home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Network Working Group R. Brett
- Request for Comments: 2436 Nortel Networks
- Category: Informational S. Bradner
- Harvard University
- G. Parsons
- Nortel Networks
- October 1998
-
-
- Collaboration between ISOC/IETF and ITU-T
-
- Status of this Memo
-
- This memo provides information for the Internet community. It does
- not specify an Internet standard of any kind. Distribution of this
- memo is unlimited.
-
- Copyright Notice
-
- Copyright (C) The Internet Society (1998). All Rights Reserved.
-
- Overview
-
- This document describes the collaboration process between the ITU-T
- and ISOC/IETF. The process was documented by ITU-T at its TSAG
- (Telecommunication Standardization Advisory Group) meeting in
- September 1998. All participants of this meeting (including Study
- Group chairmen and the ISOC Vice President for Standards) assisted in
- the creation of this document. Subsequently, it was sent to all
- ITU-T Study Groups and ISOC/IETF to ensure that everyone was aware of
- the process. Feedback is requested by the next meeting of TSAG in
- April 1999. This document is identical to the document produced by
- TSAG.
-
- Please send any comments on this document to ISOC at poised@tis.com
- and for information to the ITU-T TSAG group at tsagco-op@itu.int
-
- ISOC/IETF and ITU-T Collaboration
-
- 1 Scope
-
- This Liaison is sent to all ITU-T Study Groups to encourage and aid
- in the understanding of collaboration on standards development
- between the ITU-T and the Internet Society (ISOC) / Internet
- Engineering Task Force (IETF). Feedback to TSAG is encouraged before
- its next meeting in April 1999.
-
-
-
-
-
- Brett, et. al. Informational [Page 1]
-
- RFC 2436 ISOC/IETF - ITU-T Collaboration October 1998
-
-
- 2 Introduction
-
- The telecommunication industry is faced with an explosion in growth
- of the Internet and other IP (Internet Protocol) based networks.
- Operators, manufacturers and software/application providers alike are
- reconsidering their business directions and Standards Development
- Organizations and Forums and Consortia are facing an immense
- challenge to address this situation. These challenges were
- considered by TSAG at its meeting in Geneva, 7-11 September 1998,
- where it recognized that although the ITU-T and ISOC/IETF are already
- collaborating in a number of areas, this collaboration must be
- strengthened within the context of changes in work emphasis and
- direction within the ITU-T on studies related to IP based networks.
-
- For example, many Study Groups (e.g., 7, 8 & 16) already address
- several the aspects of IP based networks. Further, new IP related
- work activities are starting in other Study Groups (e.g., 4, 11 &
- 13). There are many potential areas of interest to ITU-T Study
- Groups in the IP area that should be investigated (e.g., signaling,
- routing, security, numbering & addressing, integrated management,
- performance, IP - telecom interworking, access). Since many of these
- areas are also being investigated by the IETF, there is a requirement
- for close collaboration.
-
- Recommendations A.4, A.5 and A.6 already document the process for
- working with other organizations and their documents. Since there
- are no specific guidelines on the process of collaboration with the
- IETF, this liaison is meant to provide that information. The current
- level of cooperation between the ITU-T and the IETF should be built
- upon to ensure that the competence and experience of each
- organization is brought to bear in the most effective manner and in
- collaboration with the other.
-
- 3 Guidance on Collaboration
-
- TSAG has been made aware of several instances of existing successful
- collaboration between the ITU-T and ISOC/IETF. This section builds
- on this existing process and details some of the more important
- guidance points that Study Groups should be aware of in their
- collaboration with ISOC/IETF.
-
- 3.1 How to interact on ITU-T or IETF work items.
-
- Study Groups that have identified work topics that are Internet
- related should evaluate the relationship with topics defined in the
- IETF. Current IETF Working Groups and their charters (IETF
- definition of the scope of work) are listed in the IETF archives (see
-
-
-
-
- Brett, et. al. Informational [Page 2]
-
- RFC 2436 ISOC/IETF - ITU-T Collaboration October 1998
-
-
- section 3.5). A Study Group may decide that development of a
- Recommendation on a particular topic may benefit from collaboration
- with the IETF.
-
- The Study Group should identify this collaboration in its work plan
- (specifically in that of each Question involved), describing the goal
- of the collaboration and its expected outcome. It is anticipated
- that an IETF Working Group would also evaluate and identify areas of
- relationship with the ITU-T and document the collaboration with the
- ITU-T Study Group in its charter.
