and plans will have to be presented at GA 98 otherwise TC12 will be disbanded.

TC 13: Everything goes well with this Committee. A Review was completed.

With regard to Affiliate Members, Mr. Brauer reported the following issues:

IAPR: There had been no IAPR representative at IFIP General Assemblies for some years as this organization was not keen to maintain its relationship with IFIP. Mr. Freeman convinced his Board that it could prove beneficial to resume contact. TA finds it useful to intensify contacts between IFIP TCs/WGs and IAPR as IAPR represents an important field. TC12, WG8.3 and WG2.6 can benefit from such a cooperation. The IFIP Secretariat is requested to facilitate electronic links from the URLs of both organizations and to consider possible cooperation.

ICCC: A very good relationship is in place with TC6 and with IFIP. ICCC has its own publishing house and offers its services. It shares some similar problems to those of IFIP (i.e. the necessity to attract younger people and industry).

CEPIS: TA encourages TC11 to cooperate with CEPIS on encryption policies. TA supports the proposal IFIP to offer the CEPIS computer driving licence scheme to its Members.

As a general recommendation, TA encourages TCs to intensify their contacts with IFIP's Affiliates.

Mr. Brauer reported on the following strategic issues:

- Several TCs look forward to contribute to the program of WCC 2000 (TC 2, TC 10, TC 11 and TC 12). At the same time, the new Congress structure creates some obstacles for the general attraction of all TC and WG members;
- Many IFIP representatives will assist the international conference on Formal Methods 99. Nonetheless, the formal status of IFIP's cooperation with the organizers remains unsettled.
- TA proposes to introduce a new category of events - "Cooperative Events" - with sharing of responsibility. Messrs. Glasson and Kurki-Suonio will undertake to elaborate a precise definition and procedures.
- TA supports a proposal by J. Rosenfeld to start a brainstorming activity in order to identify new activities/projects of international interest. A committee consisting of Messrs. Rosenfeld (Chair), Gottlieb and Kurki-Suonio will assist this process.
- TA supports the TC Chairs' proposal to continue the practice of TC attendance and TC Forum meetings during IFIP March Council meetings.

The President drew attention to the creation of the two ad hoc groups and requested them to be ready to report during the March 98 Council meeting. Mr. Rosenfeld informed that he has already received one proposal for a new activity and will continue to solicit other proposals during and following GA 97.

Mr. Rosenfeld expressed reservation to the fact that TA is becoming a closed meeting and GA members are discouraged to attend. The President responded that this is not the case and at the same time drew attention that observers should be aware that the TA membership consists of TC Chairs, Affiliate Member representatives and EB members. The TA Chair said that he has not turned away observers. However, he wished to make it clear that TA is a business meeting where decisions are made.

#### 4.14 TC Forum

Messrs. Brauer and Glasson reported that the TC Chairs are very satisfied with the TC Forum (instituted by Council 97 in Bratislava) and with the new time schedule for its meetings. A preliminary meeting helped prepare an agenda for the TC Chairs' meetings with the Marketing Committee, Publications Committee, Activity Management Board, and the Developing Countries Support Committee. A major issue for discussion was the change of the review process into a monitoring and planning process and the TC Forum intends to submit a proposal to TA in March 1998. The TC Chairs wish to have a TC Forum meeting and a TA meeting every 6 months. The TC Forum Moderator, Mr. Glasson, reassured that, following the important exchange of ideas and gained momentum by the TC Forum in Canela, a set of principles and procedures will be developed for further discussion and endorsement during March 98.

#### 4.15 Member Society Issues and Reports

The IFIP Secretary informed that a record number of 25 member society reports were submitted to GA 97. A digest, summarizing the main issues, is included under ANNEX 1 of the GA 97 Minutes.

Mr. Brauer expressed a feeling that restrictions, rather than positive remarks, are surfacing in the reports. Messrs. Rosenfeld and Glasson felt that it could be useful to consult with a Relationship Management Consultant in view of improving relations with IFIP's member societies.

Mrs. M. Toth expressed uneasiness as in her opinion, and that of many other IFIP people, the IFIP Secretariat is doing an excellent job in promoting relations with IFIP member societies. The Secretariat is always available to help and has shown a high degree of efficiency and friendliness.

General Assembly APPLAUDED.

The President supported Mrs. Toth's statement and felt that the comment concerning "relations management" in no way undermines the IFIP Secretariat's contributions in the field. Further thought should be given with respect to issues of interest to IFIP's Members which IFIP would be expected to address.

#### 4.16 Strategic Planning

Mr. A. Goldsworthy referred to his report and reminded that in Canberra two brainstorming sessions were held to identify possible "visions" for IFIP's future. The results are available as Annex 1 to the GA 96 Minutes. Based on these results, Mr. Goldsworthy progressed the exercise by submitting a paper to Council 97. In Bratislava, there was full consensus that the primary objective for IFIP is to satisfy the needs of its Members. The following objectives and Action Plan were agreed:

1. Identify the three most important needs of member societies that should be satisfied by IFIP.
   Action: The IFIP President would write to member societies.
2. Ensure that within IFIP there are internationally recognized technical bodies to address the most important and leading edge issues in IT.
   Action: A working group (Messrs. Brauer, Glasson, Doumeingts and Spaniol) would develop a proposal.
3. Develop and conduct a range of conferences that are seen as leading edge in their specific field and establish IFIP as a leading source of IT publications worldwide.
   Action: A working group (Messrs. Bollerslev, Guy, Johnson and von Solms) would develop a proposal.

It was further agreed to set the deadline for the two working groups to develop and submit proposals 4 weeks after the Council meeting. This timetable was not achieved as the proposal from Working Group 2 was delayed.

In respect of Item 2 the Working Group submitted the following:

- Which type of Knowledge must IFIP generate?
- How can IFIP generate this Knowledge?

Type of Knowledge

- Research
- Professional Application
- Knowledge collected through conferences with publication of a book
- Knowledge collected through various sources of information by creating a Scientific Network: use of INTERNET.

The first step is to determine where we want to go. The action of the President requesting Members to identify their three most important needs is a part of this step. A more strategic proposal would be to ask IFIP member societies to define what they want IFIP to be in five years.

The second step is to evaluate the actual position of IFIP: Where is IFIP? What is the situation? How is the position of IFIP on "its market"? Which are the main IFIP competitors or potential partners? During this step, it could be interesting to evaluate the position by using some Performance Indicators.

The third step is to determine an action plan to achieve the desired horizon (five years) in order to move IFIP from the actual situation (defined in the second step) to the target situation (defined in the first step).

With respect of Item 3, the Working Group considers that within IFIP there are valuable sources of information for the whole IT community. IFIP recognizes that through its TCs and WGs it advances knowledge across many subject areas and it affirms its wish to work with its member societies to make this information accessible to the wider community. Many IFIP member societies also create new knowledge, which they currently disseminate mainly within their membership. Dissemination of information requires infrastructure support. IFIP currently disseminates information in limited ways via events, publications and the Internet.

The Group proposes:

1. An IFIP electronic shop in which products (such as books, journals, etc.) from IFIP or its members societies can be offered for sale to the wider IT community. A small royalty (e.g. 5% of the list price) to IFIP is suggested;
2. A conference diary (together with a separate call for papers diary) to which all member societies can post entries for any event of international interest with URLs whenever possible. A small royalty might apply to online registrations;
3. IFIP could offer to publish books for member societies on a shared royalty basis;
4. IFIP to maintain lists of email lists available within IFIP member societies, which could be used by other member societies to publicize events, publications etc;
5. IFIP to maintain a worldwide list of SIGs together with URLs and/or email addresses, again for publicity purposes.

