Internet Architecture Board (IAB)                     S. Trowbridge, Ed.
Request for Comments: 6756                                Alcatel-Lucent
Obsoletes: 3356                                             E. Lear, Ed.
Category: Informational                                    Cisco Systems
ISSN: 2070-1721                                          G. Fishman, Ed.
                                              Pearlfisher International
                                                        S. Bradner, Ed.
                                                     Harvard University
                                                         September 2012


                 Internet Engineering Task Force and
      International Telecommunication Union - Telecommunication
           Standardization Sector Collaboration Guidelines

Abstract

  This document provides guidance to aid in the understanding of
  collaboration on standards development between the Telecommunication
  Standardization Sector of the International Telecommunication Union
  (ITU-T) and the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) of the
  Internet Society (ISOC).  It is an update of and obsoletes RFC 3356.
  The updates reflect changes in the IETF and ITU-T since RFC 3356 was
  written.  The bulk of this document is common text with ITU-T A
  Series Supplement 3 (07/2012).

  Note: This was approved by TSAG on 4 July 2012 as Supplement 3 to the
  ITU-T A-Series of Recommendations.

Status of This Memo

  This document is not an Internet Standards Track specification; it is
  published for informational purposes.

  This document is a product of the Internet Architecture Board (IAB)
  and represents information that the IAB has deemed valuable to
  provide for permanent record.  It represents the consensus of the
  Internet Architecture Board (IAB).  Documents approved for
  publication by the IAB are not a candidate for any level of Internet
  Standard; see Section 2 of RFC 5741.

  Information about the current status of this document, any errata,
  and how to provide feedback on it may be obtained at
  http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6756.







Trowbridge, et al.            Informational                     [Page 1]

RFC 6756         IETF and ITU-T Collaboration Guidelines  September 2012


Copyright Notice

  Copyright (c) 2012 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
  document authors.  All rights reserved.

  This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
  Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
  (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
  publication of this document.  Please review these documents
  carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
  to this document.








































Trowbridge, et al.            Informational                     [Page 2]

RFC 6756         IETF and ITU-T Collaboration Guidelines  September 2012


Table of Contents

  1. Introduction and Scope ..........................................4
  2. Guidance on Collaboration .......................................5
     2.1. How to Interact on ITU-T or IETF Work Items ................5
          2.1.1. How the ITU-T Is Informed about Existing
                 IETF Work Items .....................................6
          2.1.2. How the IETF Is Informed about Existing
                 ITU-T Work Items ....................................6
          2.1.3. How the ITU-T Is Informed about Proposed New
                 IETF Work Items .....................................6
          2.1.4. How the IETF Is Informed about ITU-T Work Items .....7
     2.2. Representation .............................................7
          2.2.1. IETF Recognition at ITU-T ...........................7
          2.2.2. ITU-T Recognition at ISOC/IETF ......................7
     2.3. Communication outside of Meetings ..........................8
     2.4. Mailing Lists ..............................................8
     2.5. Document Sharing ...........................................9
          2.5.1. Contributions and Liaison Statements from
                 the IETF to ITU-T ...................................9
          2.5.2. Contributions and Liaison Statements from
                 the ITU-T to IETF ..................................10
          2.5.3. ITU-T and IETF .....................................10
     2.6. Simple Cross Referencing ..................................11
     2.7. Preliminary Work Efforts ..................................11
     2.8. Additional Items ..........................................11
          2.8.1. IETF Information That May Be Useful to
                 ITU-T Participants .................................11
          2.8.2. ITU-T Information That May Be Useful to
                 IETF Participants ..................................12
  3. Security Considerations ........................................13
  4. Acknowledgements ...............................................13
  5. References .....................................................13
     5.1. Normative References ......................................13
     5.2. Informative References ....................................14
  6. Changes since RFC 3356 .........................................15
  7. IAB Members at the Time of Approval ............................15














Trowbridge, et al.            Informational                     [Page 3]

RFC 6756         IETF and ITU-T Collaboration Guidelines  September 2012


1.  Introduction and Scope

  This document provides non-normative guidance to aid in the
  understanding of collaboration on standards development between the
  Telecommunication Standardization Sector of the International
  Telecommunication Union (ITU-T) and the Internet Engineering Task
  Force (IETF) of the Internet Society (ISOC).  Early identification of
  topics of mutual interest will allow for constructive efforts between
  the two organizations based on mutual respect.

