GENWiki

Premier IT Outsourcing and Support Services within the UK

User Tools

Site Tools


rfc:rfc4691

Network Working Group L. Andersson, Ed. Request for Comments: 4691 IAB Category: Informational October 2006

  Guidelines for Acting as an IETF Liaison to Another Organization

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 (2006).

Abstract

 Whenever the IETF decides to enter into a liaison relationship with
 another organization, such as a Standards Development Organization
 (SDO), a consortium, or an industrial forum, a liaison manager is
 appointed.  The procedures used by the IAB to establish and maintain
 liaison relationships between the IETF and other organizations are
 described in RFC 4052.  This document expands on the role of liaison
 managers and liaison representatives, giving guidelines on their
 mandate and the expectations, tasks, and responsibilities placed on
 them.

Table of Contents

 1. Introduction ....................................................2
 2. IETF Liaison Relationships ......................................3
    2.1. Related Documents ..........................................3
    2.2. Liaison Managers and Liaison Representatives ...............3
    2.3. Written Communications .....................................4
    2.4. Terminology and Conventions ................................5
 3. Guidelines for Liaison Managers and Representatives .............5
    3.1. Mandate ....................................................6
         3.1.1. Speaking for the IETF ...............................6
    3.2. Expectations ...............................................6
    3.3. Responsibilities ...........................................8
    3.4. Tasks ......................................................9
    3.5. Relationship Management ...................................10
         3.5.1. IETF Consensus Process on Liaison Statements .......10
         3.5.2. Incoming Liaison Statements ........................10
         3.5.3. Ambiguous Incoming Liaison Statements ..............11
         3.5.4. Liaison Managers Representing Peer Organizations ...11

Andersson Informational [Page 1] RFC 4691 Liaison Guidelines October 2006

 4. Security Considerations ........................................12
 5. IANA Considerations ............................................12
 6. Acknowledgements ...............................................12
 7. References .....................................................13
    7.1. Normative References ......................................13
    7.2. Informative References ....................................13

1. Introduction

 In the course of developing Internet standards, the IETF needs to
 communicate extensively with various other peer organizations,
 including the following:
 o  Standards Development Organizations (SDOs) such as the
    Telecommunication Standardization Sector of the International
    Telecommunication Union (ITU-T) or standardization working groups
    of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (e.g.,
    IEEE 802)
 o  Consortia such as the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C)
 o  Industrial forums such as the Global Grid Forum (GGF)
 These organizations are usually concerned with developing related
 standards and technical specifications, so that from time to time
 issues of coordination and mutual interest may arise.  To facilitate
 communications, the IETF, through the Internet Architecture Board
 (IAB), establishes permanent liaison relationships with appropriate
 parts of these organizations according to the processes described in
 RFC 4052 [RFC4052].
 Whenever the IETF decides to enter into a liaison relationship, a
 liaison manager and possibly some liaison representatives are
 appointed by the IAB to act as a channel between the IETF and the
 peer organization, typically in tandem with counterparts appointed by
 the peer organization.
 Sections 2.2, 2.3, and 3 of RFC 4052 briefly set out the basic
 functions of the tasks of liaison managers and representatives.  Over
 time, the number and importance of liaisons have grown, and the
 importance of the personal role of IETF liaison managers and
 representatives in maintaining effective relationships with peer
 organizations has grown concomitantly.  This document supplements
 [RFC4052] by providing guidelines for liaison managers and liaison
 representatives in maintaining communications to peer organizations.

Andersson Informational [Page 2] RFC 4691 Liaison Guidelines October 2006

2. IETF Liaison Relationships

 A major goal of the IETF is to develop standards for the Internet,
 enabling the development of interoperable implementations.  In order
 to develop Internet standards, it is frequently necessary for the
 IETF to communicate with other organizations that develop standards
 for other types of networks, for Internet applications, or for
 technologies that the Internet uses.
 In some cases, the IETF and peer organizations consider it mutually
 beneficial to have a permanent formal relationship with certain rules
 governing the relationship.  The organizations then enter into a
 "liaison relationship".  At a high level, both sides agree to
 undertake certain responsibilities with respect to each other.  The
 most basic liaison responsibility is to communicate information as
 necessary, and to respond to requests from peer organizations to
 which liaisons are maintained.
 Decisions on IETF liaison relationships are the responsibility of the
 IAB.  This includes whether or not the IETF should have a liaison
 relationship with a particular organization.

