path: root/doc/rfc/rfc2436.txt

Network Working Group                                          R. Brett
Request for Comments: 2436                              Nortel Networks
Category: Informational                                      S. Bradner
                                                     Harvard University
                                                             G. Parsons
                                                        Nortel Networks
                                                           October 1998


               Collaboration between ISOC/IETF and ITU-T

Status of this Memo

   This memo provides information for the Internet community.  It does
   not specify an Internet standard of any kind.  Distribution of this
   memo is unlimited.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (C) The Internet Society (1998).  All Rights Reserved.

Overview

   This document describes the collaboration process between the ITU-T
   and ISOC/IETF. The process was documented by ITU-T at its TSAG
   (Telecommunication Standardization Advisory Group) meeting in
   September 1998.  All participants of this meeting (including Study
   Group chairmen and the ISOC Vice President for Standards) assisted in
   the creation of this document.  Subsequently, it was sent to all
   ITU-T Study Groups and ISOC/IETF to ensure that everyone was aware of
   the process. Feedback is requested by the next meeting of TSAG in
   April 1999.  This document is identical to the document produced by
   TSAG.

   Please send any comments on this document to ISOC at poised@tis.com
   and for information to the ITU-T TSAG group at tsagco-op@itu.int

ISOC/IETF and ITU-T Collaboration

1 Scope

   This Liaison is sent to all ITU-T Study Groups to encourage and aid
   in the understanding of collaboration on standards development
   between the ITU-T and the Internet Society (ISOC) / Internet
   Engineering Task Force (IETF).  Feedback to TSAG is encouraged before
   its next meeting in April 1999.





Brett, et. al.               Informational                      [Page 1]
^L
RFC 2436            ISOC/IETF - ITU-T Collaboration         October 1998


2 Introduction

   The telecommunication industry is faced with an explosion in growth
   of the Internet and other IP (Internet Protocol) based networks.
   Operators, manufacturers and software/application providers alike are
   reconsidering their business directions and Standards Development
   Organizations and Forums and Consortia are facing an immense
   challenge to address this situation.  These challenges were
   considered by TSAG at its meeting in Geneva, 7-11 September 1998,
   where it recognized that although the ITU-T and ISOC/IETF are already
   collaborating in a number of areas, this collaboration must be
   strengthened within the context of changes in work emphasis and
   direction within the ITU-T on studies related to IP based networks.

   For example, many Study Groups (e.g., 7, 8 & 16) already address
   several the aspects of IP based networks.  Further, new IP related
   work activities are starting in other Study Groups (e.g., 4, 11 &
   13).  There are many potential areas of interest to ITU-T Study
   Groups in the IP area that should be investigated (e.g., signaling,
   routing, security, numbering & addressing, integrated management,
   performance, IP - telecom interworking, access).  Since many of these
   areas are also being investigated by the IETF, there is a requirement
   for close collaboration.

   Recommendations A.4, A.5 and A.6 already document the process for
   working with other organizations and their documents.  Since there
   are no specific guidelines on the process of collaboration with the
   IETF, this liaison is meant to provide that information.  The current
   level of cooperation between the ITU-T and the IETF should be built
   upon to ensure that the competence and experience of each
   organization is brought to bear in the most effective manner and in
   collaboration with the other.

3 Guidance on Collaboration

   TSAG has been made aware of several instances of existing successful
   collaboration between the ITU-T and ISOC/IETF.  This section builds
   on this existing process and details some of the more important
   guidance points that Study Groups should be aware of in their
   collaboration with ISOC/IETF.

3.1  How to interact on ITU-T or IETF work items.

   Study Groups that have identified work topics that are Internet
   related 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




Brett, et. al.               Informational                      [Page 2]
^L
RFC 2436            ISOC/IETF - ITU-T Collaboration         October 1998


   section 3.5).  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.  It is anticipated
   that an IETF Working Group would 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 learn about the others new work items.

3.1.1  How the ITU-T learns 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.  Should a Study Group believe that there is an
   opportunity for collaboration on a topic of mutual interest it should
   contact both the IETF Working Group Chair and the Area Director
   responsible.

3.1.2  How the ITU-T learns about proposed new IETF work items

   The IETF maintains a mailing list for the distribution and discussion
   of proposed new Working Group charters amongst the management team.
   To add or change a subscription to this list, send a message to
   iesg-secretary@ietf.org indicating who you are and that you would
   like to subscribe to the New Work mailing list.  Details on the list
   process will be emailed to each subscriber.

