Independent Submissions to the RFC Editor
RFC 4846

• Status
• IESG evaluation record
• IESG writeups
• Email expansions
• History

• Versions
• 00

Network Working Group                                    J. Klensin, Ed.
Request for Comments: 4846                                D. Thaler, Ed.
Category: Informational                                        July 2007

               Independent Submissions to the RFC Editor

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 IETF Trust (2007).

Abstract

   There is a long-standing tradition in the Internet community,
   predating the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) by many years,
   of use of the RFC Series to publish materials that are not rooted in
   the IETF standards process and its review and approval mechanisms.
   These documents, known as "Independent Submissions", serve a number
   of important functions for the Internet community, both inside and
   outside of the community of active IETF participants.  This document
   discusses the Independent Submission model and some reasons why it is
   important.  It then describes editorial and processing norms that can
   be used for Independent Submissions as the community goes forward
   into new relationships between the IETF community and its primary
   technical publisher.

Klensin & Thaler             Informational                      [Page 1]
RFC 4846                Independent Submissions                July 2007

Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  3
     1.1.  Terminology Note . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  3
     1.2.  Context and Philosophical Assumptions  . . . . . . . . . .  4
   2.  The Role of Independent Submissions  . . . . . . . . . . . . .  4
   3.  Document Submission  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  5
   4.  The Review Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  6
     4.1.  Posting of Draft . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  6
     4.2.  Request for Publication  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  6
     4.3.  Initial RFC Editor Review  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  6
     4.4.  Review and Evaluation  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  7
     4.5.  Additional Reviews . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  7
     4.6.  Document Rejection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  7
     4.7.  Final Decision and Notification  . . . . . . . . . . . . .  8
     4.8.  Final Editing and Publication  . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  8
   5.  Formal IESG Review . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  8
   6.  The Editorial Review Board . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  9
   7.  Status and Availability of Reviews . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
     7.1.  Posted Reviews . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
     7.2.  Rejected Documents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
     7.3.  Documents Approved for Publication . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
   8.  Intellectual Property Rights . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
   9.  Security Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
   10. Acknowledgments  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
   11. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
     11.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
     11.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
   Appendix A.  IAB Members at the Time of Approval . . . . . . . . . 15

Klensin & Thaler             Informational                      [Page 2]
RFC 4846                Independent Submissions                July 2007

1.  Introduction

   There is a long-standing tradition in the Internet community,
   predating the IETF by many years, of use of the RFC Series to publish
   materials that are not rooted in the IETF standards process and its
   review and approval mechanisms.  These documents, known as
   "Independent Submissions", serve a number of important functions for
   the Internet community, both inside and outside of the community of
   active IETF participants.  This document discusses the Independent
   Submission model and some reasons why it is important.  It then
   describes editorial and processing norms that can be used for
   Independent Submissions as the community goes forward into new
   relationships between the IETF community and its primary technical
   publisher.

   To understand the perspective of this document, it is important to
   remember that the RFC Editor function predates the creation of the
   IETF.  As of the time of this writing, the RFC Series goes back 38
   years [RFC2555], while the IETF is celebrating its 21st anniversary.
   All of the documents that were published before the IETF was created,
   and for some years thereafter, would be considered Independent
   Submissions today.  As the IETF evolved, the Internet Architecture
   Board (IAB) and then the IETF itself chose to publish IETF documents