  In the IETF, work is done in working groups (WGs), mostly through
  open, public mailing lists rather than face-to-face meetings.  WGs
  are organized into areas, each area being managed by two co-area
  directors.  Collectively, the area directors comprise the Internet
  Engineering Steering Group (IESG).

  In the ITU-T, work is defined by study Questions which are worked on
  mostly through meetings led by rapporteurs (these are sometimes
  called "rapporteur's group" meetings).  Questions are generally
  grouped within working parties (WPs) led by a WP chairman.  Working
  parties report to a parent study group (SG) led by an SG chairman.
  Work may also be conducted in ITU-T focus groups (see Section 2.7).

  To foster ongoing communication between the ITU-T and IETF, it is
  important to identify and establish contact points within each
  organization.  Contact points may include:

  1. ITU-T Study Group Chairman and IETF Area Director

     An IETF area director is the individual responsible for overseeing
     a major focus of activity with a scope similar to that of an ITU-T
     study group chairman.  These positions are both relatively long-
     term (of several years) and offer the stability of contact points
     between the two organizations for a given topic.

  2. ITU-T Rapporteur and IETF Working Group Chair

     An IETF working group chair is an individual who is assigned to
     lead the work on a specific task within one particular area with a
     scope similar to that of an ITU-T rapporteur.  These positions are
     working positions (of a year or more) that typically end when the
     work on a specific topic ends.  Collaboration here is very
     beneficial to ensure the actual work gets done.








Trowbridge, et al.            Informational                     [Page 4]

RFC 6756         IETF and ITU-T Collaboration Guidelines  September 2012


  3. Other Contact Points

     It may be beneficial to establish additional contact points for
     specific topics of mutual interest.  These contact points should
     be established early in the work effort, and in some cases the
     contact point identified by each organization may be the same
     individual.  ITU-T has an additional level of management, the
     working party chairman.  From time to time, it may be beneficial
     for this person to exchange views with IETF working group chairs
     and area directors.

  Note: The current list of IETF area directors and working group
  chairs can be found in the IETF working group charters.  The current
  ITU-T study group chairmen and rapporteurs are listed on the ITU-T
  study group web pages.

2.  Guidance on Collaboration

  This section describes how the existing processes within the IETF and
  ITU-T may be utilized to enable collaboration between the
  organizations.

2.1.  How to Interact on ITU-T or IETF Work Items

  Study groups that have identified work topics that are related to the
  Internet Protocol (IP) should evaluate the relationship with topics
  defined in the IETF. Current IETF working groups and their charters
  (IETF definition of the scope of work) are listed in the IETF
  archives (see Section 2.8.1).

  A study group may decide that development of a Recommendation on a
  particular topic may benefit from collaboration with the IETF.  The
  study group should identify this collaboration in its work plan
  (specifically in that of each Question involved), describing the goal
  of the collaboration and its expected outcome.

  An IETF working group should also evaluate and identify areas of
  relationship with the ITU-T and document the collaboration with the
  ITU-T study group in its charter.

  The following sections outline a process that can be used to enable
  each group to be informed about the other's new work items.









Trowbridge, et al.            Informational                     [Page 5]

RFC 6756         IETF and ITU-T Collaboration Guidelines  September 2012


2.1.1.  How the ITU-T Is Informed about Existing IETF Work Items

  The responsibility is on individual study groups to review the
  current IETF working groups to determine if there are any topics of
  mutual interest.  Working group charters and active Internet-Drafts
  can be found on the IETF web site (http://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/).
  If a study group identifies a common area of work, the study group
  leadership should contact both the IETF working group chair and the
  area director(s) responsible.  This may be accompanied by a formal
  liaison statement (see Section 2.3).