   It is recommended that each Study Group chairman (or a delegate)
   subscribe to this list and monitor the new work items for possible
   overlap or interest to their Study Group.  It is expected that this
   mailing list will see one or two messages per month. Chairmen should
   identify their 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.  It should be noted that the IETF
   turnaround time for new Working Group charters is one week.  As a
   result, the mailing list should be consistently monitored.

3.1.3  How the IETF learns about ITU-T work items

   An initial list of Internet related topics in ITU-T Study Groups
   based on the situation as of 11 September is being provided to the
   Vice President of Standards for ISOC for distribution to the
   appropriate IETF interested individuals and will be copied to all



Brett, et. al.               Informational                      [Page 3]
^L
RFC 2436            ISOC/IETF - ITU-T Collaboration         October 1998


   ITU-T Study Group Chairmen.  The intention is for Study Groups to
   forward updates to the Vice President of Standards for ISOC as they
   occur.

   It is expected that any IETF Working Group interest with the topics
   being covered by the ITU-T will be forwarded to individual Study
   Group Chairmen (or the lead Study Group Chairman) by the Vice
   President of Standards for ISOC.

3.2  Representation

   ISOC, including its standards body IETF, have been admitted by the
   ITU Council to participate in the work of the ITU-T.   As a result,
   ISOC delegates are therefore afforded equivalent rights to those of
   other ITU-T Study Group participants (see 3.2.1).  Conversely, ITU-T
   delegates may participate in the work of the IETF as individuals or
   be recognized as ITU-T delegates (see 3.2.2).  To promote
   collaboration it is useful to facilitate communication between the
   organizations as further described below.

3.2.1  IETF Recognition at ITU-T

   Participants from the IETF may participate in ITU-T meetings as ISOC
   delegates if the appropriate IETF Working Group (or area) has
   approved their attendance.  This approval will be communicated to the
   TSB in the form of a registration for a particular ITU-T meeting by
   the Vice President of Standards for ISOC.

3.2.2  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 on
   behalf of the Study Group (or a particular Rapporteur Group).  The
   Study Group Chairman communicates the ITU-T list of delegates by
   email to the Vice President of Standards for ISOC and also to the
   Study Group.  The email address of the Vice President of Standards
   for ISOC is vp-standards@isoc.org.

3.2.3 Communication contacts

   To foster ongoing communication between the ITU-T and ISOC/IETF, it
   is important to identify and establish contact points within ITU-T
   Study Groups for specific IETF topics of mutual interest. It is
   beneficial to identify these contact points early and in some cases
   the contact point identified by each organization may be the same
   individual.  It is responsibility of a Study Group to establish the
   contact points with the IETF and maintain the list on its web page.




Brett, et. al.               Informational                      [Page 4]
^L
RFC 2436            ISOC/IETF - ITU-T Collaboration         October 1998


   An example of communication contacts that is suggested to Study
   Groups has both a high level and a working level:

   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. Note that the
      current 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 web page.

   Both the ITU-T and IETF may assign their contact point function(s) to
   other individuals than those suggested as it deems appropriate.

3.2.4  Communication

   Informal communication between contact points and experts of both
   organizations is encouraged.  However, note that formal communication
   from an ITU-T Study Group, Working Party or Rapporteur to an
   associated IETF contact point must be explicitly approved and
   identified as coming from the Study Group, Working Party or
   Rapporteur Group, respectively.  Conversely, formal communication
   from an IETF Working Group or Area Director must also be explicitly
   approved and identified before forwarding to any ITU-T contact.
   Formal communication is intended to allow the sharing of positions
   between the IETF and the ITU-T outside of actual documents (as
   described in 3.3).  This would cover such things as comments on
   documents and requests for input.  The approved communication is
   simply emailed from one body contact to another (the appropriate
   mailing lists, as described in 3.2.5 may be copied).

3.2.5  Mailing Lists

   All IETF Working Groups and all ITU-T Study Group Questions have
   associated mailing lists.




Brett, et. al.               Informational                      [Page 5]
^L
RFC 2436            ISOC/IETF - ITU-T Collaboration         October 1998


   In the IETF, the mailing list is the primary vehicle for discussion
   and decision making.  It is recommended the ITU-T experts interested
   in particular IETF working group topics subscribe to and participate
   in these lists. 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 website.).  These mailing lists are typically used
   for discussion of ITU-T contributions.  Note that individual
   subscribers to this list must be affiliated with an ITU-T member (at
   this time, there is no blanket inclusion of all IETF participants as
   members, however, as a member ISOC may designate representatives to
   subscribe).  Alternatively, ITU-T members operate personal mailing
   lists on various topics with no restrictions on membership (e.g.,
   IETF participants are welcome).

