diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'doc/rfc/rfc6756.txt')
| -rw-r--r-- | doc/rfc/rfc6756.txt | 899 |
1 files changed, 899 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/doc/rfc/rfc6756.txt b/doc/rfc/rfc6756.txt new file mode 100644 index 0000000..ade1d8f --- /dev/null +++ b/doc/rfc/rfc6756.txt @@ -0,0 +1,899 @@ + + + + + + +Internet Architecture Board (IAB) S. Trowbridge, Ed. +Request for Comments: 6756 Alcatel-Lucent +Obsoletes: 3356 E. Lear, Ed. +Category: Informational Cisco Systems +ISSN: 2070-1721 G. Fishman, Ed. + Pearlfisher International + S. Bradner, Ed. + Harvard University + September 2012 + + + Internet Engineering Task Force and + International Telecommunication Union - Telecommunication + Standardization Sector Collaboration Guidelines + +Abstract + + This document provides guidance to aid in the understanding of + collaboration on standards development between the Telecommunication + Standardization Sector of the International Telecommunication Union + (ITU-T) and the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) of the + Internet Society (ISOC). It is an update of and obsoletes RFC 3356. + The updates reflect changes in the IETF and ITU-T since RFC 3356 was + written. The bulk of this document is common text with ITU-T A + Series Supplement 3 (07/2012). + + Note: This was approved by TSAG on 4 July 2012 as Supplement 3 to the + ITU-T A-Series of Recommendations. + +Status of This Memo + + This document is not an Internet Standards Track specification; it is + published for informational purposes. + + This document is a product of the Internet Architecture Board (IAB) + and represents information that the IAB has deemed valuable to + provide for permanent record. It represents the consensus of the + Internet Architecture Board (IAB). Documents approved for + publication by the IAB are not a candidate for any level of Internet + Standard; see Section 2 of RFC 5741. + + Information about the current status of this document, any errata, + and how to provide feedback on it may be obtained at + http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6756. + + + + + + + +Trowbridge, et al. Informational [Page 1] + +RFC 6756 IETF and ITU-T Collaboration Guidelines September 2012 + + +Copyright Notice + + Copyright (c) 2012 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the + document authors. All rights reserved. + + This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal + Provisions Relating to IETF Documents + (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of + publication of this document. Please review these documents + carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect + to this document. + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +Trowbridge, et al. Informational [Page 2] + +RFC 6756 IETF and ITU-T Collaboration Guidelines September 2012 + + +Table of Contents + + 1. Introduction and Scope ..........................................4 + 2. Guidance on Collaboration .......................................5 + 2.1. How to Interact on ITU-T or IETF Work Items ................5 + 2.1.1. How the ITU-T Is Informed about Existing + IETF Work Items .....................................6 + 2.1.2. How the IETF Is Informed about Existing + ITU-T Work Items ....................................6 + 2.1.3. How the ITU-T Is Informed about Proposed New + IETF Work Items .....................................6 + 2.1.4. How the IETF Is Informed about ITU-T Work Items .....7 + 2.2. Representation .............................................7 + 2.2.1. IETF Recognition at ITU-T ...........................7 + 2.2.2. ITU-T Recognition at ISOC/IETF ......................7 + 2.3. Communication outside of Meetings ..........................8 + 2.4. Mailing Lists ..............................................8 + 2.5. Document Sharing ...........................................9 + 2.5.1. Contributions and Liaison Statements from + the IETF to ITU-T ...................................9 + 2.5.2. Contributions and Liaison Statements from + the ITU-T to IETF ..................................10 + 2.5.3. ITU-T and IETF .....................................10 + 2.6. Simple Cross Referencing ..................................11 + 2.7. Preliminary Work Efforts ..................................11 + 2.8. Additional Items ..........................................11 + 2.8.1. IETF Information That May Be Useful to + ITU-T Participants .................................11 + 2.8.2. ITU-T Information That May Be Useful to + IETF Participants ..................................12 + 3. Security Considerations ........................................13 + 4. Acknowledgements ...............................................13 + 5. References .....................................................13 + 5.1. Normative References ......................................13 + 5.2. Informative References ....................................14 + 6. Changes since RFC 3356 .........................................15 + 7. IAB Members at the Time of Approval ............................15 + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +Trowbridge, et al. Informational [Page 3] + +RFC 6756 IETF and ITU-T Collaboration Guidelines September 2012 + + +1. Introduction and Scope + + This document provides non-normative guidance to aid in the + understanding of collaboration on standards development between the + Telecommunication Standardization Sector of the International + Telecommunication Union (ITU-T) and the Internet Engineering Task + Force (IETF) of the Internet Society (ISOC). Early identification of + topics of mutual interest will allow for constructive efforts between + the two organizations based on mutual respect. + + In the IETF, work is done in working groups (WGs), mostly through + open, public mailing lists rather than face-to-face meetings. WGs + are organized into areas, each area being managed by two co-area + directors. Collectively, the area directors comprise the Internet + Engineering Steering Group (IESG). + + In the ITU-T, work is defined by study Questions which are worked on + mostly through meetings led by rapporteurs (these are sometimes + called "rapporteur's group" meetings). Questions are generally + grouped within working parties (WPs) led by a WP chairman. Working + parties report to a parent study group (SG) led by an SG chairman. + Work may also be conducted in ITU-T focus groups (see Section 2.7). + + To foster ongoing communication between the ITU-T and IETF, it is + important to identify and establish contact points within each + organization. Contact points may include: + + 1. ITU-T Study Group Chairman and IETF Area Director + + An IETF area director is the individual responsible for overseeing + a major focus of activity with a scope similar to that of an ITU-T + study group chairman. These positions are both relatively long- + term (of several years) and offer the stability of contact points + between the two organizations for a given topic. + + 2. ITU-T Rapporteur and IETF Working Group Chair + + An IETF working group chair is an individual who is assigned to + lead the work on a specific task within one particular area with a + scope similar to that of an ITU-T rapporteur. These positions are + working positions (of a year or more) that typically end when the + work on a specific topic ends. Collaboration here is very + beneficial to ensure the actual work gets done. + + + + + + + + +Trowbridge, et al. Informational [Page 4] + +RFC 6756 IETF and ITU-T Collaboration Guidelines September 2012 + + + 3. Other Contact Points + + It may be beneficial to establish additional contact points for + specific topics of mutual interest. These contact points should + be established early in the work effort, and in some cases the + contact point identified by each organization may be the same + individual. ITU-T has an additional level of management, the + working party chairman. From time to time, it may be beneficial + for this person to exchange views with IETF working group chairs + and area directors. + + Note: The current list of IETF area directors and working group + chairs can be found in the IETF working group charters. The current + ITU-T study group chairmen and rapporteurs are listed on the ITU-T + study group web pages. + +2. Guidance on Collaboration + + This section describes how the existing processes within the IETF and + ITU-T may be utilized to enable collaboration between the + organizations. + +2.1. How to Interact on ITU-T or IETF Work Items + + Study groups that have identified work topics that are related to the + Internet Protocol (IP) should evaluate the relationship with topics + defined in the IETF. Current IETF working groups and their charters + (IETF definition of the scope of work) are listed in the IETF + archives (see Section 2.8.1). + + A study group may decide that development of a Recommendation on a + particular topic may benefit from collaboration with the IETF. The + study group should identify this collaboration in its work plan + (specifically in that of each Question involved), describing the goal + of the collaboration and its expected outcome. + + An IETF working group should also evaluate and identify areas of + relationship with the ITU-T and document the collaboration with the + ITU-T study group in its charter. + + The following sections outline a process that can be used to enable + each group to be informed about the other's new work items. + + + + + + + + + +Trowbridge, et al. Informational [Page 5] + +RFC 6756 IETF and ITU-T Collaboration Guidelines September 2012 + + +2.1.1. How the ITU-T Is Informed about Existing IETF Work Items + + The responsibility is on individual study groups to review the + current IETF working groups to determine if there are any topics of + mutual interest. Working group charters and active Internet-Drafts + can be found on the IETF web site (http://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/). + If a study group identifies a common area of work, the study group + leadership should contact both the IETF working group chair and the + area director(s) responsible. This may be accompanied by a formal + liaison statement (see Section 2.3). + +2.1.2. How the IETF Is Informed about Existing ITU-T Work Items + + The IETF through its representatives will review the current work of + the various study groups from time to time. Each ITU-T study group's + web page on the ITU-T web site contains its current list of Questions + as well as its current work programme. When an area or working group + identifies a common area of work, the matter is referred to + appropriate working group chairs and area directors, where they may + consider sending a liaison statement to the appropriate study group. + +2.1.3. How the ITU-T Is Informed about Proposed New IETF Work Items + + The IETF maintains a mailing list for the distribution of proposed + new work items among standards development organizations. Many such + items can be identified in proposed Birds-of-a-Feather (BOF) + sessions, as well as draft charters for working groups. The IETF + forwards all such draft charters for all new and revised working + groups and BOF session announcements to the IETF new-work mailing + list. An ITU-T mailing list is subscribed to this list. Leadership + of study groups may subscribe to this ITU-T mailing list, which is + maintained by the Telecommunication Standardization Bureau (TSB). + Members of the SG-specific listname may include the SG chairman, SG + vice-chairmen, working party chairmen, concerned rapporteurs, other + experts designated by the SG, and the SG Counsellor. This will + enable the SGs to monitor the new work items for possible overlap or + interest to their study group. It is expected that this mailing list + will see a few messages per month. + + Each SG chairman, or designated representative, may provide comments + on these charters by responding to the IESG mailing list at + iesg@ietf.org clearly indicating their ITU-T position and the nature + of their concern. Plain-text email is preferred on the IESG mailing + list. + + It should be noted that the IETF turnaround time for new working + group charters can be as short as two weeks. As a result, the + mailing list should be consistently monitored. + + + +Trowbridge, et al. Informational [Page 6] + +RFC 6756 IETF and ITU-T Collaboration Guidelines September 2012 + + +2.1.4. How the IETF Is Informed about ITU-T Work Items + + The ITU-T accepts new areas of work through the creation or update of + Questions and these can be found on the ITU-T study group web pages. + In addition, the ITU-T work programme is documented on each ITU-T + study group's web page on the ITU-T web site. + + Study groups send updates to the IETF new-work mailing list as new + Questions are first drafted or created, terms of reference for + Questions are first drafted or updated, or otherwise when there is + reason to believe that a particular effort might be of interest to + the IETF. Area directors or WG chairs should provide comments + through liaison statements or direct email to the relevant SG + chairman in cases of possible overlap or interest. + +2.2. Representation + + ISOC, including its standards body IETF, is a Sector Member of the + ITU-T. As a result, ISOC delegates are afforded the same rights as + other ITU-T Sector Members (see Section 2.2.1). Conversely, ITU-T + delegates may participate in the work of the IETF as representatives + of the ITU-T (see Section 2.2.2). To promote collaboration, it is + useful to facilitate communication between the organizations as + further described below. + +2.2.1. IETF Recognition at