-
- The following sections outline a process that can be used to enable
- each group to learn about the others new work items.
-
- 3.1.1 How the ITU-T learns about existing IETF work items
-
- The responsibility is on individual Study Groups to review the
- current IETF Working Groups to determine if there are any topics of
- mutual interest. Should a Study Group believe that there is an
- opportunity for collaboration on a topic of mutual interest it should
- contact both the IETF Working Group Chair and the Area Director
- responsible.
-
- 3.1.2 How the ITU-T learns about proposed new IETF work items
-
- The IETF maintains a mailing list for the distribution and discussion
- of proposed new Working Group charters amongst the management team.
- To add or change a subscription to this list, send a message to
- iesg-secretary@ietf.org indicating who you are and that you would
- like to subscribe to the New Work mailing list. Details on the list
- process will be emailed to each subscriber.
-
- It is recommended that each Study Group chairman (or a delegate)
- subscribe to this list and monitor the new work items for possible
- overlap or interest to their Study Group. It is expected that this
- mailing list will see one or two messages per month. Chairmen should
- identify their comments on these charters by responding to the IESG
- mailing list at iesg@ietf.org clearly indicating their ITU-T position
- and the nature of their concern. It should be noted that the IETF
- turnaround time for new Working Group charters is one week. As a
- result, the mailing list should be consistently monitored.
-
- 3.1.3 How the IETF learns about ITU-T work items
-
- An initial list of Internet related topics in ITU-T Study Groups
- based on the situation as of 11 September is being provided to the
- Vice President of Standards for ISOC for distribution to the
- appropriate IETF interested individuals and will be copied to all
-
-
-
- Brett, et. al. Informational [Page 3]
-
- RFC 2436 ISOC/IETF - ITU-T Collaboration October 1998
-
-
- ITU-T Study Group Chairmen. The intention is for Study Groups to
- forward updates to the Vice President of Standards for ISOC as they
- occur.
-
- It is expected that any IETF Working Group interest with the topics
- being covered by the ITU-T will be forwarded to individual Study
- Group Chairmen (or the lead Study Group Chairman) by the Vice
- President of Standards for ISOC.
-
- 3.2 Representation
-
- ISOC, including its standards body IETF, have been admitted by the
- ITU Council to participate in the work of the ITU-T. As a result,
- ISOC delegates are therefore afforded equivalent rights to those of
- other ITU-T Study Group participants (see 3.2.1). Conversely, ITU-T
- delegates may participate in the work of the IETF as individuals or
- be recognized as ITU-T delegates (see 3.2.2). To promote
- collaboration it is useful to facilitate communication between the
- organizations as further described below.
-
- 3.2.1 IETF Recognition at ITU-T
-
- Participants from the IETF may participate in ITU-T meetings as ISOC
- delegates if the appropriate IETF Working Group (or area) has
- approved their attendance. This approval will be communicated to the
- TSB in the form of a registration for a particular ITU-T meeting by
- the Vice President of Standards for ISOC.
-
- 3.2.2 ITU-T Recognition at ISOC/IETF
-
- ITU-T Study Group Chairmen can authorize one or more members to
- attend an IETF meeting as an official ITU-T delegate speaking on
- behalf of the Study Group (or a particular Rapporteur Group). The
- Study Group Chairman communicates the ITU-T list of delegates by
- email to the Vice President of Standards for ISOC and also to the
- Study Group. The email address of the Vice President of Standards
- for ISOC is vp-standards@isoc.org.
-
- 3.2.3 Communication contacts
-
- To foster ongoing communication between the ITU-T and ISOC/IETF, it
- is important to identify and establish contact points within ITU-T
- Study Groups for specific IETF topics of mutual interest. It is
- beneficial to identify these contact points early and in some cases
- the contact point identified by each organization may be the same
- individual. It is responsibility of a Study Group to establish the
- contact points with the IETF and maintain the list on its web page.
-
-
-
-
- Brett, et. al. Informational [Page 4]
-
- RFC 2436 ISOC/IETF - ITU-T Collaboration October 1998
-
-
- An example of communication contacts that is suggested to Study
- Groups has both a high level and a working level:
-
- 1. ITU-T Study Group Chairman and IETF Area Director
-
- An IETF Area Director is the individual responsible for overseeing
- a major focus of activity with a scope similar to that of an ITU-T
- Study Group Chairman. These positions are both relatively long-
- term (of several years) and offer the stability of contact points
- between the two organizations for a given topic.