3.3     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.  Initial 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 or RFCs (Internet Drafts) may also be sent between
   the organizations as described below.

3.3.1  IETF to ITU-T

   IETF documents (e.g., Internet Drafts) can be submitted to a Study
   Group as a Contribution from ISOC.  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 and that there is a
   benefit in forwarding them to the ITU-T for review, comment and
   potential use.  Once agreed, the Vice President Standards for ISOC
   would review the Working Group request and give approval.  The
   contributions would then be forwarded (with the noted approval) to
   the TSB for circulation as a Study Group Contribution.

3.3.2  ITU-T to IETF

   A Study Group may send texts of draft new Recommendations to the IETF
   as contributions in the form of Internet Drafts.  Internet Drafts are
   IETF temporary documents that expire six months after being
   published.  The Study Group 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



Brett, et. al.               Informational                      [Page 6]
^L
RFC 2436            ISOC/IETF - ITU-T Collaboration         October 1998


   Drafts, to the IETF.  In both cases, the document editor would be
   instructed to prepare the contribution in Internet Draft format (in
   ASCII and optionally postscript format as per RFC 2223) and submit it
   to the Internet Draft editor (email: internet-drafts@ietf.org).
   Alternatively, the Study Group or Rapporteur Group could agree to
   post the document on a web site and merely document its existence
   with a short Internet Draft that contains a summary and the document
   URL.

   Both the Rapporteur and the Document Editor should be identified as
   contacts in the contribution.  The contribution must also clearly
   indicate that the Internet Draft is a working document of a
   particular ITU-T Study Group.

3.3.3  ITU-T & IETF

   It is envisaged that the processes of 3.3.1 & 3.3.2 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 3.4 for details).  That is, common or joint text is
   discouraged because of the current differences in approval, revision
   and stability of approved documents for publication by each body.

3.4  Simple cross referencing

   ITU-T Recommendation A.5, specifically its Annex A and the
   application guidelines attached, describes the process for
   referencing IETF RFCs in ITU-T Recommendations.  IETF RFC 2026,
   specifically section 7.1.1, describes the process for referencing
   other open standards (like ITU-T Recommendations) in IETF RFCs.

3.5  Additional items

   Several URLs to IETF procedures are provided here for information:

   RFC2223  - Instructions to RFC Authors, October 1997
      ftp://ftp.isi.edu/in-notes/rfc2223.txt
   RFC2026  - The Internet Standards Process Revision 3, October 1996
      ftp://ftp.isi.edu/in-notes/rfc2026.txt
   RFC2418 - IETF Working Group Guidelines and Procedures, September
      1998 ftp://ftp.isi.edu/in-notes/rfc2418.txt
   Current list and status of all IETF RFCs ftp://ftp.isi.edu/in-
      notes/rfc-index.txt
   Current list and description of all IETF Internet Drafts:
      ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/1id-abstracts.txt




Brett, et. al.               Informational                      [Page 7]
^L
RFC 2436            ISOC/IETF - ITU-T Collaboration         October 1998


   Current list of IETF Working Groups and their Charters: (includes
      Area Directors and Chair contacts, Mailing list information, etc.)
      http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/wg-dir.html
   Current ITU-T information can be found on the ITU website: (includes
      contacts, organization, Recommendations for purchase, mailing list
      info, etc.) http://www.itu.int

4.  Acknowledgments

   The process was documented by ITU-T at its TSAG (Telecommunication
   Standardization Advisory Group) meeting in September 1998.  All
   participants of this meeting (including Study Group chairmen and the
   ISOC Vice President for Standards) assisted in the creation of this
   document.  Subsequently, it was sent to all ITU-T Study Groups and
   ISOC/IETF to ensure that everyone was aware of the process. Feedback
   is requested by the next meeting of TSAG in April 1999.

5. Security Considerations

   This type of non-protocol document does not directly effect the
   security of the Internet.