These and other similar simple schemes could provide real "added value" by IFIP to its member societies.

With respect to generating new IFIP conferences, the Working Group identifies three potential sources for new conferences - through TCs and WGs which are already well covered, unsolicited proposals from outside IFIP and proposals received from within IFIP (primarily the member societies since TC/WGs can initiate their own events). To encourage new proposals, IFIP should make known its willingness to support high quality new ventures via short announcements in publications, WWW and conference literature. It should also formally invite member societies to put forward new proposals. Each submitted project would need to be evaluated to ensure quality and avoid duplication.

It is considered that the evaluation can be carried out by a group of three/four people with access to advice from a panel of about 12 experienced IFIP people such as recently retired TC/WG Chairs. The proposed group members are the TA chairman, the TC Forum Moderator, a New Initiatives Manager and an Event Innovator (this might be combined, at least initially, with a New Initiatives Manager). The Event Innovator would be responsible for proactively carrying out market research with member societies on potential opportunities. The New Initiatives Manager would conduct the evaluation of each new proposal whatever the proposal's source. Each proposal will be circulated by email to all TC chairs, the TC Forum Moderator, and anyone else with relevant expertise. Important evaluation criteria include having a keen champion for the event and a number of supporters of high standing in the subject area. The group will decide whether the event is approved and whether it should be associated with particular TCs or WGs. If it gets clearance and is not taken up by a TC or WG, a member of the panel of 12 will be appointed to act as IFIP liaison manager to the event. The choice will be influenced by technical and geographical considerations. The manager will be expected to take a responsible role on the Organizing Committee acting as a mentor as well as providing IFIP liaison. Once approved, an Event Request Form can be created and the event brought within the normal IFIP event management process. For internal purposes the New Initiatives Manager would perform the role of a TC Chair. The main benefits of this are expected to be an increased level in IFIP activity, innovation and visibility, wider participation in IFIP by individuals and member societies, possible new areas of work for TCs and WGs and possible additional income and membership.

According to Mr. Jaervinen, IFIP is facing a one-track approach with respect to strategic planning. There are many other approaches and Mr. Goldsworthy should consider introducing the double-loop learning mechanism process. Mr. Rosenfeld felt that the report is not action oriented. Mr. Goldsworthy disagreed as there are 5 action-oriented proposals with respect to item 3 of the Council 97 Action Plan. EB formed a working group (Messrs. Goldsworthy, Bollerslev, Johnson and Brauer) with the purpose of producing a Business plan for the "New Conferences" proposal. The "item 2" working group (Messrs. Brauer, Glasson, Doumeingts and Spaniol) is requested to examine the analysis and come up with recommendations.

#### 4.17 Activity Management Board

The AMB Chair, Mr. W. Grafendorfer reported that the Event Approval Guidelines and related forms were revised in accordance with the agreement in Bratislava. Drafts were circulated and the documents were updated giving full consideration to the received comments. The documents are available from the IFIP URL. The procedure for event approval is described in the guidelines.

Mr. Grafendorfer drew attention to the following Sponsorship Statistics:

|  | S P O N S O R S H I P |
| TOTAL | FULL | MAIN | CO- | JOINT | OTHERS
1994 | 86 | 24 | 41 | 18 | 1 | 2
|  | 28% | 48% | 21% | 1% | 2%
1995 | 68 | 11 | 37 | 15 | 2 | 3
|  | 16% | 54% | 22% | 3% | 4%
1996 | 64 | 6 | 34 | 17 | 4 | 3
|  | 9% | 53% | 27% | 6% | 5%
1997 | 74 | 16 | 33 | 21 | 1 | 3
as per 01.08.97 |  | 22% | 45% | 28% | 1% | 4%

The trend for 97 is encouraging, as there are already 74 events registered and Full Sponsorship is increasing.

As at 1 August 97, in comparison to the whole 1996 proceeds from TC activities were received as follows:

                                                              (in CHF)
              Total  WCC         TC2  TC3   TC5   TC6    TC8   TC10  TC11   TC13
        1996: 67,304 25.000(C94) 175 2,045 1,592 19,723 5,645 11,115 2,000
    1 Aug 97: 33,298                       6,780 13,550 7,514  4,067       1,388

Income varies as it is dependent on the main TC events. Improvements in collecting proceeds were implemented. Organizers should be aware that 75 % of the conference proceeds are credited to the respective TC fund.

Mr. Grafendorfer further reported that the Moderator of the TC Forum had presented a list of items discussed by the TC Forum which include further improvement of the event approval procedure, liability/insurance provision for IFIP Events, guidance for inexperienced event organizers and other. These will be addressed by AMB in future.

The TC Forum is not in favor of holding IFIP sponsored events exclusively in member society countries. This issue was raised by several IFIP member societies and EB may have to address it in future. Events in series should maintain a history of performance, which should be provided to future organizers. The AMB Chair and TC Forum Moderator agreed to consider the above items in close cooperation.

The AMB Chair addressed the issue of generating new conferences, discussed by Council 97 in Bratislava. AMB agreed to support the implementation of the proposal by Messrs. Ausiello, Glasson and Johnson. A volunteer will have to be identified to act as a New Initiatives Organizer. The existing guidelines and forms for the event approval process will apply.

Mr. Johnson felt that the AMB involvement in the implementation of the proposal to generate new conferences is rather vague. It is important to find a champion who will pursue the issue. Mr. Glasson wondered whether one of the national GA representatives could volunteer for this task. The President concluded that EB plans to address the issue and report back to Council and GA.

#### 4.18 Technical Committees

4.18.1 TC 1 Foundations of Computer Science

From the submitted report by Mr. G. Ausiello, GA noted that TC1 held its first meeting in Bologna on July 6, 1997 in conjunction with the ICALP conference and the Silver Jubilee of the European Association for Theoretical Computer Science. Prof. Roberto Gorrieri was appointed TC 1 Secretary. The next meeting of TC1 will be held in Lisbon between 30 March and 3 April, 1998.

Currently, the main activity is to evaluate the existing Working Groups and investigate the creation of new Groups. The following scopes are taken into consideration: computational logic, approximation algorithms, term rewriting, theoretical issues related to very large information systems, bi-dimensional languages. Possibilities for cooperation with other TCs will be investigated. Concrete proposals will be prepared for GA 98. The institution of a prize for theoretical results with strong impact on applications is considered. Initiatives will continue to promote the participation of young researchers from disadvantaged countries in scientific events. TC 1 proposes that a "theory track" is included in the Program of WCC 2000.

The TC 1 WWW site is now available at http://hermes.dis.uniroma1.it/Ifip-TC .

4.18.2 TC 2 Software: Theory and Practice

Mr. R. Kurki-Suonio recalled that the TC 2 homepage is at http://www.cs.tut.fi/~rks/ifip/tc2.html and reported that the last TC 2 meeting was held in Konstanz, Germany on 5 - 6 June 97 and was attended by 15 national representatives and WG Chairs. The TC 2 Chair was reelected for a further term. There are no changes in TC 2 Officers. There are new representatives from Switzerland and the Czech Republic. Inactive representation/no representation is registered for Australia, France, India, Israel, Italy, Portugal, Slovakia, South Africa, Sweden and Syria. The next meeting is scheduled for 12 - 13 June 98 in Shelter Island, NY, USA.

Most TC 2 working groups are active with an increasing number of organized events. Three books were recently published with Chapman & Hall. There are new Chairs for WG 2.1 (Mr. P. Henderson), WG 2.5 (Ms. M. Wright - from October 97 onwards) and WG 2.8 (Mr. J. Hughes).