ITU-T + + Experts and representatives from the IETF that are chosen by IETF + leadership normally participate in ITU-T meetings as ISOC delegates. + The ISOC focal point will facilitate registration and verification of + these people, as appropriate. + +2.2.2. ITU-T Recognition at ISOC/IETF + + ITU-T study group chairmen can authorize one or more members to + attend an IETF meeting as an official ITU-T delegate speaking + authoritatively on behalf of the activities of the study group (or a + particular rapporteur group). The study group chairman sends the + ITU-T list of delegates by email to the working group chair, with a + copy to the area directors, and also to the study group. According + to IETF process, opinions expressed by any such delegate are given + equal weight with opinions expressed by any other working group + participant. + + + + + + + + +Trowbridge, et al. Informational [Page 7] + +RFC 6756 IETF and ITU-T Collaboration Guidelines September 2012 + + +2.3. Communication outside of Meetings + + Informal communication between contact points and experts of both + organizations is encouraged. However, formal communication from an + ITU-T study group, working party, or rapporteur group to an + associated IETF contact point must be explicitly approved and + identified as coming from the study group, working party, or + rapporteur group, respectively. Formal liaison statements from the + ITU-T to the IETF are transmitted according to the procedures + described in RFC 4053 [2]. These liaison statements are placed by + the IETF onto a liaison statements web page at + https://datatracker.ietf.org/liaison/. An individual at the IETF is + assigned responsibility for dealing with each liaison statement that + is received. The name and contact information of the responsible + person and any applicable deadline is listed with the links to the + liaison statement on this web page. + + Formal liaison statements from the Internet Architecture Board (IAB), + the IESG, the IETF, an IETF working group or area to the ITU-T are + generated, approved, and transmitted according to the procedures + described in RFC 4053 [2] and Recommendation ITU-T A.1 [15]. Formal + communication is intended to allow the sharing of positions between + the IETF and the ITU-T outside of actual documents (as described in + Section 2.5.1). This covers such things as comments on documents and + requests for input. + +2.4. Mailing Lists + + All IETF working groups and all ITU-T study group Questions have + associated mailing lists. + + In the IETF, the mailing list is the primary vehicle for discussion + and decision-making. It is recommended that the ITU-T experts + interested in particular IETF working group topics subscribe to and + participate in these lists. IETF WG mailing lists are open to all + subscribers. The IETF working group mailing list subscription and + archive information are noted in each working group's charter. In + the ITU-T, the TSB has set up formal mailing lists for Questions, + working parties, and other topics within study groups (more detail + can be found on the ITU-T web site). These mailing lists are + typically used for ITU-T correspondence, including technical + discussion, meeting logistics, reports, etc. + + Note: Individual subscribers to this list must be affiliated with an + ITU-T member or associate (at this time, there is no blanket + inclusion of all IETF participants as members, however, as a member, + the ISOC focal point can facilitate access by IETF technical experts, + liaison representatives, or liaison managers). + + + +Trowbridge, et al. Informational [Page 8] + +RFC 6756 IETF and ITU-T Collaboration Guidelines September 2012 + + + IETF participants may subscribe to ITU-T focus group email lists if + they are individuals from a country that is a member of ITU-T. + +2.5. Document Sharing + + During the course of ITU-T and IETF collaboration, it is important to + share working drafts and documents among the technical working + groups. Initially proposed concepts and specifications typically can + be circulated by email (often just repeating the concept and not + including the details of the specification) on both the IETF and + ITU-T mailing lists. In addition, working texts (or URLs) of draft + Recommendations, Internet-Drafts, or RFCs may also be sent between + the organizations as described below. + + Internet-Drafts are available on the IETF web site. The ITU-T can + make selected ITU-T documents at any stage of development available + to the IETF by attaching them to a formal liaison