6. Authors' Addresses

   ITU-T Contact:
   R. F. Brett
   Nortel Networks
   P.O. Box 3511, Station C
   Ottawa, ON  K1Y 4H7
   Canada

   Phone: +1-613-828-0902
   Fax:   +1-613-828-9408
   EMail: rfbrett@nortel.ca


   ISOC Contact:
   Scott O. Bradner
   Harvard University
   Holyoke Center, Room 876
   1350 Mass. Ave.
   Cambridge, MA  02138
   USA

   Phone: +1 617 495 3864
   EMail: sob@harvard.edu





Brett, et. al.               Informational                      [Page 8]
^L
RFC 2436            ISOC/IETF - ITU-T Collaboration         October 1998


   Editor:
   Glenn W. Parsons
   Nortel Networks
   P.O. Box 3511, Station C
   Ottawa, ON  K1Y 4H7
   Canada

   Phone: +1-613-763-7582
   Fax:   +1-613-763-4461
   EMail: Glenn.Parsons@Nortel.ca

7. References

   [A.4]     ITU-T Recommendation A.4 - Communication process between
             ITU-T and forums and consortia, October 1996.

   [A.5]     ITU-T Recommendation A.5 - Generic procedures for including
             references to documents to other organizations in ITU-T
             Recommendations, January 1998.

   [A.6]     ITU-T Recommendation A.6 - Cooperation and exchange of
             information between ITU-T and national and regional
             standards development organizations, September 1998.

   [RFC2026] Bradner, S., "The Internet Standards Process - Revision 3",
             BCP 9, RFC 2026, October 1996.

   [RFC2223] Postel, J. and J. Reynolds, "Instructions to RFC Authors",
             RFC 2223, October 1997.

   [RFC2418] Bradner, S., "IETF Working Group Guidelines and
             Procedures", BCP 25, RFC 2418, September 1998.

8.  Full ITU Copyright Statement

   Copyright (C) ITU (1998).  All Rights Reserved.

   No part of this publication may be reproduced or utilized in any form
   or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying and
   microfilm, without permission in writing from the ITU.











Brett, et. al.               Informational                      [Page 9]
^L
RFC 2436            ISOC/IETF - ITU-T Collaboration         October 1998


9.  Annex A

   APPLICATION GUIDELINES ON REFERENCING DOCUMENTS FROM OTHER
   ORGANIZATIONS

PART I - Developed by TSAG at its January 1998 Meeting

   The following guidelines should be used in conjunction with the
   relevant provisions of Recommendations A.3, A.4, A.5 and A.23.

   1. Ownership/Change Control
      - When considering using material from other organizations it is
         preferable to only include references to other standards,
         rather than incorporate text from a standard in the body of a
         Recommendation. Exceptionally, full text incorporation is
         necessary rather than a reference where Recommendations having
         regulatory connotations are concerned.

      - Reference should be made to the particular issue of a standard.
         In this way the ITU-T is in control of what is actually
         referenced even if the source organization updates the
         standard.
      - References to standards from other organizations should only be
         made where those organizations continue to provide public
         access to the version referenced even when updated versions are
         issued.
      - When a draft Recommendation is being prepared and the intention
         is to reference a standard from another organization, that
         organization should be advised by the TSB of the ITU-T's
         intention and should be requested to notify the ITU-T of any
         impending changes to the standard and of any reissues of the
         standard. (This request may be part of the correspondence
         described in Recommendation A.5, section 2.4.) It is however
         the responsibility of the Study Group to regularly review its
         Recommendations and check if the references are correct and if
         necessary to reissue the Recommendation with revised references
         (and where necessary make changes in the body of the
         Recommendation where the reference is made.).
      - Should an organization intend to remove completely an earlier
         version of a standard the ITU-T should be advised so that it
         can either incorporate the text in the Recommendation or change
         the reference to a later version.

   2. Access
      - The objective is to have referenced standards freely available
         via the Web so that people purchasing a Recommendation may get
         access to the references.  A warning should be given to
         purchasers of ITU-T Recommendations that they may have to



Brett, et. al.               Informational                     [Page 10]
^L
RFC 2436            ISOC/IETF - ITU-T Collaboration         October 1998


         additionally purchase the referenced standards. This could be
         done by including a note to such effect in the introduction to
         Recommendations where references are included.
      - When developing a Recommendation where consideration is being
         given to using references to other standards the Study Group
         should investigate with the TSB whether the referenced text
         will be available free of charge or if a payment will be
         required. This should be taken into account by the Study Group
         as it may influence the decision to use the reference.

   3. IPR
      - In principle, if the IPR policy of the organization owning a
         referenced standard is more stringent than that of the ITU-T
         then there should not be any IPR problems with including the
         reference. However, this may not be the case with all
         organizations. Further guidelines are being prepared by the
         Director of the TSB.

   4. Approval
      - The approval procedures in Resolution 1 have to be followed for
         Recommendations containing references (wholly or in part) to
         standards from other bodies even in the case where the
         Recommendation is just a reference to another standard.