Mr. Rosenfeld was interested to know more about the organization of the WG 2.2 Seminar, 28 September - 4 October 1996. The TC 2 Chair responded that the UN University's International Institute for Software Technology and its Director, Mr. D. Bjorner supported the Seminar organizationally and financially.

4.18.3 TC 3 Education

Mr. B. Samways informed that the 48th meeting of TC 3 was held on 24 August 97 in Harare, Zimbabwe. The next meeting is scheduled for 29 - 30 August 98 in Vienna, Austria. Since Council 97, there is a new US representative to TC 3 and changes include a new Chair of WG 3.3 (Mr. J. Tiffin, NZ) and a new Vice-Chair for WG 3.3 (Mr. J. Multisilta, FIN). Mr. Bollerslev (DK) has a responsibility for TC 3 contacts with UNESCO, Ms. De Caluwe (B) maintains contacts with the European Union and Mr. Waker (ZA) liaises with the International Olympiad in Informatics.

TC 3 working groups are active and good progress is made in maintaining the TC 3 international position. Currently, a TC 3 Policy Document is considered. The TC 3 Journal on Education and Information Technologies is an important endeavor and all GA members are requested to support the promotion of subscriptions (special IFIP price for personal subscriptions is GBP 28 or US $ 43).

The work with UNESCO on Secondary and Higher Education curricula has received important recognition. The TC 3 Chair took part in the UNESCO Regional Symposium for the Arab World held in Tunisia in May 97. There is good progress in the contacts with UNESCO. In cooperation with CEPIS, it is planned to convene a Summer school for Teachers in 1998 in Central Europe. Plans are underway for the next World Conference on Computers in Education, which will be hosted by the DANFIP in the year 2001. Several Web pages are established and the TC 3 Homepage can be found at http://www.ge-dip.etat-ge.ch/cip/ifip/welcome.html .

Mr. Bauknecht wished to know of any follow-up actions from the TC 3 involvement in the 1996 Moscow International Congress on Education and Informatics. Mr. Bollerslev informed that UNESCO has experienced a delay in producing the Congress documents. In May 97, contact was established with the Institute for Curriculum Development and as a result TC 3 members visited St. Petersburg, Russia to design future activities.

4.18.4 TC 5 Computer Applications in Technology

From the submitted report by Mr. G. Doumeingts, GA noted that the last TC5 Meeting took part in Trondheim in May 96. The next TC5 Meeting will be organized in Detroit on 4 November in conjunction with CAPE 97 and AUTOFACT.

TC5 has 37 members. A number of replacements and new nominations were made (India, Italy, Czech Republic). Replacements are pending for Switzerland, Spain and Sweden. New individual members were invited.

While TC5 has 10 working groups, reports were received from 7. WGs 5.3, 5.6, 5.7, 5.8, 5.10, 5.11 and 5.12 are active. For a rather long period no reports have come from WG5.2. WG 5.9 is no longer active and it is proposed to terminate its current activity. 7 working group events were held between March and August 97. The future schedule currently includes over 20 planned TC 5 and working groups' events. TC 5 is very active in publishing with Chapman & Hall. The most important activity in the last months was to save the CAPE 97 Conference in Detroit, 5 - 7 November 97. The program is well established now and TC 5 is hopeful that the Conference will boost this TC forward. A restructuring plan for TC 5 is launched and will be further fine-tuned in Detroit.

4.18.5 TC 6 Communication Systems

From the submitted report by Mr. O. Spaniol, GA noted that the last TC 6 meeting was held on 2 - 3 May 97 in White Plains, NY, USA. Future plans include a meeting on 17 and 18 October 97 in Sofia, Bulgaria. In 1998, the first TC 6 meeting is scheduled for 3-4 April in Ladenburg, Germany while the second will be held on 25-26 October in Tunisia in conjunction with AFRICOM 98.

No changes in membership have occurred since Council 97. The terms of office of the TC 6 Chair and Vice-Chair will come to an end in December 97. New officers will be elected during the meeting in Sofia.

TC 6 is in excellent shape and organizes numerous events and publications with good reputation. At the same time, more should be done in future to improve Internet networking and the visibility of TC 6 events. The low level of activity of many national delegates remains a problem. TC 6 operations are rather limited to conference organization and it can hardly be expected that its activity will diversify in the near future.

4.18.6. TC 7 System Modelling and Optimization

Mr. P. Kall reported that the annual TC 7 meeting was held on 24 July in conjunction with 18th IFIP Conference on System Modelling and Optimization, 22 - 25 July, 1997 Detroit, USA. The next meeting is scheduled for April 98 in Chemnitz, Germany. In the last 2 years there has been a change of/new representation from Denmark, Greece, Norway, Netherlands, Portugal, China, Slovakia and USA.

The major TC 7 event was the 18th Conference in Detroit attended by approximately 210 participants with 4 plenary sessions and many other parallel sessions covering almost all areas in which TC 7 is involved. Several TC 7 working groups organized special sessions. The 19th IFIP Conference on System Modelling and Optimization is scheduled for 12 - 16 July 1999 in Cambridge, U.K.

Most working groups have a satisfactory level of activity. WG 7.1 is undergoing a review in order to develop plans for future work. WGs 7.3 and 7.4 has significantly increased its membership. The calendar of future conferences currently includes over 10 events with TC 7 working group involvement.

Mr. Nedkov wished to know whether any contact is maintained with the former SG 15 Chair, Mr. Novak after the GA 95 decision to transform SG 15 on Fractals into a TC 7 WG. Mr. Brauer informed that following GA 95 in Calgary he had written to Mr. Novak informing him of the decision and requesting him to be make contact with the TC 7 Chair. Since Mr. Novak had not made an attempt after Calgary to contact the TC 7 Chair, Technical Assembly considers that Mr. Kall should start afresh and supports him in establishing a new WG, which will incorporate the topic of the former SG 15.

4.18.7 TC 8 Information Systems

Mr. B. Glasson drew attention to his report and informed that the 28th Business meeting of national representatives and working group Chairs was held on 27 - 29 June 97 in Ambleside, U.K. The TC Chair was pleased to see representation from some of the previously inactive countries. The 29th Business meeting is scheduled for 29 - 30 August 98 in Vienna, Austria.

With respect to the terms of office of the TC 8 and WG Officers, Mr. Glasson advised that TC 8 elections for Officers will be scheduled for 1998. WGs will reelect their officers in 1998 and 1999.

The June meeting of TC8 agreed to tentatively establish WG 8.8 on Smart Cards and to sponsor a working conference on Smart Cards so as to determine the viability of this new working group.

Mr. Glasson reported that TC 8 is in a healthy state, with many events and publications organized by its WGs. At the last Business meeting, actions were identified so as to advance the TC 8 cause in a medium perspective. Plans foresee a year book, a conference planning kit, electronic availability of abstracts, improving public relations, widening the WG Newsletter distribution, better evaluation of events, obtaining conference liability policy, improving outreach to developing countries, improving mechanisms for cross WG communication, establishing WG membership guidelines and further identifying emerging important topics.

4.18.8 TC 9 Relationship Between Computers and Society

Mr. P. Jaervinen drew attention to his report and informed that the TC 9 annual meeting was held on 11 - 12 May 1997 in Corfu, Greece. The next meeting is scheduled for 29 - 30 August 1998 in Geneva, Switzerland. There are new members from Greece, China, Austria and the Czech Republic, a new Secretary for WG 9.2 and a new Vice- Chair for SIG 9.2.1.