-
- 2. ITU-T Rapporteur and IETF Working Group Chair
-
- An IETF Working Group Chair is an individual who is assigned to
- lead the work on a specific task within one particular area with a
- scope similar to that of an ITU-T Rapporteur. These positions are
- working positions (of a year or more) that typically end when the
- work on a specific topic ends. Collaboration here is very
- beneficial to ensure the actual work gets done. Note that the
- current IETF Area Directors and Working Group chairs can be found
- in the IETF Working Group charters. The current ITU-T Study Group
- chairmen and Rapporteurs are listed on the ITU-T web page.
-
- Both the ITU-T and IETF may assign their contact point function(s) to
- other individuals than those suggested as it deems appropriate.
-
- 3.2.4 Communication
-
- Informal communication between contact points and experts of both
- organizations is encouraged. However, note that formal communication
- from an ITU-T Study Group, Working Party or Rapporteur to an
- associated IETF contact point must be explicitly approved and
- identified as coming from the Study Group, Working Party or
- Rapporteur Group, respectively. Conversely, formal communication
- from an IETF Working Group or Area Director must also be explicitly
- approved and identified before forwarding to any ITU-T contact.
- Formal communication is intended to allow the sharing of positions
- between the IETF and the ITU-T outside of actual documents (as
- described in 3.3). This would cover such things as comments on
- documents and requests for input. The approved communication is
- simply emailed from one body contact to another (the appropriate
- mailing lists, as described in 3.2.5 may be copied).
-
- 3.2.5 Mailing Lists
-
- All IETF Working Groups and all ITU-T Study Group Questions have
- associated mailing lists.
-
-
-
-
- Brett, et. al. Informational [Page 5]
-
- RFC 2436 ISOC/IETF - ITU-T Collaboration October 1998
-
-
- In the IETF, the mailing list is the primary vehicle for discussion
- and decision making. It is recommended the ITU-T experts interested
- in particular IETF working group topics subscribe to and participate
- in these lists. The IETF Working Group mailing list subscription and
- archive information are noted in each Working Group's charter. In the
- ITU-T, the TSB has set up formal mailing lists for Questions, Working
- Parties and other topics within Study Groups (more detail can be
- found on the ITU website.). These mailing lists are typically used
- for discussion of ITU-T contributions. Note that individual
- subscribers to this list must be affiliated with an ITU-T member (at
- this time, there is no blanket inclusion of all IETF participants as
- members, however, as a member ISOC may designate representatives to
- subscribe). Alternatively, ITU-T members operate personal mailing
- lists on various topics with no restrictions on membership (e.g.,
- IETF participants are welcome).
-
- 3.3 Document Sharing
-
- During the course of ITU-T and IETF collaboration it is important to
- share working drafts and documents among the technical working
- groups. Initial proposed concepts and specifications typically can
- be circulated by email (often just repeating the concept and not
- including the details of the specification) on both the IETF and
- ITU-T mailing lists. In addition, working texts (or URLs) of draft
- Recommendations or RFCs (Internet Drafts) may also be sent between
- the organizations as described below.
-
- 3.3.1 IETF to ITU-T
-
- IETF documents (e.g., Internet Drafts) can be submitted to a Study
- Group as a Contribution from ISOC. In order to ensure that the IETF
- has properly authorized this, the IETF Working Group must agree that
- the specific drafts are of mutual interest and that there is a
- benefit in forwarding them to the ITU-T for review, comment and
- potential use. Once agreed, the Vice President Standards for ISOC
- would review the Working Group request and give approval. The
- contributions would then be forwarded (with the noted approval) to
- the TSB for circulation as a Study Group Contribution.
-
- 3.3.2 ITU-T to IETF
-
- A Study Group may send texts of draft new Recommendations to the IETF
- as contributions in the form of Internet Drafts. Internet Drafts are
- IETF temporary documents that expire six months after being
- published. The Study Group must decide that there is a benefit in
- forwarding them to the IETF for review, comment and potential use.
- Terms of reference for Rapporteur Group meetings may authorize
- Rapporteur Groups to send working documents, in the form of Internet
-
-
-
- Brett, et. al. Informational [Page 6]
-
- RFC 2436 ISOC/IETF - ITU-T Collaboration October 1998
-
-
- Drafts, to the IETF. In both cases, the document editor would be
- instructed to prepare the contribution in Internet Draft format (in
- ASCII and optionally postscript format as per RFC 2223) and submit it
- to the Internet Draft editor (email: internet-drafts@ietf.org).