2.1. Related Documents

 The IETF liaison process is specified in several documents.  RFC 4052
 [RFC4052] specifies how the IAB manages the IETF liaison
 relationship; RFC 4053 [RFC4053] specifies how liaison statements
 should be treated.  Organization-specific agreements and documents
 may also be generated in some cases, e.g., RFC 3356 [RFC3356]
 describes the collaboration between the IETF and ITU-T, RFC 3113
 [RFC3113] describes the relationship with the 3rd Generation
 Partnership Project (3GPP), and RFC 3131 [RFC3131] describes the one
 with the Third Generation Partnership Project 2 (3GPP2).

2.2. Liaison Managers and Liaison Representatives

 Whenever the IETF enters into a liaison relationship with another
 organization, a liaison manager (often referred to as "the IETF
 liaison") is appointed by the IAB.  This document expands on the
 mandate of and the expectations, tasks, and responsibilities placed
 on the liaison manager by Section 2.2 of RFC 4052.
 In some cases, it may be necessary to have more than one person
 handling the liaison relationship with a given organization.  For
 example, the time commitment required may be too substantial, or the
 technical scope of the liaison relationship may be too broad to be
 handled by a single individual.

Andersson Informational [Page 3] RFC 4691 Liaison Guidelines October 2006

 In such cases, the IAB may appoint one or more liaison
 representatives to supplement the work of the liaison manager by
 managing different aspects of the liaison relationship between the
 IETF and the other organization.
 The value of personal relationships between the IETF liaison manager
 and representatives and members of the peer organization is central
 to the roles.  The IAB will be looking for people who have both a
 good technical understanding of the work being carried out and
 effective personal relationships within the peer organization.
 Ongoing face-to-face interactions between the IETF liaisons and
 members of the peer organization are seen as critical to the
 effective functioning of the role.  These interactions should allow
 the liaisons to keep the IETF abreast, and preferably ahead, of
 matters of mutual interest or potential conflict.  When the liaison
 is working effectively, it should facilitate the IETF and the peer
 organization working synergistically and reduce the chance of
 overlapping or conflicting standards being created.

2.3. Written Communications

 Aside from the personal contacts between liaisons and the peer
 organization, extensive communication may occur between the IETF and
 the peer organizations through written materials.  Much of this
 communication is through liaison statements that typically contain
 plans, new developments, and time schedules of which one party
 believes that the other party should be aware.
 The liaison manager should be aware of these written communications
 and assist both parties to see that appropriate action is taken in
 relation to liaison statements passing in both directions.
 For example, when a liaison organization, such as ITU-T, needs to
 reference material that is under development in the IETF: the final
 reference in the peer organization's document needs the permanent
 identifier (RFC number) that will be assigned to the Internet Draft
 when it is approved and published.  To meet the publication schedule
 of the peer organization, a liaison statement is often sent to the
 IETF requesting that an RFC number be assigned within the required
 timeframe.  In response, the IETF can provide the RFC number or
 explain why it is not possible to provide this within the timeframe
 requested.
 An alternative situation that involves more specific action by the
 liaison manager also involves requests for this kind of expedited
 action on RFCs.  For example, 3GPP/3GPP2 and the Open Mobile Alliance
 (OMA) provide the IETF with an updated list of dependencies between
 their documents and IETF documents on a monthly basis, indicating

Andersson Informational [Page 4] RFC 4691 Liaison Guidelines October 2006

 what documents are needed and the required timeframe.  In this case,
 the liaison manager tracks the dependency list and, when necessary,
 conveys the request for expedited assignment to the appropriate IETF
 Area Director (AD).

2.4. Terminology and Conventions

 Terminology relating to IETF liaison procedures is found in
 [RFC4052].  Terms defined below are valid for this document only.
 Liaison manager
 A person appointed to manage an IETF liaison relationship with
 another organization.
 Liaison representative
 A person appointed to manage a certain (sub-)aspect of an IETF
 liaison relationship with another organization.  Since it is only the
 scale of the responsibilities, mandate, and tasks that is different,
 the rest of this document only explicitly mentions liaison managers.
 IETF consensus
 RFC 2026 [RFC2026] and RFC 2418 [RFC2418] discuss the IETF consensus
 process.  In this document, the term "IETF consensus" is used to
 indicate either consensus of the IETF as an organization, an area
 within IETF, or a working group.  There the term "IETF consensus"
 needs to be interpreted in the context in which it is used.
 The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
 "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
 document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [RFC2119].

