Re: Informational RFC to be: <draft-weeb-research-to-internet-stds-02.txt>

The IESG <iesg-secretary@ietf.org> Mon, 29 August 2011 18:12 UTC

Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: The IESG <iesg-secretary@ietf.org>
To: RFC ISE <rfc-ise@rfc-editor.org>
Subject: Re: Informational RFC to be: <draft-weeb-research-to-internet-stds-02.txt>
Message-ID: <20110829181221.28893.90010.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2011 11:12:21 -0700
Cc: iana@iana.org, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, ietf-announce@ietf.org
Precedence: list

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.

Re: Informational RFC to be: <draft-weeb-research… The IESG