WG 9.2 is particularly active and incorporates two SIGs - on Disabilities and on Ethics. In this respect, the TC 9 Chair wished to know whether the Chairman of the Ethics SIG is expected to report directly to GA. The President clarified that reporting should be done via the TC 9.

Other TC 9 working groups are also active and most have scheduled events. However, there were some problems and these were identified by the Corfu meeting and appear solvable. The organization of the HCC5 conference, scheduled for 26 - 28 August 1998 in Geneva was in a critical state but now is on the right track.

Mr. Jaervinen presented the TC 9 Review Intermediate Report and mentioned that it followed the guidelines for IFIP Review Committees. The President requested GA to take note of the report and commended the TC 9 Chair for his work. Mr. Aiken considered the intermediate review as good and shared that TC 9 has possibilities for project development.

4.18.9 TC 10 Computer Systems Technology

Mr. J.-C. Laprie drew attention to his report and informed that the TC 10 meeting was convened prior to GA 97 on 30 - 31 August in Gramado, Brazil. It was held in conjunction with the VLSI 97 Conference, which was very successful. The next TC 10 meeting is scheduled for 4 - 5 September 98 in Budapest, Hungary and meeting 99 will be held in Toulouse, France on 30 - 31 August.

Three TC 10 working groups, namely WG 10.3, WG 10.4 and WG 10.5, have regular and visible activities. No reports were received from WG 10.1, WG 10.6 and WG 10.7. An internal TC workshop is planned in conjunction with the 98 Annual meeting in Budapest. TC 10 would be available to organize a workshop/conference on the State-of-the-art in Computer Systems Technology as part of WCC 2000 in Beijing.

The TC Chair informed that there is a new representative from Japan and that the UK delegate has resigned. Mr. Johnson advised that the Vice Chair of WG 10.3, Mr. N. Topham was nominated by the BCS as its TC 10 representative and a letter to this effect should have been sent.

4.18.10 TC 11 Security and Protection of IP Systems

Mr. Guy reported on behalf of the TC 11 Chair, Mr. B. von Solms, and informed GA that TC 11 had a very good year. The TC 11 Web page can be found at http://www.iaik.tu-graz.ac.at/tc11_hom.html and is managed by TC 11 Vice Chair, Mr. R. Posch.

IFIP/Sec 98 will be part of WCC 98. IFIP/Sec 99 was scheduled for India but was cancelled due to lack of reaction from the Indian representative. No IFIP/Sec conference will, therefore, take place in 1999. However, a number of TC 11 working groups plan workshops and these may be networked into an umbrella event to be held in Sweden. IFIP/Sec 2000 is scheduled for the PR of China. The organizers prefer not to integrate the conference with WCC 2000. IFIP/Sec 2001 will be in France and IFIP/Sec 2002 in New Zealand. The IFIP/Sec conferences attract good audiences and are financially successful.

A Special Task Force on Cryptography compiled a TC 11 Statement on Cryptography which was approved by TC 11 at its meeting in May 1997 in Copenhagen, Denmark. The Statement is attached as ANNEX 2 of the Minutes.

A TC 11 Publication Policy was also drafted and accepted by Council 97. It is satisfying to note that all TC 11 WGs are active and several are expanding their workshop and conference activities. This trend is continuing during the last 2 years. In 1998 TC 11 would like to expand its profile internationally, and market its activities as widely as possible. More attention should be given to publicity, marketing and getting more members active within TC 11.

Mr. Brauer drew attention that the IFIP/Sec conferences charge very high participation fees. The President agreed to discuss this matter with the TC 11 Chair and also to investigate the reasons why IFIP/Sec 2000 would not be a part of the Congress.

Mr. Rosenfeld wished to know whether the TC 11 Publications Policy is different to that of IFIP. Mr. Johnson clarified that it is based on the IFIP Publications Policy and is tailored for TC 11 use.

4.18.11 TC 12 Artificial Intelligence

From the submitted report by Mrs. L. Carlucci-Aiello, GA noted that the TC 12 Annual meeting was held on 25 August 1997 in Nagoya, Japan. Unfortunately, attendance was low (only 8 persons). The meeting congratulated Mr. Cuena for his active contributions to the Program of Congress 98 (Conference on IT & KNOWS). It was resolved to pursue the possibility to organize a TC 12 Conference during Congress 2000. Following the TC 12 Chair's resignation the meeting unanimously elected Mr. B. Neumann as the new TC 12 Chair and recommends to the IFIP President to issue an appointment at an early convenience.

The TC 12 Annual meeting had decided to continue the mandate and work of WG 12.2 and WG12.5. It decided to suspend WG 12.1, WG 12.3 and WG 12.4. The new Chair intends to propose a redefinition of activities in view of the strategic planning directions, which were formulated by the meeting, and to present a proposal to Council 98.

4.18.12 TC 13 Human-Computer Interaction

Mrs. J. Hammond referred to here report and mentioned that the 12th meeting of TC 13 was held on 14 July 1997 in Sydney, Australia. The 13th meeting will take place in early 1998 in Europe. There are no recent changes in TC 13 membership. The representatives of France and Singapore have shown no sign of interest in TC 13 for more than 2 years now.

INTERACT 97 was held on 14 - 18 July 1997 in Sydney, Australia. The 6th INTERACT Conference was very successful with 298 participants. Several TC 13 working groups held their business meetings during the conference. The Conference proceedings were published by Chapman & Hall and delivered in time for the Opening. A detailed report will be submitted when all matters are finalized.

INTERACT 99 will be held from 30 August to 3 September in Edinburgh, U.K. The International Program Committee is in process of establishment.

Most TC 13 working groups are involved in the organization of events. A TC 13 subcommittee is mandated to develop the TC 13 Information Service.

Mr. Johnson presented the final draft of the TC 13 Review Report which has been distributed for feed back to the TC 13 Activities Planning Panel, the TC 13 Members and WG Chairs. As Review Chair, he shared that TC 13 is in a good shape and is realistic in setting goals. Mrs. Hammond stressed that the intention was to produce a historic document as TC 13 is rather new and it should know where its past in order to determine where it is going. The President was pleased with the report, requested GA to take note of the final draft and commended the TC 13 Review Committee for their efforts.

Please note: on 8 October 97 the TC 13 Chair reported that no changes were made to the distributed final draft of the TC 13 Review Report and the document, as presented in Canela, should be considered as final.

#### 4.19 Committee Reports

4.19.1. Publications Committee

Mr. Johnson drew attention to his report and informed that the 1997 sales of new books are ahead of budget and are 25% over the same period in 1996. 36 books will be published this year, which represents three more books than originally planned. The Back list sales are slightly below budget, however, this will be offset by the Front list sales.

The Publications Committee Chair holds regular meetings with Chapman & Hall. He has also met with TC 8 and will be happy to meet with any other TC to discuss Publications policy and specific matters. The proposal to place a copyright notice at the foot of the first page of each paper is implemented. A set of ISBNs was obtained. Guidelines for their use were prepared by the Contract Officer, agreed by the Publications Committee and will be available soon after GA 97. At its meeting in Canela, PC reaffirmed its policy of retaining copyright even when material goes to alternative publishers. Another issue that was dealt with by PC was to negotiate with the Publisher a rebate for a TC 13 publication as a compensation for serious errors in printing the INTERACT 97 proceedings.

A TC 3 publication is now available electronically at http://www.infotech.chapmanhall.com . Sales are monitored in order to determine the impact of the online publication. Comments to Chapman & Hall are welcome.