statement. + Although a communication can point to a URL where a non-ASCII + document (e.g., Word) can be downloaded, attachments in proprietary + formats to an IETF mailing list are discouraged. It should also be + recognized that the official versions of all IETF documents are in + ASCII. + +2.5.1. Contributions and Liaison Statements from the IETF to ITU-T + + IETF documents (e.g., Internet-Drafts) or URLs of those documents are + most commonly transmitted to ITU-T study groups as liaison statements + (see RFC 4053 [2]), but exceptionally can be submitted to a study + group as a contribution from ISOC in accordance with Recommendation + ITU-T A.2 [16]. In order to ensure that the IETF has properly + authorized this, the IETF working group must agree that the specific + drafts are of mutual interest; that there is a benefit in forwarding + them to the ITU-T for review, comment, and potential use; and that + the document status is accurately represented in the cover letter. + Once agreed, the appropriate area directors review the working group + request and give approval. The rules of the IETF Trust are followed + in these circumstances [3]. The contributions are then forwarded + (with the noted approval) to the TSB for circulation as a + contribution to the appropriate ITU-T study group. Material + submitted to the ITU-T as an ISOC contribution is governed by clause + 3.1.5 of Recommendation ITU-T A.1 [15]. Any such contribution will + be made only after receiving necessary approval of owners of the work + in question. In other circumstances, a liaison statement may be + appropriate. See RFC 5378 [3] and Recommendation ITU-T A.1 [15] for + more information. + + + + + + +Trowbridge, et al. Informational [Page 9] + +RFC 6756 IETF and ITU-T Collaboration Guidelines September 2012 + + +2.5.2. Contributions and Liaison Statements from the ITU-T to IETF + + An ITU-T study group or working party may send texts of draft new or + revised Recommendations, clearly indicating their status, to the IETF + as contributions in the form of liaison statements or Internet- + Drafts. Internet-Drafts are IETF temporary documents that expire six + months after being published. The study group or working party must + decide that there is a benefit in forwarding them to the IETF for + review, comment, and potential use. Terms of reference for + rapporteur group meetings may authorize rapporteur groups to send + working documents, in the form of Internet-Drafts, to the IETF. + + If the study group or working party elects to transmit the text as an + Internet-Draft, the document editor would be instructed to prepare + the contribution in Internet-Draft format (in ASCII and optionally + postscript format as per RFC 2223 [8]) and upload it via + https://datatracker.ietf.org/idst/upload.cgi. Material submitted as + an Internet-Draft or intended for inclusion in an Internet-Draft or + RFC is governed by the rules set forth in RFCs 5378 [3], 3979 [4], + and 4879 [5]. Alternatively, the study group, working party, or + rapporteur group could attach the text to a formal liaison statement. + + Both the rapporteur and the document editor should be identified as + contacts in the contribution. The document should also clearly + indicate the state of development in a particular ITU-T study group. + + Note: Liaison statements and their attachments sent to the IETF are + made publicly available on the IETF web site. + +2.5.3. ITU-T and IETF + + It is envisaged that the processes of Sections 2.5.1 and 2.5.2 will + often be used simultaneously by both an IETF working group and an + ITU-T study group to collaborate on a topic of mutual interest. + + It is also envisaged that the outcome of the collaboration will be + the documentation in full by one body and its referencing by the + other (see Section 2.6 for details). That is, common or joint text + is discouraged because of the current differences in procedures for + document approval and revision. Where complementary work is being + undertaken in both organizations that will result in Recommendations + or RFCs, due allowance should be given to the differing perspectives, + working methods, and procedures of the two organizations. That is, + each organization should understand the other organization's + procedures and strive to respect them in the collaboration. + + + + + + +Trowbridge, et al. Informational [Page 10] + +RFC 6756 IETF and ITU-T Collaboration Guidelines September 2012 + + +2.6. Simple Cross Referencing + + Recommendation ITU-T A.5 [6] describes the process for including + references to documents of other organizations in ITU-T + Recommendations. Recommendation ITU-T A.5 also addresses the + situation where a study group or working party decides to incorporate + the text of another organization into the text of a Recommendation, + rather than referencing it. Information specific to referencing IETF + RFCs is found at http://itu.int/ITU-T/go/ref-ietf-isoc. + + Section 6.1.1 of RFC 2026 [7] describes the process for referencing + other open standards (like ITU-T Recommendations) in IETF RFCs. + +2.7. Preliminary Work Efforts + + Both ITU-T and IETF provide mechanisms for early discussion of + potential new work areas prior to the official start of work in an + ITU-T study group or creation of an IETF working group. + + Objectives, methods, and procedures for the creation and operation of + ITU-T focus groups are defined in Recommendation ITU-T A.7 [17]. + Focus groups are frequently created in new work areas where there is + a need for deliverables to be produced on a specific topic within a + short timeframe. IETF participants who are not members or associates + of ITU-T may participate fully in the work of ITU-T focus groups if + they are from a country that is a member of ITU-T. + + In the IETF, guidance for BOF sessions is provided in RFC 5434 [13]. + Efforts that have not yet reached the working group stage may be + discussed in BOF sessions. These sessions typically gauge interest + in pursuing creation of working groups. In some cases, these + discussions continue on mailing lists. + +2.8. Additional Items + +2.8.1. IETF Information That May Be Useful to ITU-T Participants + + Information on IETF procedures may be found in the documents in the + informative references, and URLs below. + + Note: RFCs do not change after they are published. Rather, they are + either obsoleted or updated by other RFCs. Such updates are tracked + in the rfc-index.txt file. + + Current list and status of all IETF RFCs: + ftp://ftp.ietf.org/rfc/rfc-index.txt + + + + + +Trowbridge, et al. Informational [Page 11] + +RFC 6756 IETF and ITU-T Collaboration Guidelines September 2012 + + + Current list and description of all IETF Internet-Drafts: + ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/1id-abstracts.txt + + Current list of IETF working groups and their Charters: (includes + area directors and chair contacts, mailing list information, etc.) + http://www.ietf.org/dyn/wg/charter.html + + Current list of registered BOFs + http://trac.tools.ietf.org/bof/trac/ + + RFC Editor pages about publishing RFCs, including available tools and + lots of guidance: + http://www.rfc-editor.org/pubprocess.html + + Current list of liaison statements: + https://datatracker.ietf.org/liaison/ + + IETF Intellectual Property Rights Policy and Notices: + http://www.ietf.org/ipr/ + + The Tao of the IETF - A Novice's Guide to the Internet Engineering + Task Force: + http://www.ietf.org/tao.html + +2.8.2. ITU-T Information That May Be Useful to IETF Participants + + Information about the ITU-T can be found in the informative + references and at the URLs below. + + ITU-T Main page: + http://itu.int/ITU-T + + List of all ITU-T Recommendations: + http://itu.int/itu-t/recommendations/ + + ITU-T study group main page for Study Group NN (where NN is the + 2-digit SG number): + http://itu.int/ITU-T/studygroups/comNN/ + + Intellectual Property policies, forms, and databases: + http://itu.int/en/ITU-T/ipr/Pages/default.aspx + + Current list of active ITU-T focus Groups + http://itu.int/en/ITU-T/focusgroups/Pages/default.aspx + + + + + + + +Trowbridge, et al. Informational [Page 12] + +RFC 6756 IETF and ITU-T Collaboration Guidelines September 2012 + + + ITU-T Procedures including: + WTSA Resolution 1, Rules of procedure of the ITU Telecommunication + Standardization Sector (ITU-T) + WTSA Resolution 2, Study Group responsibility and mandates + http://itu.int/publ/T-RES/en + + Author's Guide for drafting ITU-T Recommendations: + http://itu.int/ITU-T/go/author-guide + + Templates for contributions, ITU-T Recommendations, and liaison + statements: + http://itu.int/ITU-T/studygroups/templates/index.html + +3. Security Considerations + + Documents that describe cooperation procedures, like this one does, + have no direct Internet security implications. + +4. Acknowledgements + + This document is based on the text from RFCs 2436 and 3356 [10] and + benefited greatly from discussions during the January 2012 ITU-T + Telecommunication Standardization Advisory Group (TSAG) meeting. + +5. References + +5.1. Normative