- Alternatively, the Study Group or Rapporteur Group could agree to
- post the document on a web site and merely document its existence
- with a short Internet Draft that contains a summary and the document
- URL.
-
- Both the Rapporteur and the Document Editor should be identified as
- contacts in the contribution. The contribution must also clearly
- indicate that the Internet Draft is a working document of a
- particular ITU-T Study Group.
-
- 3.3.3 ITU-T & IETF
-
- It is envisaged that the processes of 3.3.1 & 3.3.2 will often be
- used simultaneously by both an IETF Working Group and an ITU-T Study
- Group to collaborate on a topic of mutual interest. It is also
- envisaged that the outcome of the collaboration will be the
- documentation in full by one body and its referencing by the other
- (see section 3.4 for details). That is, common or joint text is
- discouraged because of the current differences in approval, revision
- and stability of approved documents for publication by each body.
-
- 3.4 Simple cross referencing
-
- ITU-T Recommendation A.5, specifically its Annex A and the
- application guidelines attached, describes the process for
- referencing IETF RFCs in ITU-T Recommendations. IETF RFC 2026,
- specifically section 7.1.1, describes the process for referencing
- other open standards (like ITU-T Recommendations) in IETF RFCs.
-
- 3.5 Additional items
-
- Several URLs to IETF procedures are provided here for information:
-
- RFC2223 - Instructions to RFC Authors, October 1997
- ftp://ftp.isi.edu/in-notes/rfc2223.txt
- RFC2026 - The Internet Standards Process Revision 3, October 1996
- ftp://ftp.isi.edu/in-notes/rfc2026.txt
- RFC2418 - IETF Working Group Guidelines and Procedures, September
- 1998 ftp://ftp.isi.edu/in-notes/rfc2418.txt
- Current list and status of all IETF RFCs ftp://ftp.isi.edu/in-
- notes/rfc-index.txt
- Current list and description of all IETF Internet Drafts:
- ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/1id-abstracts.txt
-
-
-
-
- Brett, et. al. Informational [Page 7]
-
- RFC 2436 ISOC/IETF - ITU-T Collaboration October 1998
-
-
- Current list of IETF Working Groups and their Charters: (includes
- Area Directors and Chair contacts, Mailing list information, etc.)
- http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/wg-dir.html
- Current ITU-T information can be found on the ITU website: (includes
- contacts, organization, Recommendations for purchase, mailing list
- info, etc.) http://www.itu.int
-
- 4. Acknowledgments
-
- The process was documented by ITU-T at its TSAG (Telecommunication
- Standardization Advisory Group) meeting in September 1998. All
- participants of this meeting (including Study Group chairmen and the
- ISOC Vice President for Standards) assisted in the creation of this
- document. Subsequently, it was sent to all ITU-T Study Groups and
- ISOC/IETF to ensure that everyone was aware of the process. Feedback
- is requested by the next meeting of TSAG in April 1999.
-
- 5. Security Considerations
-
- This type of non-protocol document does not directly effect the
- security of the Internet.
-
- 6. Authors' Addresses
-
- ITU-T Contact:
- R. F. Brett
- Nortel Networks
- P.O. Box 3511, Station C
- Ottawa, ON K1Y 4H7
- Canada
-
- Phone: +1-613-828-0902
- Fax: +1-613-828-9408
- EMail: rfbrett@nortel.ca
-
-
- ISOC Contact:
- Scott O. Bradner
- Harvard University
- Holyoke Center, Room 876
- 1350 Mass. Ave.
- Cambridge, MA 02138
- USA
-
- Phone: +1 617 495 3864
- EMail: sob@harvard.edu
-
-
-
-
-
- Brett, et. al. Informational [Page 8]
-
- RFC 2436 ISOC/IETF - ITU-T Collaboration October 1998
-
-
- Editor:
- Glenn W. Parsons
- Nortel Networks
- P.O. Box 3511, Station C
- Ottawa, ON K1Y 4H7
- Canada
-
- Phone: +1-613-763-7582
- Fax: +1-613-763-4461
- EMail: Glenn.Parsons@Nortel.ca
-
- 7. References
-
- [A.4] ITU-T Recommendation A.4 - Communication process between
- ITU-T and forums and consortia, October 1996.