Mr. Freeman was aware of a large output of IFIP proceedings. However, he felt that IFIP books are too expensive. Mr. Johnson shared that there are two models: the American, as observed with ACM and IEEE CS (large membership and therefore satisfactory profit due to a guaranteed market of low-cost proceedings); and the European (performing in a market environment where it is difficult to achieve large sales).

Mr. Rosenfeld suggested that the "no returns" policy of Chapman & Hall should be reconsidered by incorporating a number of variations such as higher prices for negotiated number of returns and lower prices with no returns. Mr. Johnson drew attention that Chapman & Hall is willing to increase the number of conference copies at a very short notice and it is really a matter of accurate planning. Nevertheless, he will further pursue the issue with the TC Forum Moderator. Mr. Reis drew attention to a problem with the VLSI 97 proceedings, which were not available for the conference due to problems with UPS.

4.19.2 Statutes and Bylaws

Mr. Morris informed that there are no proposed changes to the Statutes and Bylaws and reminded that a new printed edition was distributed in December 1996. It incorporates all changes during the last three years and is also available electronically from the IFIP URL.

4.19.3 Admissions Committee

The Secretary referred to the circulated report of the Admissions Committee by Mr. Yan and drew attention to the application of the New Zealand Computer Society (NZCS) for Full Membership in IFIP. All requirements were met and Admissions Committee recommends NZCS to be reinstated as an IFIP Full Member.

General Assembly unanimously ACCEPTED NZCS as an IFIP Full Member.

The NZCS President, Mr. I. Mitchell thanked General Assembly for the warm reception and shared that NZCS plans to play an active role in IFIP as it is important for small countries to be members of forums of international consensus. NZCS is interested in new ideas, practices and the international experience in the IT field. The President welcomed Mr. Mitchell and the NZCS. He stressed that the spirit of international cooperation is based on constructive inputs from all Members and he looked forward to an active NZCS participation in IFIP. Mr. Glasson encouraged Mr. Mitchell to consider nominating representatives to IFIP Technical Committees.

In view of his many outstanding contributions to IFIP, the President on behalf of EB moved General Assembly to elect Mr. Asbjorn Rolstadas as IFIP Honorary Member.

General Assembly APPLAUDED.

4.19.4 Congress Committee

(Please refer to Agenda item 4.11.5)

4.19.5 DCSC

Mr. Gottlieb referred to his report and informed that the following grants were approved during the year:

- CHF 4000 for TC 3 CapBit 97 in Zimbabwe to support individual participants from neighbor countries;
- CHF 2000 to support IFIP speaker in the UNESCO Symposium on the Arab World and the Information Society in Tunisia;
- CHF 2000 to support an IFIP speaker for the National Congress of the Brazilian Computer Society;
- CHF 400 to support TC 3 participation in a joint UNESCO - IFIP Task force meeting in St. Petersburg, Russia.
- CHF 4000 for INTERACT 97 support to developing country participants (unfortunately the sum was not used).

The DCSC Chair further reported that the Committee considered a broad IFIP working definition for developing countries. These are countries, which in view of the UN scale of assessment normally fall within the lowest IFIP dues category. There are obvious exceptions to this definition. Mr. Nedkov advised that Brazil and China pay higher dues but should qualify for DCSC support while Andorra, New Zealand, and some other countries fall within the lowest dues category but are not DCs.

Mr. Gottlieb advised that the following events are eligible to be supported:

1. Events organized by IFIP bodies (e.g. TCs, WGs) in DCs
2. Events organized by IFIP bodies anywhere in the world
3. Events organized by IFIP's Member Societies of DCs in their respective countries
4. Events organized by any official body in DCs

Types of support (in descending priority) may be considered as:

1. Attendance of IFIP experts as invited speakers in events held in DCs
2. Attendance of neighboring countries' specialists in events held in DCs
3. Attendance of IFIP DC Member society members in IFIP World Congresses
4. Attendance of IFIP DC Member society members in any IFIP event

Bodies involved in dispersing approved IFIP fund:

1. DCSC chair
2. TC chair and/or WG chair
3. IFIP's Member society of a DC related to the event or applying for IFIP support.

The Event Organizers should submitted applications (with a description of the event, the purpose and the amount of the requested support) to the DCSC Chair with a copy to the IFIP Secretariat. Individual applications will not to be considered! Event Organizer is obliged to waive the Conference participation fee to participants with approved IFIP support. In case of an application from a National society, the Society is obliged to confirm the part of the total travel expenses, which it intends to cover. A detailed report for the use of the approved grant must submitted to the DCSC chair with a copy to the Secretariat. Then, the DCSC Chair would be in a position to authorize disbursement.

Messrs. Glasson and Rosenfeld considered that it is important for the AMB and DCSC Chairs to interact in approving grants for IFIP Events. Mr. Gottlieb agreed.

4.19.6 Finance Committee

Mr. Granado referred to his written report and pointed out that on the basis of reports from the IFIP Treasurer FC had discussion on issues relating to the 1996 Final Audited Accounts, the accounts pertaining to the first 7 months of 1997 and the proposed draft budget for 1998.

With regard to the 1996 accounts, written off dues does not imply that Members are exempted from paying the back dues. The major factors for the good result were administrative expense reductions and non-use of allocated budgets. The Australian Computer Society has not paid the contractually guaranteed fee Special Funds are pre-allocated to TCs while the IFIP General Fund is accumulated Fund for general use. Very high cash availability is observed and FC will address the issue in consultation with EB. A low return on assets calls for a change in policy and in Statutes and Bylaws. Similar tendencies are observed during the period January - July 1997. The IFIP Treasurer forecasts a net surplus of over 100 K CHF. With respect to the draft Budget for 1998 FC recommends an increase in the Portfolio Investment and Return on Assets. Some increase in the administrative expenses as compared to the 1996 accounts should be forecasted.

Mr. Granado drew attention to the FC proposals which reflect the FC discussion and recommendations and requested General Assembly to:

1. Mandate FC in cooperation with a financial adviser to evaluate the present currency rules and propose the most appropriate currency for staking IFIP's financial resources;
2. Mandate FC to revise the current investment policy, in order to increase its profitability while keeping the low risk directions;
3. Mandate FC to prepare a Cash Flow Budget for 1998 before 15 December 1997. Make this instrument mandatory for the future with quarterly revisions in order to improve the management of IFIP's financial resources.
4. Mandate FC to explore a reasonable pension scheme for the IFIP full-time staff for approval by Executive Board;
5. Accept the Accounts for the first seven months of 1997 (January - June);
6. Approve the proposed Budget for 1998 with two amendments: increase Return on Assets from 48 K CHF to 60 K CHF and reduce Administrative Secretariat expenses from 281 K CHF to 270 K CHF;
7. Declare its satisfaction with the sound effects of the decision to transfer the IFIP Secretariat to Laxenburg and its further implementation, which proved to be the single major contributor for re-balancing IFIP's accounts.

Mr. Goldsworthy referred to the 4th proposal and considered that the scheme should enter into effect retrospectively. Mr. Granado confirmed that this was discussed in FC and with EB members and the pension scheme will cover a period beginning from the date of actual employment. The President stated that EB is resolved to act on this issue expediently and there should be no cause for concern.

The Executive Director referred to the 6th proposal and informed General Assembly that he had already proposed a very rigid 1998 budget for the Secretariat. This has been discussed with

4.19.7 IFIP-UNESCO Liaison

The IFIP-UNESCO Liaison Officer drew attention to his written report and supplements and recalled that during the year the IFIP Officials were regularly updated on all major issues pertaining to IFIP's contacts with UNESCO. In June 97 the Executive Board of UNESCO decided to admit IFIP into formal consultative relations with UNESCO. The new status implies both privileges and obligations for IFIP as an important UNESCO partner in the field of Informatics. The IFIP President received a letter from UNESCO requesting formal confirmation of IFIP's acceptance. Executive Board welcomed the proposal and requested the President to confirm. Mr. Nedkov advised that IFIP Members (via their UNESCO National Commissions) will be in a better position to consult, design, participate and benefit from UNESCO's programs and IFIP would be expected to take an active part in the UNESCO mechanisms of consultations and project implementation.

