How to Contribute Research Results to Internet Standardization
Draft of message to be sent after approval:
From: The IESG <email@example.com> To: RFC ISE <firstname.lastname@example.org> Cc: The IESG <email@example.com>, <firstname.lastname@example.org>, <email@example.com> Subject: Re: Informational RFC to be: <draft-weeb-research-to-internet-stds-02.txt> The IESG has no problem with the publication of 'How to Contribute Research Results to Internet Standardization' <draft-weeb-research-to-internet-stds-02.txt> as an Informational RFC. The IESG would also like the RFC-Editor to review the comments in the datatracker (http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-weeb-research-to-internet-stds/) related to this document and determine whether or not they merit incorporation into the document. Comments may exist in both the ballot and the comment log. A URL of this Internet Draft is: http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-weeb-research-to-internet-stds/ The process for such documents is described at http://www.rfc-editor.org/indsubs.html Thank you, The IESG Secretary
Technical Summary The development of new technology is driven by scientific research. The Internet, with its roots in the ARPANET and NSFNet, is no exception. Many of the fundamental, long-term improvements to the architecture, security, end-to-end protocols and management of the Internet originate in the related academic research communities. Even shorter-term, more commercially driven extensions are oftentimes derived from academic research. When interoperability is required, the IETF standardizes such new technology. Timely and relevant standardization benefits from continuous input and review from the academic research community. For an individual researcher, it can however by quite puzzling how to begin to most effectively participate in the IETF and - arguably to a much lesser degree - in the IRTF. The interactions in the IETF are much different than those in academic conferences, and effective participation follows different rules. The goal of this document is to highlight such differences and provide a rough guideline that will hopefully enable researchers new to the IETF to become successful contributors more quickly. Working Group Summary This is a submission on the independent stream; not a working group document. Document Quality No protocol is described in this document. It contains practical advice and useful encouragement for increasing positive IETF participation from the academic and research communities. Personnel Wesley Eddy is the area director assigned for the RFC 5742 review, per the IESG procedure for performing such reviews. He proposes that the IESG position on this document be: The IESG has concluded that there is no conflict between this document and IETF work. IESG Note The IESG notes that response (1) from RFC 5742 applies: The IESG has concluded that there is no conflict between this document and IETF work.