3. Guidelines for Liaison Managers and Representatives

 Since liaison relationships are intended to be mutually beneficial,
 the IETF liaison to another organization must act as a bi-directional
 communication link between the IETF and the other organization.
 Since the liaison manager has been appointed by the IETF, the liaison
 manager needs to be responsive to the needs and aims of the IETF.
 RFC 4052 lists some of the tasks and expectations relating to liaison
 managers and liaison representatives.  This document expands on their
 mandate, provides more detailed discussion, and describes how the
 role is executed.

Andersson Informational [Page 5] RFC 4691 Liaison Guidelines October 2006

3.1. Mandate

 The mandate for IETF liaison managers is strictly limited to
 conveying IETF consensus to the liaised organization.  The liaison
 manager MUST NOT on their own initiative send liaison statements to a
 liaised organization on behalf of IETF, or any of its areas and
 working groups.  Liaison statements are only sent following the
 process specified in [RFC4052].  Liaison statements are only sent on
 the initiative of the IETF chair, the IAB chair, IETF Area Directors,
 or IETF working group chairs.
 In Section 3.3 and Section 3.4, responsibilities and tasks are listed
 that enable the IETF to obtain the information to correctly interact
 with the liaised organizations and to develop and clearly communicate
 IETF consensus.

3.1.1. Speaking for the IETF

 The IETF functions based on rough consensus, which means that the
 right to speak for the IETF cannot be delegated.  The liaison manager
 speaks on behalf of the IETF on the subject matter of the liaison,
 but only after making sure that the IETF consensus is understood.
 Some guidelines for understanding IETF consensus are provided above;
 however, the most important requirement is close and detailed
 coordination/consultation with the IETF community.

3.2. Expectations

 There are certain expectations placed on liaison managers appointed
 by the IETF.  Examples of these expectations are listed below.
 Competences required
    The key competence needed in the liaison manager or representative
    role is effective management of the liaison process according to
    the rules that have been agreed upon.  The liaison acts as a
    representative of the IETF and not an independent voice with
    respect to topics of discussion in the liaison relationship.  The
    liaison must therefore be careful to distinguish his or her own
    views from documented IETF consensus in dealings with the peer
    organization.
    To this end, the liaison manager or representative must be able to
    communicate effectively with members of the peer organization,
    especially in face-to-face situations.  This is important both to
    communicate the IETF's viewpoint and to gather information about
    the issues in the peer organization that the IETF needs to
    understand.

Andersson Informational [Page 6] RFC 4691 Liaison Guidelines October 2006

    In support of the liaison process, a person appointed to act as a
    liaison manager or representative on behalf of the IETF is
    expected to have a good technical understanding of the key issues
    in the subject area, as well as an understanding of the concerns
    important to stakeholders in both organizations.
    An IETF liaison needs to have knowledge of the IETF's consensus
    process in general, as well as the consensus process(es) applying
    to the key issues within the liaison relationship.
    The liaison must also have a good understanding of the processes
    used by the peer organization involved.
 Perspective
    Liaison relationships are designed for the mutual benefit of the
    organizations participating in the liaison.  As such, swift
    information flow in both directions is a firm requirement.  The
    role of an IETF liaison manager is to promote the interests of the
    IETF with respect to all topics within the scope of the liaison
    relationship.  Since the liaison manager "wears an IETF hat", it
    is NOT the task of a liaison manager to promote the interests of
    the liaised organization within the IETF.
 Distance
    A liaison may not be able to maintain the required perspective if
    he or she is closely involved in the outcome of the work in the
    peer organization.  A conflict of interest might arise if the
    liaison is involved in the management of the relevant part of the
    peer organization, has a close technical involvement in the work
    that is the subject of the liaison, or has a close interest in the
    outcome of the work in the peer organization through his or her
    employment.  When appointing an appropriate person to manage a
    liaison relationship, the IAB needs to take into account any
    conflicts of interest that the individual being considered might
    have.  Before a person is appointed to manage a liaison
    relationship, he or she will be asked to explicitly state any
    conflicts of interest.  The IAB will not appoint a person to a
    liaison manager position if there is a strong conflict of
    interest.  For example, an individual with an industry or
    organizational leadership position in an organization would
    typically not be suitable for appointment as an IETF liaison to
    that organization.