The IFIP President and the IFIP-UNESCO Liaison Officer took part in the UNESCO/ IIP meeting in December 1996 in Paris. IFIP, along with specialized agencies of the UN system, was invited to the session as an observer and its participation was prominently acknowledged by IIP. Meetings were arranged with a number of national and international officials. An Exhibit of IFIP publications with Chapman & Hall was organized. The 1st Announcement, Congress 98 posters and other IFIP promotional materials were displayed. Meetings were held with the UNESCO Assistant Director General for Education, Dr. C. Power and the Assistant Director General for Communication, Information and Informatics, Dr. H. Yushkiavitshus. A Memorandum was prepared. Regretfully, the requested grants for CAPBIT 97 and INTERACT 97 were not provided. Fortunately, another grant of 6,000 US Dollars was made available from the Regional UNESCO Office in Brazil to support the IFIP TC 9 Conference in Florianopolis in June 97. As a follow-up of these contacts in UNESCO House, other meetings and exhibits with IFIP participation were achieved.

Following a request from the Tunisian GA Member, Mr. B. Samways was identified as the IFIP representative to take part in the UNESCO Symposium on the Arab World and the Information Society in Tunisia, 4 - 8 May 1997. After the event the TC 3 Chair reported that IFIP's representation was valued by the organizers and hosts and that IFIP maintained its good reputation. Many future opportunities were identified.

The President thanked Mr. Nedkov for his report and assistance in further promoting IFIP's relations with UNESCO.

4.19.8 Internal Awards Committee

Mr. Morris informed that nominations for the Outstanding Service Award were received from the TC 9 and TC 11 Chairs. He is happy to recommend to General Assembly to distinguish the following IFIP volunteers:

    TC 9:  Diane Whitehouse (GB)
    TC 11: Reinhard Posch (A)
           Willis Ware (USA)
           John Beatson (NZ)
           Jan Carlsen (DK)

Motion unanimously CARRIED.

The Chairman of the Internal Awards Committee informed that there are no modifications to the conditions governing the Silver Core Award. The 1998 awards will be based on the current scheme.

4.19.9 Marketing Committee

Mr. C. Guy referred to his report and reiterated that IFIP should make itself more visible to its Member societies and their members. One way is by publicizing activities of TCs and WGs. Member societies should be encouraged to plan concurrent events in order to profit from the presence of IFIP people (as was the case with the organization of tutorials following GA 97). MC considered the organization of summer schools, video recordings of eminent speakers and visiting lecturers as possible vehicles in promoting the IFIP image.

Mrs. de Brisis considered that the MC should prepare and carry out a survey on how IFIP is perceived. Mr. Guy referred to the President's letter to Member societies, which could be reissued. Mrs. de Brisis said that she was not referring to the internal (society) perception of IFIP but what the IT community at large thinks of IFIP.

Mr. Grafendorfer recalled that the names of the IFIP supporters should be included in the IFIP Bulletin. Mrs. Hammond and Messrs. Brauer and Glasson reminded that the TC Forum proposed that the names of all working group members are included in the printed version of the IFIP Bulletin. Mr. Morris reminded that the names are available from the online copy of the Bulletin, recalled that WGs have unstable membership and wondered whether the additional cost justifies printing lists of names which become quickly outdated.

Following a discussion on the importance of recognizing the work of IFIP's WG members, General Assembly SUPPORTED the proposal to include their names in the printed version of the IFIP Bulletin. It further requested TC Chairs to collect up-to-date membership lists from their respective WG Chairs and to submit these lists to the IFIP Secretariat.

The MC Chair recalled that MC was requested in Bratislava to provide an attractive Marketing leaflet to be made available at functions, conferences and other events. A quote was obtained amounting to US $ 6,100 for concept, design, copy and production of 10,000 copies. An electronic copy will be provided.

Mr. Gottlieb noted that the mailing costs and distribution is not included in the quote. Mr. Khakhar reminded that the normal practice is to invite several offers before a decision is made. Mr. Glasson considered that IFIP Member societies could be involved in the printing and distribution.

The President agreed that the MC budget for 1998 should have a provision for such expenses. He requested MC to solicit alternative offers and proposals and on the basis of an MC review to select the most attractive one.

IFIP Newsletter

Mr. J. Rosenfeld reported that the IFIP Newsletter is faring well with a circulation of 3,500 individual copies and 1,300 copies sent in bulk to member societies and conference organizers. It is also available in electronic form from the IFIP URL. Mr. Freeman suggested a column on Affiliate member activities. Mr. Johnson suggested adding PC and TC representatives to the Editorial Board.

#### 4.20 Affiliate Members

Mr. Verma, President of the International Council for Computer Communication (ICCC), presented an overview of the ICCC organization, objectives, activities and finances. A principal activity is the organization of the biennial ICCC Conferences, the next ones being scheduled for November 1997 in Cannes, France and in Japan during 1999.

Major conferences in which ICCC is involved include Global Networking 97 (held in June in Calgary, Canada), Electronic Publishing (held in April 97 in Canterbury, U.K. in joint sponsorship with IFIP) and other. Future IFIP and ICCC involvement includes Networks 98 in India and INDC 98 in Portugal. With the increasing level of joint activities between IFIP and ICCC, Mr. Verma stressed that the relationship between the two organizations is close and strong and this tendency will continue to grow in future. The ICCC Executive Committee is appreciative of this trend which serves the respective missions and provides mutual benefits to both organizations.

Mr. Freeman presented a description of the International Association for Pattern Recognition (IAPR) and informed that IAPR sponsors the biennial International Conference on Pattern Recognition. Upcoming conferences are scheduled for 1998 in Brisbane, Australia and the year 2000 in Barcelona, Spain. IAPR's technical committees organize many workshops and conferences. The IEEE Computer Society Press Conference publishes the IAPR conference proceedings while North-Holland, Amsterdam publishes the IAPR Journal "Pattern Recognition Letters". A newsletter is issued quarterly. IAPR has instituted two Awards - the "Fellow of IAPR" Award and the King-Sun Fu Prize in memory of IAPR's first president. These are given to individuals with significant contributions to the field.

Mr. Freeman informed that IAPR is constantly reviewing its mission, method of operation and organization. Its Affiliate status with IFIP is currently under review.

Mr. Johnson reported that CEPIS had increased its visibility during the current year. The finances proved to be healthy and a special reserve fund has been set up to support a Web Task Force. CEPIS has formed an Intellectual Property Task Force. Its Professional Development and Qualifications Task Force initiated a Continuous Learning Program and IFIP is invited to nominate a representative. CEPIS has adopted a policy statement on Encryption. The European Computer Driving License (ECDL) was launched and a Foundation formally established to manage it. The ECDL is a certificate awarded for basic skills in informatics and there are financial benefits to member societies participating in the scheme.

Mr. Johnson reassured that as an Affiliate member, CEPIS wishes to establish stronger ties with IFIP. It plans to hold a Council meeting during IFIP Congress 98 and to celebrate its 10th Anniversary. An opportunity to hold a joint meeting with members of the IFIP General Assembly would be explored. In cooperation with IFIP a Summer school in Eastern Europe is envisaged on "Teaching IT in secondary schools". CEPIS hopes to conclude a Memorandum of Understanding with IFIP.