2.1.2.  How the IETF Is Informed about Existing ITU-T Work Items

  The IETF through its representatives will review the current work of
  the various study groups from time to time.  Each ITU-T study group's
  web page on the ITU-T web site contains its current list of Questions
  as well as its current work programme.  When an area or working group
  identifies a common area of work, the matter is referred to
  appropriate working group chairs and area directors, where they may
  consider sending a liaison statement to the appropriate study group.

2.1.3.  How the ITU-T Is Informed about Proposed New IETF Work Items

  The IETF maintains a mailing list for the distribution of proposed
  new work items among standards development organizations.  Many such
  items can be identified in proposed Birds-of-a-Feather (BOF)
  sessions, as well as draft charters for working groups.  The IETF
  forwards all such draft charters for all new and revised working
  groups and BOF session announcements to the IETF new-work mailing
  list.  An ITU-T mailing list is subscribed to this list. Leadership
  of study groups may subscribe to this ITU-T mailing list, which is
  maintained by the Telecommunication Standardization Bureau (TSB).
  Members of the SG-specific listname may include the SG chairman, SG
  vice-chairmen, working party chairmen, concerned rapporteurs, other
  experts designated by the SG, and the SG Counsellor.  This will
  enable the SGs to monitor the new work items for possible overlap or
  interest to their study group.  It is expected that this mailing list
  will see a few messages per month.

  Each SG chairman, or designated representative, may provide comments
  on these charters by responding to the IESG mailing list at
  [email protected] clearly indicating their ITU-T position and the nature
  of their concern.  Plain-text email is preferred on the IESG mailing
  list.

  It should be noted that the IETF turnaround time for new working
  group charters can be as short as two weeks.  As a result, the
  mailing list should be consistently monitored.



Trowbridge, et al.            Informational                     [Page 6]

RFC 6756         IETF and ITU-T Collaboration Guidelines  September 2012


2.1.4.  How the IETF Is Informed about ITU-T Work Items

  The ITU-T accepts new areas of work through the creation or update of
  Questions and these can be found on the ITU-T study group web pages.
  In addition, the ITU-T work programme is documented on each ITU-T
  study group's web page on the ITU-T web site.

  Study groups send updates to the IETF new-work mailing list as new
  Questions are first drafted or created, terms of reference for
  Questions are first drafted or updated, or otherwise when there is
  reason to believe that a particular effort might be of interest to
  the IETF.  Area directors or WG chairs should provide comments
  through liaison statements or direct email to the relevant SG
  chairman in cases of possible overlap or interest.

2.2.  Representation

  ISOC, including its standards body IETF, is a Sector Member of the
  ITU-T.  As a result, ISOC delegates are afforded the same rights as
  other ITU-T Sector Members (see Section 2.2.1).  Conversely, ITU-T
  delegates may participate in the work of the IETF as representatives
  of the ITU-T (see Section 2.2.2).  To promote collaboration, it is
  useful to facilitate communication between the organizations as
  further described below.

2.2.1.  IETF Recognition at ITU-T

  Experts and representatives from the IETF that are chosen by IETF
  leadership normally participate in ITU-T meetings as ISOC delegates.
  The ISOC focal point will facilitate registration and verification of
  these people, as appropriate.

2.2.2.  ITU-T Recognition at ISOC/IETF

  ITU-T study group chairmen can authorize one or more members to
  attend an IETF meeting as an official ITU-T delegate speaking
  authoritatively on behalf of the activities of the study group (or a
  particular rapporteur group).  The study group chairman sends the
  ITU-T list of delegates by email to the working group chair, with a
  copy to the area directors, and also to the study group.  According
  to IETF process, opinions expressed by any such delegate are given
  equal weight with opinions expressed by any other working group
  participant.