Andersson Informational [Page 7] RFC 4691 Liaison Guidelines October 2006

 Commitment and opportunity
    A liaison manager needs to be committed to addressing the issues
    relevant to the liaison relationship.  To handle the job properly,
    it is necessary that the liaison be able to allocate sufficient
    time to the task.
 Timeliness
    It is expected that a liaison manger will make the IETF aware of
    new developments in the subject area in a timely fashion.

3.3. Responsibilities

 The liaison manager and representatives provide information to the
 IETF community in order to enable the IETF to make decisions based on
 the best possible information regarding the work in the peer
 organization.  In turn, information communicated by the IETF liaison
 to the liaised organization MUST be based on the relevant IETF
 consensus.  The liaison manager works with the liaised organization
 to ensure that communication is clear.  As part of this, the liaison
 must clearly differentiate his or her own independent positions from
 those that represent IETF consensus.
 It is the responsibility of the liaison manager to ensure that the
 liaised organization communicates its requirements to the IETF in a
 timely fashion and that the IETF consensus is clearly understood.
 This is particularly important in situations where the IETF and the
 liaised organization differ substantially in their positions.  In
 this situation, the liaison manager needs to facilitate prompt
 communication so that the IETF and the liaised organization can stay
 in close communication and avoid misunderstandings.
 The liaison manager and representatives are responsible for clearly
 and correctly communicating the IETF consensus position to the
 liaised organization.  This includes, when specifically instructed,
 carrying any messages from the IETF to the peer organization.
 Generally, these communications "represent the IETF", and therefore
 due care and consensus must be applied in their construction.
 The liaison manager and representatives are responsible for ensuring
 that relevant information originating from the liaised organization,
 or other information coming to the attention of the liaison, reaches
 the correct destination within the IETF, in a timely and effective
 way.

Andersson Informational [Page 8] RFC 4691 Liaison Guidelines October 2006

3.4. Tasks

 Examples of tasks performed by the liaison manager are provided
 below.  Depending on the nature of the liaised organization, the task
 may vary in frequency and relative importance.
 1.  Attend relevant meetings and participate in conference calls and
     mailing lists within the liaised organization to gather
     information relevant to the liaison relationship.  Note
     developments of interest for onward communication to the IETF.
     Communicate the point of view of the IETF consensus to the peer
     organization.
 2.  Communicate information relevant to the liaison relationship to
     the relevant part of the IETF either by written reports or
     verbally; this may involve briefings with a team of IETFers
     involved in the liaised organization and other interested parties
     within the IETF, e.g., working group chairs and ADs.
 3.  Understand the concerns of both the IETF and the peer
     organization, while ensuring that interests of the IETF are
     maintained; where there appear to be problems to solve or
     conflicts between approaches, work with both parties to encourage
     engineers from both organizations to collaborate on solving the
     problem and facilitate the development of engineering solutions
     in the appropriate organization.
 4.  Prepare reports giving updates on developments in the peer
     organization as requested by the IAB or other interested parties
     in the IETF.  The target for these updates (e.g., the IAB, an AD,
     a WG) will typically be identified upon establishment of the
     liaison relationship and/or the appointment of the liaison
     manager.
 5.  Oversee delivery of liaison statements addressed to the IETF.
     This includes ensuring that liaison statements are delivered to
     the appropriate destination within the IETF, as well as
     shepherding the timely creation of responses by the IETF.
 6.  Work with the liaised organization to ensure that the IETF's
     liaison statements are appropriately directed and responded to in
     a timely fashion.  To accomplish this, the liaison needs to build
     a contact network.
 7.  Communicate and coordinate with other IETF liaison managers where
     the activities of two or more liaised organizations overlap.