The President thanked the three representatives for their reports to the IFIP General Assembly.

#### 4.21 Appointments

The President announced the responsibilities of the Executive Board as follows:

EXECUTIVE BOARD |  |  |  | RESPONSIBILITIES
K. Bauknecht P. Bollerslev W. Brauer W. Grafendorfer C. Guy A. Goldsworthy D. Khakhar G. Morris | President President Elect Vice-President Vice-President Vice-President Vice-President Treasurer Secretary | CH DK D A ZA AUS S IND.M. | 95/98 97/98 95/98 97/99 97/2000 95/98 96/99 96/99 | Congress Chairmen Congress 2000 Technology, Science, TA Contracts, Admissions, Developing Countries Congresses, Publications, Marketing Finances, Member Society Relations, Management Development, Strategic Planning Activity Management Board, IFIPSEC IFIPSEC, UNESCO, S&B, Int.Awards

The terms of IFIP TRUSTEES are as follows:

R. Aiken M. Goyal M. Gottlieb J. Granado R. Johnson T. Miura R. Reis X. Yan | USA IND IL P UK J BR PRC | 97/2000 97/2000 95/98 97/2000 95/98 97/98 96/99 96/99

Mr. Bauknecht announced the appointments of the Chairs of IFIP's Standing Committees and informed that he will appoint committee members soon after GA 97. As a result, the following appointments were made:

TECHNICAL ASSEMBLY
W. BRAUER, Chairman
TC Chairs
Affiliate Member Representatives
Ex-officio: Executive Board

STANDING COMMITTEES

ACTIVITY MANAGEMENT BOARD R. AIKEN, Chairman K. de Brisis R. Johnson K. Song X. Yan Ex-officio: - DCSC Chairman - Executive Board | MARKETING COMMITTEE M. GOTTLIEB, Chairman K. Brown D. Dolan L. Gudza M. Masduki I. Mitchell R. Reis A. Siow Ex-officio: - PC Chairman - Newsletter Editor

ADMISSIONS COMMITTEE X. YAN, Chairman P.A. Bobillier Z. Bubnicki G. Sacerdoti | PUBLICATIONS COMMITTEE R. JOHNSON, Chairman R. Aiken K. Boyanov J. Dolezal A. Melief I. Privara Ex-officio: Contracts Officer TC/SG Chairs MC Chair Invited Observers: Chapman & Hall

CONGRESS COMMITTEE C. GUY, Chairman P. Bollerslev J. Granado A. Siow | STATUTES AND BYLAWS COMMITTEE P. BOBILLIER, Chairman J. Dolezal G. Morris

DEVELOPING COUNTRIES SUPPORT COMMITTEE M. GOYAL, Chairman D. Bastida K. Brown J. Dolezal J. Navez R. Reis Ex-officio: - Contracts Officer | FINANCE COMMITTEE J. GRANADO, Chairman K. de Brisis C. Gergely M. Gottlieb L. Gudza M. Masduki T. Miura Ex-officio: - Treasurer

INTERNAL AWARDS COMMITTEE G. MORRIS, Chairman P. Bobillier

AD HOC COMMITTEES

NOMINATIONS COMMITTEE FOR OFFICERS G. MORRIS, Chairman W. Brauer A. Goldsworthy NOMINATIONS COMMITTEE FOR TRUSTEES R. REIS, Chairman R. Johnson T. Miura |
IFIP HISTORIAN H. ZEMANEK | IFIP NEWSLETTER EDITOR J. ROSENFELD

IFIP-UNESCO LIAISON OFFICER AND CONTRACTS OFFICER
P. NEDKOV

#### 4.22 Future Meetings

Mr. Morris advised that the Malaysian National Computer Confederation extended an invitation to host GA 99 in Malaysia.

General Assembly unanimously ACCEPTED the invitation from Malaysia

The Secretary informed General Assembly of the forthcoming meetings as follows:

1998 Council Manchester, U.K.
Sunday, March 1 - 5

1998 General Assembly EB - Vienna, Austria
Tuesday, September 1

GA - Budapest, Hungary
Saturday, September 5 - 8

1999 Council New Delhi, India*
Sunday, February 28 - March 4

1999 General Assembly Kuala Lumpur (Cyberjaya), Malaysia
Sunday, September 5 - 9

2000 Council Rome, Italy*

2000 General Assembly Beijing, China

* to be confirmed by Council 98

#### 4.23 Other Business

At the request of IFIP's Executive Board, Mr. B. Shriver made a presentation to General Assembly of his proposal for a new type of IFIP Full Member category. The proposal requests the IFIP General Assembly to consider the creation of a new category of membership - International Professional Society Member (IPS). Qualifications for IPS membership should be determined by the IFIP GA. IPS Members would have a vote in GA, pay full dues, nominate TC representatives and have all other privileges and obligations of IFIP Full Members. This membership category will be internationally advertised and societies will be invited to apply through IFIP's Admissions Committee.

The nature and mission of IFIP (as well as those of many other organizations) have changed. The current IFIP "national" membership scheme includes stand-alone professional societies, national academies of sciences and federations of diverse professional societies. Due to inherent dynamism of the computer science field, some professional societies have become regional or truly international in scope while others have remained national in scope. The organizational pluralism of IFIP's membership is a valuable asset. A strength of IFIP has been to allow computer professionals to decide on their own what organizational form best fits their needs. In view of the dynamic changes in the international scene, Mr. Shriver believes that the proposed IPS category would serve to recognize the existence of truly international, individual member societies.

The IFIP Affiliate Member category is inappropriate for organizations representing many of the World's computer professionals. An IPS has a significant number of its members, both as a percentage and in absolute numbers, in many countries worldwide. It has international representation on its governing, editorial, conference and other boards.

An example of an IPS is the IEEE CS. It was founded in 1946 and currently has 100,000 members (40% being non-US in 147 countries). The Computer Society has 30 technical committees and 19 periodicals with 223,000 subscriptions, organizes 122 conferences (31 non-US) and generates 150 conference proceedings. Another example is ACM - founded in 1947 with a current membership of 83,000 (30% non-US in 121 countries). ACM has 37 SIGs, publishes 73 journals, transactions and periodicals and organizes 142 conferences (44 non-US). Combined these to societies produce a very substantial part of the World's computer science literature.

Ms. Glenn wondered what other societies would meet the criteria - would BCS and IPSJ be eligible? Mr. Goldsworthy wished to know what would happen to FOCUS if IEEE CS and ACM were to be admitted to the proposed new category. Mr. Shriver responded that Admissions Committee should look into the matter when and if the scheme is instituted and when applications are made. Messrs. Gottlieb, Glasson and Morris wished to know more of the perceived advantages of this category and Mr. Shriver responded that it could provide a two-way flow of benefits and could bring additional input and another perspective to IFIP's activity. Mr. Freeman wished to know how this category would impact the Affiliate members.

Mr. Johnson found the proposal interesting and recalled that IFIP had emerged as a representative body of national organizations. Currently many of these national organizations have multiple membership. He wished to know how many of the IEEE CS members are members of national societies, which in turn are represented in IFIP. He is also interested to know the projection of the 40% international members in terms of representation in the governing board. Mr. Shriver replied that he does not have exact figures and cautioned GA at this stage not to relate the issue of IPS Membership to IEEE CS and ACM.

The President thanked Mr. Shriver for the stimulating presentation. He informed General Assembly that he appoints a Committee (Messrs. Goldsworthy (Chair), Bobillier, Khakhar and Morris) to study the issue and to consider possible criteria for eligibility. This Committee is asked to report back to Council 98 and GA 98.