Trowbridge, et al.            Informational                     [Page 7]

RFC 6756         IETF and ITU-T Collaboration Guidelines  September 2012


2.3.  Communication outside of Meetings

  Informal communication between contact points and experts of both
  organizations is encouraged.  However, formal communication from an
  ITU-T study group, working party, or rapporteur group to an
  associated IETF contact point must be explicitly approved and
  identified as coming from the study group, working party, or
  rapporteur group, respectively.  Formal liaison statements from the
  ITU-T to the IETF are transmitted according to the procedures
  described in RFC 4053 [2].  These liaison statements are placed by
  the IETF onto a liaison statements web page at
  https://datatracker.ietf.org/liaison/.  An individual at the IETF is
  assigned responsibility for dealing with each liaison statement that
  is received.  The name and contact information of the responsible
  person and any applicable deadline is listed with the links to the
  liaison statement on this web page.

  Formal liaison statements from the Internet Architecture Board (IAB),
  the IESG, the IETF, an IETF working group or area to the ITU-T are
  generated, approved, and transmitted according to the procedures
  described in RFC 4053 [2] and Recommendation ITU-T A.1 [15].  Formal
  communication is intended to allow the sharing of positions between
  the IETF and the ITU-T outside of actual documents (as described in
  Section 2.5.1).  This covers such things as comments on documents and
  requests for input.

2.4.  Mailing Lists

  All IETF working groups and all ITU-T study group Questions have
  associated mailing lists.

  In the IETF, the mailing list is the primary vehicle for discussion
  and decision-making.  It is recommended that the ITU-T experts
  interested in particular IETF working group topics subscribe to and
  participate in these lists.  IETF WG mailing lists are open to all
  subscribers.  The IETF working group mailing list subscription and
  archive information are noted in each working group's charter.  In
  the ITU-T, the TSB has set up formal mailing lists for Questions,
  working parties, and other topics within study groups (more detail
  can be found on the ITU-T web site).  These mailing lists are
  typically used for ITU-T correspondence, including technical
  discussion, meeting logistics, reports, etc.

  Note: Individual subscribers to this list must be affiliated with an
  ITU-T member or associate (at this time, there is no blanket
  inclusion of all IETF participants as members, however, as a member,
  the ISOC focal point can facilitate access by IETF technical experts,
  liaison representatives, or liaison managers).



Trowbridge, et al.            Informational                     [Page 8]

RFC 6756         IETF and ITU-T Collaboration Guidelines  September 2012


  IETF participants may subscribe to ITU-T focus group email lists if
  they are individuals from a country that is a member of ITU-T.

2.5.  Document Sharing

  During the course of ITU-T and IETF collaboration, it is important to
  share working drafts and documents among the technical working
  groups.  Initially proposed concepts and specifications typically can
  be circulated by email (often just repeating the concept and not
  including the details of the specification) on both the IETF and
  ITU-T mailing lists.  In addition, working texts (or URLs) of draft
  Recommendations, Internet-Drafts, or RFCs may also be sent between
  the organizations as described below.

  Internet-Drafts are available on the IETF web site.  The ITU-T can
  make selected ITU-T documents at any stage of development available
  to the IETF by attaching them to a formal liaison statement.
  Although a communication can point to a URL where a non-ASCII
  document (e.g., Word) can be downloaded, attachments in proprietary
  formats to an IETF mailing list are discouraged.  It should also be
  recognized that the official versions of all IETF documents are in
  ASCII.

2.5.1.  Contributions and Liaison Statements from the IETF to ITU-T

  IETF documents (e.g., Internet-Drafts) or URLs of those documents are
  most commonly transmitted to ITU-T study groups as liaison statements
  (see RFC 4053 [2]), but exceptionally can be submitted to a study
  group as a contribution from ISOC in accordance with Recommendation
  ITU-T A.2 [16].  In order to ensure that the IETF has properly
  authorized this, the IETF working group must agree that the specific
  drafts are of mutual interest; that there is a benefit in forwarding
  them to the ITU-T for review, comment, and potential use; and that
  the document status is accurately represented in the cover letter.
  Once agreed, the appropriate area directors review the working group
  request and give approval.  The rules of the IETF Trust are followed
  in these circumstances [3].  The contributions are then forwarded
  (with the noted approval) to the TSB for circulation as a
  contribution to the appropriate ITU-T study group.  Material
  submitted to the ITU-T as an ISOC contribution is governed by clause
  3.1.5 of Recommendation ITU-T A.1 [15].  Any such contribution will
  be made only after receiving necessary approval of owners of the work
  in question.  In other circumstances, a liaison statement may be
  appropriate.  See RFC 5378 [3] and Recommendation ITU-T A.1 [15] for
  more information.