Andersson Informational [Page 9] RFC 4691 Liaison Guidelines October 2006

 8.  Assist with the preparation of IETF liaison statements based on
     IETF consensus.
 9.  From time to time, liaison managers and liaison representatives
     will have to report to the IETF on the status of the liaison
     relationship.  For this purpose, they will need to keep track of
     outstanding issues on behalf of the IETF.  The frequency of the
     reports and the recipients of the reports within the IETF will be
     decided when the liaison relationship is set up and may be
     changed at any time by an IAB decision.  IAB or other parties
     within the IETF may probe for liaison reports as needed or at
     regular intervals.

3.5. Relationship Management

 Liaison managers will be involved in activities for which they are
 not directly responsible, but that might greatly benefit from their
 expertise.  Some of these activities are outlined below.

3.5.1. IETF Consensus Process on Liaison Statements

 Liaison statements and other messages sent to a liaised organization
 should be based on rough consensus within the IETF or one of its
 working groups or areas.  Though the liaison manager is not
 responsible for determining consensus, it is important that the
 liaison manager participate in the process and makes his or her
 expertise and knowledge available.
 How consensus is arrived at may vary according to the circumstances.
 Some issues are new, and in these cases an open discussion on a
 mailing list should be undertaken.  For some issues, consensus has
 already been arrived at or the liaison statement is a mere statement
 of facts (e.g., to inform the liaised organization that an IETF Last
 Call had started on a document it had previously expressed interest
 in) and in these cases the liaison statement can be written and sent
 (such as by a working group chair), possibly involving the liaison
 manager.

3.5.2. Incoming Liaison Statements

 When the IETF receives a liaison statement or other communication
 from an organization with which it has a liaison relationship that
 includes a request for a response to the communication, the IETF is
 committed to providing a timely response.  This means that the IETF
 will respond within the time requested and provide information as
 accurately as possible.  This commitment has been one of the key
 discussion points in the past, such as within the (g)mpls change
 process [GMPLS].

Andersson Informational [Page 10] RFC 4691 Liaison Guidelines October 2006

 This commitment does not mean that the IETF will uncritically accept
 the content in the incoming liaison statement.  To the extent that
 the liaison contains requirements on IETF technology or protocols,
 they will be taken into consideration based on their technical merit.

3.5.3. Ambiguous Incoming Liaison Statements

 Sometimes the IETF, an IETF area, or an IETF working group receives
 liaison statements from a liaised organization that are sent to the
 wrong destination.  At other times, the liaison statement is sent to
 working groups that are not chartered to do the work that the liaison
 statement addresses.  In some cases, it might be the situation that
 no working group is chartered to do the work.
 In such cases, the liaison manager should assist in finding the
 appropriate recipient within the IETF that might respond to the
 incoming liaison statement.  Sometimes this might require that the
 intended response is made available for review on one of the IETF
 mailing lists.

3.5.4. Liaison Managers Representing Peer Organizations

 Liaised organizations may appoint a person to act as a liaison
 manager for "their side" of the relationship.  This is the person
 that will speak authoritatively, within the IETF, on the activities
 performed by the other organization.  The other organization needs to
 make this person known to the IETF.  This person might request a slot
 on a working group agenda to discuss developments and plans of the
 liaised organization.
 Opinions expressed by a liaison mangers of other SDOs, other than
 reports on work within the liaised organization, are given equal
 weight with opinions expressed by other working group participants.
 RFC 3356 [RFC3356] describes this in the context of the relationship
 between the IETF and the ITU-T; however, the same model is applicable
 to all other organizations with which the IETF has a liaison
 relationship.
 The mandates of liaison managers from other organizations are
 recognized by the IETF to the extent needed to understand the
 information received from the liaison manager.  In all other respects
 he or she participates in IETF activities under the same conditions
 and rules as any other IETF participant.  It is important that the
 IETF liaison manager understands the extent to which the peer liaison
 manager is mandated or delegated to speak on behalf of the peer
 organization, and to inform the relevant part of the IETF if the peer
 liaison manager appears to be stepping outside the role or stance
 given to him or her by the peer organization.

Andersson Informational [Page 11] RFC 4691 Liaison Guidelines October 2006

 IETF liaison managers should work to include the liaison manager from
 the liaised organization within their contact network, and to
 understand the positions being communicated by the peer liaison
 manager.