PART II - Developed by TSAG at its September 1998 Meeting

   The following guidelines should be used in conjunction with
   Recommendation A.5.

   1. Nested References
      Issue: RFCs often contain references to related RFCs and ITU-T
      Recommendations which, in turn, may contain references to other
      RFCs and Recommendations. It is unclear how to handle these nested
      references in the context of A.5.

      Guideline: Each time an RFC is referenced within an ITU-T
      Recommendation, all references within that RFC should be listed in
      the report documenting the decision of the Study Group. No further
      treatment is necessary, although the Study Group may wish to
      investigate those references further on a case-by-case basis. The
      same guidelines apply when referencing the documents of other
      organizations.

   2. Subsequent Referencing of the Same Document
      Issue: It is possible that the same RFC may be considered for
      referencing in multiple Recommendations. It is unclear what
      evaluation is required in subsequent references.




Brett, et. al.               Informational                     [Page 11]
^L
RFC 2436            ISOC/IETF - ITU-T Collaboration         October 1998


      Guideline: The justification for referencing the same document in
      different Recommendations is likely to be different. Consequently,
      it is important that separate evaluations be made each time the
      document is referenced.  However, only items 1 - 8 in Appendix I
      (and Annex A) of Recommendation A.5 need to be completed if the
      referenced organization has already been qualified per Section 3
      of A.5. Since items 9 and 10 are dependent on the organization and
      not on the document, they need to be completed only the first time
      a document from that organization is being considered for
      referencing and only if such information has not been documented
      already.

   3. Availability of Referenced Document
      Issue: Paragraph 2.2.10 of A.5 requires that the contributing
      Study Group member provide a full copy of the existing document.
      It is unclear whether paper copies are mandatory or whether
      electronic availability, for example, on a Web site, is
      sufficient.

      Guideline: The objective is to have referenced documents available
      via the Web at no cost so that the Study Group members may proceed
      with their evaluation. Accordingly, if a referenced document is
      available in this manner, it is sufficient for the contributing
      member to provide its exact location on the Web. On the other
      hand, if the document is not available in this manner, a full copy
      must be provided (in electronic format if permissible by the
      referenced organization, otherwise in paper format).

   4. Referencing of IETF Documents
      Issue: It is unclear whether or not it is appropriate to reference
      RFCs that are not on the standards track (the "Informational" and
      "Experimental" RFCs) or those that are at the first level of
      standardization (the "Proposed Standard" RFCs).

      Guideline: Some outputs of organizations may not be appropriate
      for normative referencing, others may not be appropriate for any
      referencing, normative or informative. In the case of the IETF, it
      is not appropriate to make any references to "Internet Drafts" or
      to "Historic" RFCs as noted in A.5. In addition, it is not
      appropriate to make normative references to RFCs that are
      considered "Informational" or "Experimental". References to RFCs
      that have the status of "Proposed Standards" should be made with
      caution and should be evaluated on a case-by-case basis because
      such standards are considered immature in the sense that they may
      change if problems are found in real implementations or if better
      solutions are identified.





Brett, et. al.               Informational                     [Page 12]
^L
RFC 2436            ISOC/IETF - ITU-T Collaboration         October 1998


   5. IETF Address Changes
      The electronic address of the IETF archives has changed.
      Accordingly the addresses in items 4 and 9.8 of Annex A should be
      changed, respectively to:
         http://www.ietf.org/ipr.html - for the IPR archive
         http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc.html - for the RFC archive













































Brett, et. al.               Informational                     [Page 13]
^L
RFC 2436            ISOC/IETF - ITU-T Collaboration         October 1998


Full Copyright Statement

   Copyright (C) The Internet Society (1998).  All Rights Reserved.

   This document and translations of it may be copied and furnished to
   others, and derivative works that comment on or otherwise explain it
   or assist in its implementation may be prepared, copied, published
   and distributed, in whole or in part, without restriction of any
   kind, provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph are
   included on all such copies and derivative works.  However, this
   document itself may not be modified in any way, such as by removing
   the copyright notice or references to the Internet Society or other
   Internet organizations, except as needed for the purpose of
   developing Internet standards in which case the procedures for
   copyrights defined in the Internet Standards process must be
   followed, or as required to translate it into languages other than
   English.

   The limited permissions granted above are perpetual and will not be
   revoked by the Internet Society or its successors or assigns.

   This document and the information contained herein is provided on an
   "AS IS" basis and THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING
   TASK FORCE DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING
   BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE INFORMATION
   HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF
   MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
























Brett, et. al.               Informational                     [Page 14]
^L