#### 4.24 Closing of Meeting

The President once again expressed IFIP's grateful thanks to the Brazilian Computer Society and congratulated Mr. R. Reis for the impeccable arrangements.

General Assembly APPLAUDED.

Mr. Bauknecht thanked all GA Members and attendees for their contributions and declared the General Assembly meeting closed.

ANNEX 1

IFIP Member Society Reports - a digest

This summary is no substitute for a reading of the 25 reports on which it is based.

Financial problems

A number of Members had financial difficulties; some arising from national economic problems, others from internal problems. Albania and Bulgaria are in the former category and France and the Netherlands in the latter. Spain and Portugal are successfully emerging from their problems. (Is there any feasible way in which Members can profit from each others' experiences?)

National IT Policy

Some Members play an active role in contributing to national policies either as advisers or consultants or active participants in Government committees. (Armenia, Norway, Zimbabwe, South Africa)

"ECDL"

These initials occur frequently in the reports from European Members. They stand for the European Computer Driving License, a scheme for the certification of the basic skills required to be an effective user. It has been adopted very widely in Europe and non-European Members may find it worth exploring.

Membership Numbers

There seem to be surprising variations in size between Members, not necessarily what might be expected. Norway, for example, has 12,000 individual members and over 1,200 company members. On the other hand the Netherlands' membership of 10k in 1991 fell to 6.6k over five years. Others face a similar decline. The question usually asked is "What do I gain from being a member?" There seem to be two issues worth pursuing.

a) How can Members profit from the experience of others in their retention and recruitment b) Is the current IFIP Member the appropriate one?
Communication
There were many references to the Internet and the way in which plans are well under way to exploit it to achieve better communication with a Society's members. These arrangements could provide a golden opportunity for IFIP to tackle and solve our perennial problem of ignorance by our Members' members of IFIP's activities and its potential value to them. Much valuable IFIP material is already available at our web site. What steps should we take to draw the attention of the masses to its availability and should the scope of the material be extended in a form comprehensible to people not versed in IFIP's ways or jargon?

Reorganization

Apart from those forced to reorganize to solve financial problems there is good evidence that our Members strive to keep up with our fast-changing marketplace, the better to serve existing members and to attract new ones. (Denmark, Zimbabwe, Germany - we look forward to seeing their new logo!)

Activities

There is more or less detail about technical and professional activities some of which attract enviable sizes of audience. Several of our Members are involved in organizing or running national and international competitions for young people.

PART TWO

Suggestions or proposals to IFIP

Activities

1. Limit IFIP events to IFIP Member countries
2. Members should more actively promote IFIP events and publications
3. We should target our work to be of more interest to our Members' members. IFIP is seen as too academic and remote.

TCs and WGs

1. Provide more material suitable for Members' publications
2. WG members should be encouraged to join Member societies
3. Review rules about active participation in WG meetings to allow for networked contribution and discussion.

Major initiatives

1. Concentrate on issues agreed with Members which have worldwide impact e.g. data security and crypto regulations. State our position clearly and publicly to key decision-makers.
2. Create new interest groups, not necessarily TCs, to deal with matters of global concern.
3. IFIP should really aim to be the international body for all Societies and a forum for debating international issues.

Members

1. A member of a Member moving to another country should be treated as a member by that country's Member
2. IFIP should be a much more effective vehicle for Members to exchange information, ideas, advice and activities with each other.

Small and Developing countries

1. Review the fee structure to make it easier to join.
2. Provide free registration for Congress 98 for five people from each developing country.
3. Provide specialist speakers for tutorials.
4. Give more help to developing countries with the assistance of Members.
5. Recognize that small countries cannot afford to meet the cost of attending both technical and administrative meetings and must give priority to the former.
6. Reduce and restructure administrative meetings.

Promoting IFIP

1. IFIP is often the best-kept secret in a Member society. There is a great lack of knowledge about what IFIP does and can do for Members and their members. The Internet, properly exploited can provide a solution.

Professional qualifications

1. IFIP should establish international standards of knowledge and competence for IT professionals together with a professional development scheme.
2. IT professionals achieving these standards could be affiliated to IFIP as certified members.

ANNEX 2

The IFIP TC11 Position on Cryptopolicies

1. IFIP TC11 recognizes the highly important role of cryptographic mechanisms. In the Global Information Infrastructure GII and in Electronic Commerce these mechanisms will influence acceptability, usage, and competitiveness.
2. IFIP TC11 takes notice that for the convenience of discussion it is helpful to distinguish between the differing objectives for the use of cryptographic mechanisms - preservation of confidentiality, provision of the ability to authenticate people/organizations, provision of the ability to prove the integrity/completeness of data, etc.
3. IFIP TC11 is fully convinced that a range of cryptographic mechanisms is required to meet the security needs of the GII. Users may select the most effective for their specific purposes.
4. IFIP TC11 recognizes that cryptography at the same time is prone to potential abuse by criminals. In this context law enforcement plays also an important role and we face the situation that different countries exhibit different attitudes.
5. Being aware that responsibilities for crime prevention and detection lies at national governments and that business is less and less related to national boarders IFIP TC11 recognizes that cryptographic services and cryptographic applications cannot be bound to a nation's territory.
6. IFIP TC11 recognizes the technical consensus that forbidding or restricting the use of strong cryptography is from a technical standpoint ultimately unfeasible.

Taking the above said into account IFIP TC11 takes the following position on the use and regulation of cryptography:

(I) Cryptography has equal impact and importance when data are stored or transmitted. A distinction is unrealistic in a world of networked computers.

(II) It is the prime goal that, whoever is involved in the process, cryptographic procedures and keys are handled in a way that full confidence of all partners, including the public at large, is assured.

(III) It is desirable that voluntary and free use be in place for all types of cryptography.

(IV) While a business will generally take precautions to protect itself against lost/forgotten/stolen keys, such considerations should be carefully separated from the law enforcement considerations, even though the mechanisms for each may be the same or overlap.

(V) When establishing key management and cryptography infrastructures this should be primarily driven by the users needs and not by regulatory requirements.

(VI) Law enforcement shall not establish methods in the cryptography context that infringe on a citizen's expectations of personal privacy and integrity within a country.

(VII) IFIP TC11 assumes that organized and major crime will successfully avoid or evade any requirement to comply with a key deposit scheme. Law enforcers must therefore not rely primarily on key deposit schemes when addressing the issue of criminal intelligence gathering. Research should be conducted, which results in a set of appropriate, acceptable, and well focused alternative methods.

(VIII) In cases where keys are deposited at third parties it is necessary that commercial and privacy interest as well as commercial liabilities must be guaranteed in all phases. This is particularly necessary if such systems allow law enforcement to access data in clear or keys, under proper legal constraint.

(IX) There is a great need that cryptographic methods and especially digital signatures be recognized by national and international law. Such recognition carries with it responsibilities for assuring availability of relevant keys throughout any legally specified retention period and liabilities for improper disclosure of or change to keys whilst they are being kept.

(X) Any legal or regulatory arrangement between two nations, in respect to cryptography and access to relevant materials, must be symmetric.

---------------------

Please note: This Statement was approved by TC 11 and it was intended to seek GA 97 approval in order to endorse it as an IFIP Statement on Cryptopolicies. However, GA 97 experienced time constraints and there was no discussion leading to endorsement. IFIP Member Societies are requested to consider the Statement at the national level. Approval will be requested at GA 98 in Budapest, Hungary.

Back to previous menu