4. Security Considerations

 This document does not specify any protocol or "bits on the wire".
 However, since interaction with other standards-making organizations
 often relates to security, the liaison manager can assist with
 security-related issues, resulting in improved security for Internet
 protocols.

5. IANA Considerations

 There are no requests to the IANA herein.  Note that the liaison
 manager very often has to understand and convey questions regarding
 IETF namespaces managed by IANA.

6. Acknowledgements

 This document was developed as part of a conversation regarding the
 requirements on IETF liaison managers and representatives.  Several
 IAB members have significantly contributed to the document.  Also,
 the document has been improved thanks to suggestions and review from
 Allison Mankin, Dave Meyer, and Leslie Daigle.
 A special thanks to Bernard Aboba, who, based on his experience as a
 liaison manager, has made many useful comments on the subject matter.
 Elwyn Davies and Bernard Aboba have both spent time correcting
 language and grammar.
 Members of the IAB at the time of approval of this document were the
 following:
 Bernard Aboba
 Loa Andersson
 Brian Carpenter
 Leslie Daigle
 Elwyn Davies
 Kevin Fall
 Olaf Kolkman
 Kurtis Lindqvist
 David Meyer
 Dave Oran
 Eric Rescorla
 Dave Thaler
 Lixia Zhang

Andersson Informational [Page 12] RFC 4691 Liaison Guidelines October 2006

7. References

7.1. Normative References

 [RFC2026]  Bradner, S., "The Internet Standards Process -- Revision
            3", BCP 9, RFC 2026, October 1996.
 [RFC2119]  Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
            Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
 [RFC2418]  Bradner, S., "IETF Working Group Guidelines and
            Procedures", BCP 25, RFC 2418, September 1998.
 [RFC4052]  Daigle, L. and Internet Architecture Board, "IAB Processes
            for Management of IETF Liaison Relationships", BCP 102,
            RFC 4052, April 2005.

7.2. Informative References

 [GMPLS]    Andersson, L., "MPLS and GMPLS Change Process", Work in
            Progress, December 2005.
 [RFC3113]  Rosenbrock, K., Sanmugam, R., Bradner, S., and J. Klensin,
            "3GPP-IETF Standardization Collaboration", RFC 3113, June
            2001.
 [RFC3131]  Bradner, S., Calhoun, P., Cuschieri, H., Dennett, S.,
            Flynn, G., Lipford, M., and M. McPheters, "3GPP2-IETF
            Standardization Collaboration", RFC 3131, June 2001.
 [RFC3356]  Fishman, G. and S. Bradner, "Internet Engineering Task
            Force and International Telecommunication Union -
            Telecommunications Standardization Sector Collaboration
            Guidelines", RFC 3356, August 2002.
 [RFC4053]  Trowbridge, S., Bradner, S., and F. Baker, "Procedures for
            Handling Liaison Statements to and from the IETF", BCP
            103, RFC 4053, April 2005.

Editor's Address

 Loa Andersson
 IAB
 EMail: loa@pi.se

Andersson Informational [Page 13] RFC 4691 Liaison Guidelines October 2006

Full Copyright Statement

 Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2006).
 This document is subject to the rights, licenses and restrictions
 contained in BCP 78, and except as set forth therein, the authors
 retain all their rights.
 This document and the information contained herein are provided on an
 "AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS
 OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET
 ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM 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.

Intellectual Property

 The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any
 Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to
 pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in
 this document or the extent to which any license under such rights
 might or might not be available; nor does it represent that it has
 made any independent effort to identify any such rights.  Information
 on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be
 found in BCP 78 and BCP 79.
 Copies of IPR disclosures made to the IETF Secretariat and any
 assurances of licenses to be made available, or the result of an
 attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use of
 such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this
 specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository at
 http://www.ietf.org/ipr.
 The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any
 copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary
 rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement
 this standard.  Please address the information to the IETF at
 ietf-ipr@ietf.org.

Acknowledgement

 Funding for the RFC Editor function is provided by the IETF
 Administrative Support Activity (IASA).

Andersson Informational [Page 14]

/data/webs/external/dokuwiki/data/pages/rfc/rfc4691.txt · Last modified: 2006/10/20 23:56 by 127.0.0.1

Donate Powered by PHP Valid HTML5 Valid CSS Driven by DokuWiki