Trowbridge, et al.            Informational                     [Page 9]

RFC 6756         IETF and ITU-T Collaboration Guidelines  September 2012


2.5.2.  Contributions and Liaison Statements from the ITU-T to IETF

  An ITU-T study group or working party may send texts of draft new or
  revised Recommendations, clearly indicating their status, to the IETF
  as contributions in the form of liaison statements or Internet-
  Drafts.  Internet-Drafts are IETF temporary documents that expire six
  months after being published.  The study group or working party must
  decide that there is a benefit in forwarding them to the IETF for
  review, comment, and potential use.  Terms of reference for
  rapporteur group meetings may authorize rapporteur groups to send
  working documents, in the form of Internet-Drafts, to the IETF.

  If the study group or working party elects to transmit the text as an
  Internet-Draft, the document editor would be instructed to prepare
  the contribution in Internet-Draft format (in ASCII and optionally
  postscript format as per RFC 2223 [8]) and upload it via
  https://datatracker.ietf.org/idst/upload.cgi.  Material submitted as
  an Internet-Draft or intended for inclusion in an Internet-Draft or
  RFC is governed by the rules set forth in RFCs 5378 [3], 3979 [4],
  and 4879 [5].  Alternatively, the study group, working party, or
  rapporteur group could attach the text to a formal liaison statement.

  Both the rapporteur and the document editor should be identified as
  contacts in the contribution.  The document should also clearly
  indicate the state of development in a particular ITU-T study group.

  Note: Liaison statements and their attachments sent to the IETF are
  made publicly available on the IETF web site.

2.5.3.  ITU-T and IETF

  It is envisaged that the processes of Sections 2.5.1 and 2.5.2 will
  often be used simultaneously by both an IETF working group and an
  ITU-T study group to collaborate on a topic of mutual interest.

  It is also envisaged that the outcome of the collaboration will be
  the documentation in full by one body and its referencing by the
  other (see Section 2.6 for details).  That is, common or joint text
  is discouraged because of the current differences in procedures for
  document approval and revision.  Where complementary work is being
  undertaken in both organizations that will result in Recommendations
  or RFCs, due allowance should be given to the differing perspectives,
  working methods, and procedures of the two organizations.  That is,
  each organization should understand the other organization's
  procedures and strive to respect them in the collaboration.






Trowbridge, et al.            Informational                    [Page 10]

RFC 6756         IETF and ITU-T Collaboration Guidelines  September 2012


2.6.  Simple Cross Referencing

  Recommendation ITU-T A.5 [6] describes the process for including
  references to documents of other organizations in ITU-T
  Recommendations.  Recommendation ITU-T A.5 also addresses the
  situation where a study group or working party decides to incorporate
  the text of another organization into the text of a Recommendation,
  rather than referencing it.  Information specific to referencing IETF
  RFCs is found at http://itu.int/ITU-T/go/ref-ietf-isoc.

  Section 6.1.1 of RFC 2026 [7] describes the process for referencing
  other open standards (like ITU-T Recommendations) in IETF RFCs.

2.7.  Preliminary Work Efforts

  Both ITU-T and IETF provide mechanisms for early discussion of
  potential new work areas prior to the official start of work in an
  ITU-T study group or creation of an IETF working group.

  Objectives, methods, and procedures for the creation and operation of
  ITU-T focus groups are defined in Recommendation ITU-T A.7 [17].
  Focus groups are frequently created in new work areas where there is
  a need for deliverables to be produced on a specific topic within a
  short timeframe.  IETF participants who are not members or associates
  of ITU-T may participate fully in the work of ITU-T focus groups if
  they are from a country that is a member of ITU-T.