References + + [1] Daigle, L., Ed., and Internet Architecture Board, "IAB + Processes for Management of IETF Liaison Relationships", BCP + 102, RFC 4052, April 2005. + + [2] Trowbridge, S., Bradner, S., and F. Baker, "Procedures for + Handling Liaison Statements to and from the IETF", BCP 103, RFC + 4053, April 2005. + + [3] Bradner, S., Ed., and J. Contreras, Ed., "Rights Contributors + Provide to the IETF Trust", BCP 78, RFC 5378, November 2008. + + [4] Bradner, S., Ed., "Intellectual Property Rights in IETF + Technology", BCP 79, RFC 3979, March 2005. + + [5] Narten, T., "Clarification of the Third Party Disclosure + Procedure in RFC 3979", BCP 79, RFC 4879, April 2007. + + [6] Recommendation ITU-T A.5 (2008), Generic procedures for + including references to documents of other organizations in + ITU-T Recommendations, International Telecommunication Union. + + + +Trowbridge, et al. Informational [Page 13] + +RFC 6756 IETF and ITU-T Collaboration Guidelines September 2012 + + +5.2. Informative References + + [7] Bradner, S., "The Internet Standards Process -- Revision 3", + BCP 9, RFC 2026, October 1996. + + [8] Postel, J. and J. Reynolds, "Instructions to RFC Authors", RFC + 2223, October 1997. + + [9] Brett, R., Bradner, S., and G. Parsons, "Collaboration between + ISOC/IETF and ITU-T", RFC 2436, October 1998. + + [10] Fishman, G. and S. Bradner, "Internet Engineering Task Force + and International Telecommunication Union - Telecommunications + Standardization Sector Collaboration Guidelines", RFC 3356, + August 2002. + + [11] Hovey, R. and S. Bradner, "The Organizations Involved in the + IETF Standards Process", BCP 11, RFC 2028, October 1996. + + [12] Bradner, S., "IETF Working Group Guidelines and Procedures", + BCP 25, RFC 2418, September 1998. + + [13] Narten, T., "Considerations for Having a Successful Birds-of-a- + Feather (BOF) Session", RFC 5434, February 2009. + + [14] Alvestrand, H., "A Mission Statement for the IETF", BCP 95, RFC + 3935, October 2004. + + [15] Recommendation ITU-T A.1 (2008), Work methods for study groups + of the ITU Telecommunication Standardization Sector (ITU-T), + International Telecommunication Union. + + [16] Recommendation ITU-T A.2 (2008), Presentation of contributions + to the ITU-T, International Telecommunication Union. + + [17] Recommendation ITU-T A.7 (2008), Focus groups: Working methods + and procedures, International Telecommunication Union. + + [18] Recommendation ITU-T A.8 (2008), Alternative approval process + for new and revised ITU-T Recommendations, International + Telecommunication Union. + + + + + + + + + + +Trowbridge, et al. Informational [Page 14] + +RFC 6756 IETF and ITU-T Collaboration Guidelines September 2012 + + +6. Changes since RFC 3356 + + The introduction has been integrated with the scope section. + + Additional information has been added about copyright and IPR issues. + + Authorization of liaison managers and liaison representatives from + IETF to ITU-T are updated per current IETF procedures documented in + [1]. + + Transmission of formal liaison statements between ITU-T and IETF are + updated per current IETF procedures documented in [2]. + + Description is added of preliminary efforts including ITU-T focus + groups and IETF BOFs. ITU-T focus group participation is not limited + to ITU-T members. + + Obsolete URLs in RFC 3356 from both the ITU-T and IETF web sites are + updated, more references have been moved to the References section. + +7. IAB Members at the Time of Approval + + Bernard Aboba + Jari Arkko + Marc Blanchet + Ross Callon + Alissa Cooper + Spencer Dawkins + Joel Halpern + Russ Housley + David Kessens + Danny McPherson + Jon Peterson + Dave Thaler + Hannes Tschofenig + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +Trowbridge, et al. Informational [Page 15] + +RFC 6756 IETF and ITU-T Collaboration Guidelines September 2012 + + +Authors' Addresses + + Steve Trowbridge + Alcatel-Lucent + 5280 Centennial Trail + Boulder, CO 80303-1262 USA + + Phone: +1 720 945 6885 + EMail: steve.trowbridge@alcatel-lucent.com + + + Eliot Lear + Cisco Systems GmbH + Richtistrasse 7 + 8304 Wallisellen + Switzerland + + Phone: +41 44 878 9200 + EMail: lear@cisco.com + + + Gary Fishman + Pearlfisher International + 12 Chestnut Drive + Matawan, NJ 07747 + + Phone: +1 732 778 9572 + EMail: gryfishman@aol.com + + + Scott Bradner + Harvard University + 1 Oxford St. + Cambridge, MA 02138 + + Phone: +1 617 495 3864 + EMail: sob@harvard.edu + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +Trowbridge, et al. Informational [Page 16] + |