-
- [A.5] ITU-T Recommendation A.5 - Generic procedures for including
- references to documents to other organizations in ITU-T
- Recommendations, January 1998.
-
- [A.6] ITU-T Recommendation A.6 - Cooperation and exchange of
- information between ITU-T and national and regional
- standards development organizations, September 1998.
-
- [RFC2026] Bradner, S., "The Internet Standards Process - Revision 3",
- BCP 9, RFC 2026, October 1996.
-
- [RFC2223] Postel, J. and J. Reynolds, "Instructions to RFC Authors",
- RFC 2223, October 1997.
-
- [RFC2418] Bradner, S., "IETF Working Group Guidelines and
- Procedures", BCP 25, RFC 2418, September 1998.
-
- 8. Full ITU Copyright Statement
-
- Copyright (C) ITU (1998). All Rights Reserved.
-
- No part of this publication may be reproduced or utilized in any form
- or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying and
- microfilm, without permission in writing from the ITU.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Brett, et. al. Informational [Page 9]
-
- RFC 2436 ISOC/IETF - ITU-T Collaboration October 1998
-
-
- 9. Annex A
-
- APPLICATION GUIDELINES ON REFERENCING DOCUMENTS FROM OTHER
- ORGANIZATIONS
-
- PART I - Developed by TSAG at its January 1998 Meeting
-
- The following guidelines should be used in conjunction with the
- relevant provisions of Recommendations A.3, A.4, A.5 and A.23.
-
- 1. Ownership/Change Control
- - When considering using material from other organizations it is
- preferable to only include references to other standards,
- rather than incorporate text from a standard in the body of a
- Recommendation. Exceptionally, full text incorporation is
- necessary rather than a reference where Recommendations having
- regulatory connotations are concerned.
-
- - Reference should be made to the particular issue of a standard.
- In this way the ITU-T is in control of what is actually
- referenced even if the source organization updates the
- standard.
- - References to standards from other organizations should only be
- made where those organizations continue to provide public
- access to the version referenced even when updated versions are
- issued.
- - When a draft Recommendation is being prepared and the intention
- is to reference a standard from another organization, that
- organization should be advised by the TSB of the ITU-T's
- intention and should be requested to notify the ITU-T of any
- impending changes to the standard and of any reissues of the
- standard. (This request may be part of the correspondence
- described in Recommendation A.5, section 2.4.) It is however
- the responsibility of the Study Group to regularly review its
- Recommendations and check if the references are correct and if
- necessary to reissue the Recommendation with revised references
- (and where necessary make changes in the body of the
- Recommendation where the reference is made.).
- - Should an organization intend to remove completely an earlier
- version of a standard the ITU-T should be advised so that it
- can either incorporate the text in the Recommendation or change
- the reference to a later version.
-
- 2. Access
- - The objective is to have referenced standards freely available
- via the Web so that people purchasing a Recommendation may get
- access to the references. A warning should be given to
- purchasers of ITU-T Recommendations that they may have to
-
-
-
- Brett, et. al. Informational [Page 10]
-
- RFC 2436 ISOC/IETF - ITU-T Collaboration October 1998
-
-
- additionally purchase the referenced standards. This could be
- done by including a note to such effect in the introduction to
- Recommendations where references are included.
- - When developing a Recommendation where consideration is being
- given to using references to other standards the Study Group
- should investigate with the TSB whether the referenced text
- will be available free of charge or if a payment will be
- required. This should be taken into account by the Study Group
- as it may influence the decision to use the reference.
-
- 3. IPR
- - In principle, if the IPR policy of the organization owning a
- referenced standard is more stringent than that of the ITU-T
- then there should not be any IPR problems with including the
- reference. However, this may not be the case with all
- organizations. Further guidelines are being prepared by the
- Director of the TSB.
-
- 4. Approval
- - The approval procedures in Resolution 1 have to be followed for
- Recommendations containing references (wholly or in part) to
- standards from other bodies even in the case where the
- Recommendation is just a reference to another standard.
-
- PART II - Developed by TSAG at its September 1998 Meeting
-
- The following guidelines should be used in conjunction with
- Recommendation A.5.
-
- 1. Nested References
- Issue: RFCs often contain references to related RFCs and ITU-T
- Recommendations which, in turn, may contain references to other
- RFCs and Recommendations. It is unclear how to handle these nested
- references in the context of A.5.