  In the IETF, guidance for BOF sessions is provided in RFC 5434 [13].
  Efforts that have not yet reached the working group stage may be
  discussed in BOF sessions.  These sessions typically gauge interest
  in pursuing creation of working groups.  In some cases, these
  discussions continue on mailing lists.

2.8.  Additional Items

2.8.1.  IETF Information That May Be Useful to ITU-T Participants

  Information on IETF procedures may be found in the documents in the
  informative references, and URLs below.

  Note: RFCs do not change after they are published.  Rather, they are
  either obsoleted or updated by other RFCs.  Such updates are tracked
  in the rfc-index.txt file.

  Current list and status of all IETF RFCs:
     ftp://ftp.ietf.org/rfc/rfc-index.txt





Trowbridge, et al.            Informational                    [Page 11]

RFC 6756         IETF and ITU-T Collaboration Guidelines  September 2012


  Current list and description of all IETF Internet-Drafts:
     ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/1id-abstracts.txt

  Current list of IETF working groups and their Charters: (includes
  area directors and chair contacts, mailing list information, etc.)
     http://www.ietf.org/dyn/wg/charter.html

  Current list of registered BOFs
     http://trac.tools.ietf.org/bof/trac/

  RFC Editor pages about publishing RFCs, including available tools and
  lots of guidance:
     http://www.rfc-editor.org/pubprocess.html

  Current list of liaison statements:
     https://datatracker.ietf.org/liaison/

  IETF Intellectual Property Rights Policy and Notices:
     http://www.ietf.org/ipr/

  The Tao of the IETF - A Novice's Guide to the Internet Engineering
  Task Force:
     http://www.ietf.org/tao.html

2.8.2.  ITU-T Information That May Be Useful to IETF Participants

  Information about the ITU-T can be found in the informative
  references and at the URLs below.

  ITU-T Main page:
     http://itu.int/ITU-T

  List of all ITU-T Recommendations:
     http://itu.int/itu-t/recommendations/

  ITU-T study group main page for Study Group NN (where NN is the
  2-digit SG number):
     http://itu.int/ITU-T/studygroups/comNN/

  Intellectual Property policies, forms, and databases:
     http://itu.int/en/ITU-T/ipr/Pages/default.aspx

  Current list of active ITU-T focus Groups
     http://itu.int/en/ITU-T/focusgroups/Pages/default.aspx







Trowbridge, et al.            Informational                    [Page 12]

RFC 6756         IETF and ITU-T Collaboration Guidelines  September 2012


  ITU-T Procedures including:
     WTSA Resolution 1, Rules of procedure of the ITU Telecommunication
     Standardization Sector (ITU-T)
     WTSA Resolution 2, Study Group responsibility and mandates
     http://itu.int/publ/T-RES/en

  Author's Guide for drafting ITU-T Recommendations:
     http://itu.int/ITU-T/go/author-guide

  Templates for contributions, ITU-T Recommendations, and liaison
  statements:
     http://itu.int/ITU-T/studygroups/templates/index.html

3.  Security Considerations

  Documents that describe cooperation procedures, like this one does,
  have no direct Internet security implications.

4.  Acknowledgements

  This document is based on the text from RFCs 2436 and 3356 [10] and
  benefited greatly from discussions during the January 2012 ITU-T
  Telecommunication Standardization Advisory Group (TSAG) meeting.

5.  References

5.1.  Normative References

  [1]   Daigle, L., Ed., and Internet Architecture Board, "IAB
        Processes for Management of IETF Liaison Relationships", BCP
        102, RFC 4052, April 2005.

  [2]   Trowbridge, S., Bradner, S., and F. Baker, "Procedures for
        Handling Liaison Statements to and from the IETF", BCP 103, RFC
        4053, April 2005.

  [3]   Bradner, S., Ed., and J. Contreras, Ed., "Rights Contributors
        Provide to the IETF Trust", BCP 78, RFC 5378, November 2008.

  [4]   Bradner, S., Ed., "Intellectual Property Rights in IETF
        Technology", BCP 79, RFC 3979, March 2005.

