[Search] [pdf|bibtex] [Tracker] [WG] [Email] [Diff1] [Diff2] [Nits]

Versions: 00 01 02 03 04 rfc4691                           Informational
Network Working Group                                  L. Andersson (Ed)
Internet-Draft                                                       IAB
Expires: December 19, 2006                                 June 17, 2006

    Guidelines for Acting as an IETF Liaison to Another Organization

Status of this Memo

   By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents that any
   applicable patent or other IPR claims of which he or she is aware
   have been or will be disclosed, and any of which he or she becomes
   aware will be disclosed, in accordance with Section 6 of BCP 79.

   Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
   Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups.  Note that
   other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-

   Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
   and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
   time.  It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
   material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."

   The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at

   The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at

   This Internet-Draft will expire on December 19, 2006.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2006).


   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 [RFC4052].  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.

Andersson (Ed)          Expires December 19, 2006               [Page 1]

Internet-Draft             Liaison Guidelines                  June 2006

Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  3
   2.  IETF Liaison Relationships . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  3
     2.1.  Related Documents  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  4
     2.2.  Liaison Managers and Liaison Representatives . . . . . . .  4
     2.3.  Written Communications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  5
     2.4.  Terminology and Conventions  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  6
   3.  Guidelines for Liaison Managers and Representatives  . . . . .  6
     3.1.  Mandate  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  6
       3.1.1.  Speaking for the IETF  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  7
     3.2.  Expectations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  7
     3.3.  Responsibilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  9
     3.4.  Tasks  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  9
     3.5.  Relationship Management  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
       3.5.1.  IETF Consensus Process on Liaison Statements . . . . . 11
       3.5.2.  Incoming Liaison Statements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
       3.5.3.  Ambiguous incoming Liaison Statements  . . . . . . . . 11
       3.5.4.  Liaison Managers Representing Peer Organizations . . . 12
   4.  Security Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
   5.  IANA considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
   6.  Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
   7.  References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
     7.1.  Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
     7.2.  Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
   Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
   Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements . . . . . . . . . . 16

Andersson (Ed)          Expires December 19, 2006               [Page 2]

Internet-Draft             Liaison Guidelines                  June 2006

1.  Introduction

   In the course of developing Internet standards, the IETF needs to
   communicate extensively with various other peer organizations,

   o  Standards Developing Organizations (SDOs) such as the
      Telecommunication Standardization Sector of the International
      telecommunications 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.

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 which develop standards
   for other types of networks, for Internet applications or for
   technologies that the Internet uses.

Andersson (Ed)          Expires December 19, 2006               [Page 3]

Internet-Draft             Liaison Guidelines                  June 2006

   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 the IETF should have a liaison
   relationship with a particular organization or not.

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.

   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

   The value of personal relationships between the IETF liaison manager
   and represenatatives 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

Andersson (Ed)          Expires December 19, 2006               [Page 4]

Internet-Draft             Liaison Guidelines                  June 2006

   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.  Whe 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 which 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

   An alternative situation that involves more specific action by the
   liaison manage 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
   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).

Andersson (Ed)          Expires December 19, 2006               [Page 5]

Internet-Draft             Liaison Guidelines                  June 2006

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",
   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.

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

Andersson (Ed)          Expires December 19, 2006               [Page 6]

Internet-Draft             Liaison Guidelines                  June 2006

   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 in Section 3.4, tasks and responsibilities are
   listed which 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 liason process according to
      the rules which 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 their own views
      from documented IETF consensus in his or her 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 which the IETF needs to

      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

Andersson (Ed)          Expires December 19, 2006               [Page 7]

Internet-Draft             Liaison Guidelines                  June 2006

      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 organisation involved.


      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.


      A liaison may not be able 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 their
      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.

   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 for the liaison be able to allocate sufficient
      time to the task.

Andersson (Ed)          Expires December 19, 2006               [Page 8]

Internet-Draft             Liaison Guidelines                  June 2006


      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 their own independent positions from those
   which 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,
   to carry 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

3.4.  Tasks

   Examples of tasks performed by the liaison manager are provided
   below.  Depending on the nature of 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

Andersson (Ed)          Expires December 19, 2006               [Page 9]

Internet-Draft             Liaison Guidelines                  June 2006

       developments of interest for onward communication to the IETF.
       Communicate the point of view of the IETF consensus to the peer

   2.  Communicate information relevant to the liaison relationship to
       the relevant part of the IETF either by written reports or
       verbally; this may involve update meetings 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 orgnizations 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

   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.

   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

Andersson (Ed)          Expires December 19, 2006              [Page 10]

Internet-Draft             Liaison Guidelines                  June 2006

       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/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 they 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

3.5.2.  Incoming Liaison Statements

   When the IETF receives a liaison statement or other communication
   from an organization with which it has an liaison relationship that
   includes a request for a response to the communication, the IETF is
   committed to providing a timely response.  This means that 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 [I-D.andersson-rtg-gmpls-change].

   This commitment does not mean that the IETF will uncritically accept
   the content in the incoming liaison statement.  To the extent 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 is sent to the

Andersson (Ed)          Expires December 19, 2006              [Page 11]

Internet-Draft             Liaison Guidelines                  June 2006

   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 organisation, 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

   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/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.

   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

4.  Security Considerations

Andersson (Ed)          Expires December 19, 2006              [Page 12]

Internet-Draft             Liaison Guidelines                  June 2006

   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

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 Davis and Bernard Aboba has both spent time on correcting
   language and grammar.

   Members of the IAB at the time of approval of this document were:

   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

7.  References

Andersson (Ed)          Expires December 19, 2006              [Page 13]

Internet-Draft             Liaison Guidelines                  June 2006

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

              Andersson, L., "MPLS and GMPLS Change Process",
              draft-andersson-rtg-gmpls-change-02 (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.

Andersson (Ed)          Expires December 19, 2006              [Page 14]

Internet-Draft             Liaison Guidelines                  June 2006

Author's Address

   Loa Andersson

   Email: loa@pi.se

Andersson (Ed)          Expires December 19, 2006              [Page 15]

Internet-Draft             Liaison Guidelines                  June 2006

Intellectual Property Statement

   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

   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

Disclaimer of Validity

   This document and the information contained herein are provided on an

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.


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

Andersson (Ed)          Expires December 19, 2006              [Page 16]