-
- Guideline: Each time an RFC is referenced within an ITU-T
- Recommendation, all references within that RFC should be listed in
- the report documenting the decision of the Study Group. No further
- treatment is necessary, although the Study Group may wish to
- investigate those references further on a case-by-case basis. The
- same guidelines apply when referencing the documents of other
- organizations.
-
- 2. Subsequent Referencing of the Same Document
- Issue: It is possible that the same RFC may be considered for
- referencing in multiple Recommendations. It is unclear what
- evaluation is required in subsequent references.
-
-
-
-
- Brett, et. al. Informational [Page 11]
-
- RFC 2436 ISOC/IETF - ITU-T Collaboration October 1998
-
-
- Guideline: The justification for referencing the same document in
- different Recommendations is likely to be different. Consequently,
- it is important that separate evaluations be made each time the
- document is referenced. However, only items 1 - 8 in Appendix I
- (and Annex A) of Recommendation A.5 need to be completed if the
- referenced organization has already been qualified per Section 3
- of A.5. Since items 9 and 10 are dependent on the organization and
- not on the document, they need to be completed only the first time
- a document from that organization is being considered for
- referencing and only if such information has not been documented
- already.
-
- 3. Availability of Referenced Document
- Issue: Paragraph 2.2.10 of A.5 requires that the contributing
- Study Group member provide a full copy of the existing document.
- It is unclear whether paper copies are mandatory or whether
- electronic availability, for example, on a Web site, is
- sufficient.
-
- Guideline: The objective is to have referenced documents available
- via the Web at no cost so that the Study Group members may proceed
- with their evaluation. Accordingly, if a referenced document is
- available in this manner, it is sufficient for the contributing
- member to provide its exact location on the Web. On the other
- hand, if the document is not available in this manner, a full copy
- must be provided (in electronic format if permissible by the
- referenced organization, otherwise in paper format).
-
- 4. Referencing of IETF Documents
- Issue: It is unclear whether or not it is appropriate to reference
- RFCs that are not on the standards track (the "Informational" and
- "Experimental" RFCs) or those that are at the first level of
- standardization (the "Proposed Standard" RFCs).
-
- Guideline: Some outputs of organizations may not be appropriate
- for normative referencing, others may not be appropriate for any
- referencing, normative or informative. In the case of the IETF, it
- is not appropriate to make any references to "Internet Drafts" or
- to "Historic" RFCs as noted in A.5. In addition, it is not
- appropriate to make normative references to RFCs that are
- considered "Informational" or "Experimental". References to RFCs
- that have the status of "Proposed Standards" should be made with
- caution and should be evaluated on a case-by-case basis because
- such standards are considered immature in the sense that they may
- change if problems are found in real implementations or if better
- solutions are identified.
-
-
-
-
-
- Brett, et. al. Informational [Page 12]
-
- RFC 2436 ISOC/IETF - ITU-T Collaboration October 1998
-
-
- 5. IETF Address Changes
- The electronic address of the IETF archives has changed.
- Accordingly the addresses in items 4 and 9.8 of Annex A should be
- changed, respectively to:
- http://www.ietf.org/ipr.html - for the IPR archive
- http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc.html - for the RFC archive
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Brett, et. al. Informational [Page 13]
-
- RFC 2436 ISOC/IETF - ITU-T Collaboration October 1998
-
-
- Full Copyright Statement
-
- Copyright (C) The Internet Society (1998). All Rights Reserved.
-
- This document and translations of it may be copied and furnished to
- others, and derivative works that comment on or otherwise explain it
- or assist in its implementation may be prepared, copied, published
- and distributed, in whole or in part, without restriction of any
- kind, provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph are
- included on all such copies and derivative works. However, this
- document itself may not be modified in any way, such as by removing
- the copyright notice or references to the Internet Society or other
- Internet organizations, except as needed for the purpose of
- developing Internet standards in which case the procedures for
- copyrights defined in the Internet Standards process must be
- followed, or as required to translate it into languages other than
- English.
-
- The limited permissions granted above are perpetual and will not be
- revoked by the Internet Society or its successors or assigns.
-
- This document and the information contained herein is provided on an
- "AS IS" basis and THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING
- TASK FORCE DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING
- BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE INFORMATION
- HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF
- MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Brett, et. al. Informational [Page 14]
-
-