  [5]   Narten, T., "Clarification of the Third Party Disclosure
        Procedure in RFC 3979", BCP 79, RFC 4879, April 2007.

  [6]   Recommendation ITU-T A.5 (2008), Generic procedures for
        including references to documents of other organizations in
        ITU-T Recommendations, International Telecommunication Union.



Trowbridge, et al.            Informational                    [Page 13]

RFC 6756         IETF and ITU-T Collaboration Guidelines  September 2012


5.2.  Informative References

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

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

  [9]   Brett, R., Bradner, S., and G. Parsons, "Collaboration between
        ISOC/IETF and ITU-T", RFC 2436, October 1998.

  [10]  Fishman, G. and S. Bradner, "Internet Engineering Task Force
        and International Telecommunication Union - Telecommunications
        Standardization Sector Collaboration Guidelines", RFC 3356,
        August 2002.

  [11]  Hovey, R. and S. Bradner, "The Organizations Involved in the
        IETF Standards Process", BCP 11, RFC 2028, October 1996.

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

  [13]  Narten, T., "Considerations for Having a Successful Birds-of-a-
        Feather (BOF) Session", RFC 5434, February 2009.

  [14]  Alvestrand, H., "A Mission Statement for the IETF", BCP 95, RFC
        3935, October 2004.

  [15]  Recommendation ITU-T A.1 (2008), Work methods for study groups
        of the ITU Telecommunication Standardization Sector (ITU-T),
        International Telecommunication Union.

  [16]  Recommendation ITU-T A.2 (2008), Presentation of contributions
        to the ITU-T, International Telecommunication Union.

  [17]  Recommendation ITU-T A.7 (2008), Focus groups: Working methods
        and procedures, International Telecommunication Union.

  [18]  Recommendation ITU-T A.8 (2008), Alternative approval process
        for new and revised ITU-T Recommendations, International
        Telecommunication Union.










Trowbridge, et al.            Informational                    [Page 14]

RFC 6756         IETF and ITU-T Collaboration Guidelines  September 2012


6.  Changes since RFC 3356

  The introduction has been integrated with the scope section.

  Additional information has been added about copyright and IPR issues.

  Authorization of liaison managers and liaison representatives from
  IETF to ITU-T are updated per current IETF procedures documented in
  [1].

  Transmission of formal liaison statements between ITU-T and IETF are
  updated per current IETF procedures documented in [2].

  Description is added of preliminary efforts including ITU-T focus
  groups and IETF BOFs.  ITU-T focus group participation is not limited
  to ITU-T members.

  Obsolete URLs in RFC 3356 from both the ITU-T and IETF web sites are
  updated, more references have been moved to the References section.

7.  IAB Members at the Time of Approval

  Bernard Aboba
  Jari Arkko
  Marc Blanchet
  Ross Callon
  Alissa Cooper
  Spencer Dawkins
  Joel Halpern
  Russ Housley
  David Kessens
  Danny McPherson
  Jon Peterson
  Dave Thaler
  Hannes Tschofenig
















Trowbridge, et al.            Informational                    [Page 15]

RFC 6756         IETF and ITU-T Collaboration Guidelines  September 2012


Authors' Addresses

  Steve Trowbridge
  Alcatel-Lucent
  5280 Centennial Trail
  Boulder, CO 80303-1262 USA

  Phone: +1 720 945 6885
  EMail: [email protected]


  Eliot Lear
  Cisco Systems GmbH
  Richtistrasse 7
  8304 Wallisellen
  Switzerland

  Phone: +41 44 878 9200
  EMail: [email protected]


  Gary Fishman
  Pearlfisher International
  12 Chestnut Drive
  Matawan, NJ 07747

  Phone: +1 732 778 9572
  EMail: [email protected]


  Scott Bradner
  Harvard University
  1 Oxford St.
  Cambridge, MA 02138

  Phone: +1 617 495 3864
  EMail: [email protected]














Trowbridge, et al.            Informational                    [Page 16]