GENWiki

Premier IT Outsourcing and Support Services within the UK

User Tools

Site Tools


rfc:rfc3184

Network Working Group S. Harris Request for Comments: 3184 Merit Network BCP: 54 October 2001 Category: Best Current Practice

                    IETF Guidelines for Conduct

Status of this Memo

 This document specifies an Internet Best Current Practices for the
 Internet Community, and requests discussion and suggestions for
 improvements.  Distribution of this memo is unlimited.

Copyright Notice

 Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2001).  All Rights Reserved.

Abstract

 This document provides a set of guidelines for personal interaction
 in the Internet Engineering Task Force.  The Guidelines recognize the
 diversity of IETF participants, emphasize the value of mutual
 respect, and stress the broad applicability of our work.

1. Introduction

 The work of the IETF relies on cooperation among a broad cultural
 diversity of peoples, ideas, and communication styles.  The
 Guidelines for Conduct inform our interaction as we work together to
 develop multiple, interoperable technologies for the Internet.  All
 IETF participants aim to abide by these Guidelines as we build
 consensus in person, at IETF meetings, and in e-mail.  If conflicts
 arise, we resolve them according to the procedures outlined in BCP
 25.[1]

2. Principles of Conduct

 1. IETF participants extend respect and courtesy to their colleagues
    at all times.
    IETF participants come from diverse origins and backgrounds and
    are equipped with multiple capabilities and ideals.  Regardless of
    these individual differences, participants treat their colleagues
    with respect as persons--especially when it is difficult to agree
    with them.  Seeing from another's point of view is often
    revealing, even when it fails to be compelling.

Harris Best Current Practice [Page 1] RFC 3184 IETF Guidelines for Conduct October 2001

    English is the de facto language of the IETF, but it is not the
    native language of many IETF participants.  Native English
    speakers attempt to speak clearly and a bit slowly and to limit
    the use of slang in order to accommodate the needs of all
    listeners.
 2. IETF participants develop and test ideas impartially, without
    finding fault with the colleague proposing the idea.
    We dispute ideas by using reasoned argument, rather than through
    intimidation or ad hominem attack.  Or, said in a somewhat more
    IETF-like way:
          "Reduce the heat and increase the light"
 3. IETF participants think globally, devising solutions that meet the
    needs of diverse technical and operational environments.
    The goal of the IETF is to maintain and enhance a working, viable,
    scalable, global Internet, and the problems we encounter are
    genuinely very difficult.  We understand that "scaling is the
    ultimate problem" and that many ideas quite workable in the small
    fail this crucial test.  IETF participants use their best
    engineering judgment to find the best solution for the whole
    Internet, not just the best solution for any particular network,
    technology, vendor, or user.  We follow the intellectual property
    guidelines outlined in BCP 9.[2]
 4. Individuals who attend Working Group meetings are prepared to
    contribute to the ongoing work of the group.
    IETF participants who attend Working Group meetings read the
    relevant Internet-Drafts, RFCs, and e-mail archives beforehand, in
    order to familiarize themselves with the technology under
    discussion.  This may represent a challenge for newcomers, as e-
    mail archives can be difficult to locate and search, and it may
    not be easy to trace the history of longstanding Working Group
    debates.  With that in mind, newcomers who attend Working Group
    meetings are encouraged to observe and absorb whatever material
    they can, but should not interfere with the ongoing process of the
    group.  Working Group meetings run on a very limited time
    schedule, and are not intended for the education of individuals.
    The work of the group will continue on the mailing list, and many
    questions would be better expressed on the list in the months that
    follow.

Harris Best Current Practice [Page 2] RFC 3184 IETF Guidelines for Conduct October 2001

3. Security Considerations

 IETF participants review each Internet protocol for security
 concerns, and these concerns are incorporated in the description of
 each protocol.

4. Acknowledgements

 Mike O'Dell wrote the first draft of the Guidelines for Conduct, and
 many of his thoughts, statements, and observations are included in
 this version.  Many useful editorial comments were supplied by Dave
 Crocker.  Members of the POISSON Working Group provided many
 significant additions to the text.

5. References

 [1] Bradner, S., "IETF Working Group Guidelines and Procedures",
     BCP 25, RFC 2418, September 1998.
 [2] Bradner, S., "The Internet Standards Process -- Revision 3",
     BCP 9, RFC 2026, October 1996.

6. Author's Address

 Susan Harris
 Merit Network, Inc.
 4251 Plymouth Rd., Suite 2000
 Ann Arbor, MI 48105-2785
 EMail: srh@merit.edu
 Phone: (734) 936-2100

Harris Best Current Practice [Page 3] RFC 3184 IETF Guidelines for Conduct October 2001

7. Full Copyright Statement

 Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2001).  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.

Acknowledgement

 Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the
 Internet Society.

Harris Best Current Practice [Page 4]

/data/webs/external/dokuwiki/data/pages/rfc/rfc3184.txt · Last modified: 2001/10/19 19:06 by 127.0.0.1

Donate Powered by PHP Valid HTML5 Valid CSS Driven by DokuWiki