1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
324
325
326
327
328
329
330
331
332
333
334
335
336
337
338
339
340
341
342
343
344
345
346
347
348
349
350
351
352
353
354
355
356
357
358
359
360
361
362
363
364
365
366
367
368
369
370
371
372
373
374
375
376
377
378
379
380
381
382
383
384
385
386
387
388
389
390
391
392
393
394
395
396
397
398
399
400
401
402
403
404
405
406
407
408
409
410
411
412
413
414
415
416
417
418
419
420
421
422
423
424
425
426
427
428
429
430
431
432
433
434
435
436
437
438
439
440
441
442
443
444
445
446
447
448
449
450
451
452
453
454
455
456
457
458
459
460
461
462
463
464
465
466
467
468
469
470
471
472
473
474
475
476
477
478
479
480
481
482
483
484
485
486
487
488
489
490
491
492
493
494
495
496
497
498
499
500
501
502
503
504
505
506
507
508
509
510
511
512
513
514
515
516
517
518
519
520
521
522
523
524
525
526
527
528
529
530
531
532
533
534
535
536
537
538
539
540
541
542
543
544
545
546
547
548
549
550
551
552
553
554
555
556
557
558
559
560
561
562
563
564
565
566
567
568
569
570
571
572
573
574
575
576
577
578
579
580
581
582
583
584
585
586
587
588
589
590
591
592
593
594
595
596
597
598
599
600
601
602
603
604
605
606
607
608
609
610
611
612
613
614
615
616
617
618
619
620
621
622
623
624
625
626
627
628
629
630
631
632
633
634
635
636
637
638
639
640
641
642
643
644
645
646
647
648
649
650
651
652
653
654
655
656
657
658
659
660
661
662
663
664
665
666
667
668
669
670
671
672
673
674
675
676
677
678
679
680
681
682
683
684
685
686
687
688
689
690
691
692
693
694
695
696
697
698
699
700
701
702
703
704
705
706
707
708
709
710
711
712
713
714
715
716
717
718
719
720
721
722
723
724
725
726
727
728
729
730
731
732
733
734
735
736
737
738
739
740
741
742
743
744
745
746
747
748
749
750
751
752
753
754
755
756
757
758
759
760
761
762
763
764
765
766
767
768
769
770
771
772
773
774
775
776
777
778
779
780
781
782
783
784
785
786
787
788
789
790
791
792
793
794
795
796
797
798
799
800
801
802
803
804
805
806
807
808
809
810
811
812
813
814
815
816
817
818
819
820
821
822
823
824
825
826
827
828
829
830
831
832
833
834
835
836
837
838
839
840
841
842
843
844
845
846
847
848
849
850
851
852
853
854
855
856
857
858
859
860
861
862
863
864
865
866
867
868
869
870
871
872
873
874
875
876
877
878
879
880
881
882
883
884
885
886
887
888
889
890
891
892
893
894
895
896
897
898
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]
^L
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]
^L
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]
^L
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]
^L
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]
^L
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]
^L
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]
^L
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]
^L
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]
^L
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]
^L
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]
^L
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]
^L
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]
^L
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]
^L
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]
^L
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]
^L
|