Internet Research Task Force (IRTF) A. Falk
Request for Comments: 5743 IRTF
Category: Informational December 2009
ISSN: 2070-1721
Internet Research Task Force (IRTF) A. Falk
Request for Comments: 5743 IRTF
Category: Informational December 2009
ISSN: 2070-1721
Definition of an Internet Research Task Force (IRTF) Document Stream
互联网研究工作队（IRTF）文件流的定义
Abstract
摘要
This memo defines the publication stream for RFCs from the Internet Research Task Force. Most documents undergoing this process will come from IRTF Research Groups, and it is expected that they will be published as Informational or Experimental RFCs by the RFC Editor.
本备忘录定义了互联网研究工作组RFC的发布流。经历这一过程的大多数文件将来自IRTF研究小组，预计它们将由RFC编辑以信息性或实验性RFC的形式发布。
Status of this Memo
本备忘录的状况
This document is not an Internet Standards Track specification; it is published for informational purposes.
本文件不是互联网标准跟踪规范；它是为了提供信息而发布的。
This document is a product of the Internet Research Task Force (IRTF). The IRTF publishes the results of Internet-related research and development activities. These results might not be suitable for deployment. Documents approved for publication by the IRSG are not a candidate for any level of Internet Standard; see Section 2 of RFC 5741.
本文件是互联网研究工作组（IRTF）的产品。IRTF发布互联网相关研究和开发活动的结果。这些结果可能不适合部署。IRSG批准发布的文件不适用于任何级别的互联网标准；见RFC 5741第2节。
Information about the current status of this document, any errata, and how to provide feedback on it may be obtained at http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5743.
有关本文件当前状态、任何勘误表以及如何提供反馈的信息，请访问http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5743.
Copyright Notice
版权公告
Copyright (c) 2009 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the document authors. All rights reserved.
版权所有（c）2009 IETF信托基金和确定为文件作者的人员。版权所有。
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document. Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as described in the BSD License.
本文件受BCP 78和IETF信托有关IETF文件的法律规定的约束(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info)自本文件出版之日起生效。请仔细阅读这些文件，因为它们描述了您对本文件的权利和限制。从本文件中提取的代码组件必须包括《信托法律条款》第4.e节中所述的简化BSD许可文本，并且提供BSD许可中所述的代码组件时不提供任何担保。
Table of Contents
目录
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. Approval Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2.1. Research Group Preparation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2.2. IRSG Review and Approval . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2.3. IESG Review . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
2.4. RFC Editor Handling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3. Rules for Submission and Use of Material . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.1. Procedures Requested of the IETF Trust . . . . . . . . . . 6
3.2. Patent and Trademark Rules for the IRTF Stream . . . . . . 6
4. IAB Statement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
6. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
7. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Appendix A. Internet Research Steering Group membership . . . . . 9
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. Approval Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2.1. Research Group Preparation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2.2. IRSG Review and Approval . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2.3. IESG Review . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
2.4. RFC Editor Handling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3. Rules for Submission and Use of Material . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.1. Procedures Requested of the IETF Trust . . . . . . . . . . 6
3.2. Patent and Trademark Rules for the IRTF Stream . . . . . . 6
4. IAB Statement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
6. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
7. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Appendix A. Internet Research Steering Group membership . . . . . 9
From time to time the Internet Research Task Force (IRTF) [RFC2014] will wish to publish a document in the Internet RFC series. This memo defines the steps required to publish a document in the IRTF RFC stream. Document streams are described in Section 5 of [RFC4844]. Most documents undergoing this process will come from IRTF Research Groups and it is expected that they will be published as Informational or Experimental RFCs by the RFC Editor.
互联网研究工作组（IRTF）[RFC2014]不时希望在互联网RFC系列中发布一份文件。此备忘录定义了在IRTF RFC流中发布文档所需的步骤。[RFC4844]第5节描述了文档流。经历这一过程的大多数文件将来自IRTF研究小组，预计它们将由RFC编辑以信息性或实验性RFC的形式发布。
The IRTF RFC stream provides an avenue for research groups to publish their findings with an IRTF label. Pre-publication editorial review by the Internet Research Steering Group (IRSG) increases the readability of documents and ensures proper caveats (described in Section 2.1) are applied.
IRTF RFC流为研究小组提供了一条途径，以IRTF标签发布他们的研究结果。由互联网研究指导小组（IRSG）进行的出版前编辑审查提高了文件的可读性，并确保采用适当的警告（如第2.1节所述）。
The IRTF RFC approval process may be summarized as:
IRTF RFC批准流程可概括为：
o The Research Group (RG) performs a thorough technical and editorial review of the document and agrees it should be published.
o 研究小组（RG）对该文件进行了彻底的技术和编辑审查，并同意将其公布。
o The Internet Research Steering Group (IRSG) reviews the document and approves it for publication.
o 互联网研究指导小组（IRSG）审查该文件并批准其出版。
o The Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG) reviews the document to assure that there are no conflicts with current or expected standardization activities.
o 互联网工程指导小组（IESG）审查该文件，以确保与当前或预期的标准化活动没有冲突。
o The document is submitted to the RFC Editor for publication.
o 文档将提交给RFC编辑器以供发布。
This document has been updated based on over a year of experience and processing of roughly a dozen documents. The IRTF concludes that there has been sufficient experience to justify that the benefits and process are sound.
本文件是根据一年多的经验和对十几份文件的处理而更新的。IRTF的结论是，已经有足够的经验证明这些好处和过程是合理的。
The following sections describe the steps for IRTF-stream document review and publication process. There are fundamentally two steps: IRSG review and IESG review. The document shepherd is responsible for making sure reviews are responded to and documented and that the process moves along.
以下各节描述了IRTF流文档审查和发布过程的步骤。基本上有两个步骤：IRSG审查和IESG审查。文件管理人负责确保评审得到响应和记录，并确保流程顺利进行。
If an IRTF Research Group desires to publish a document as an IRTF RFC, the process in this document must be followed. First, the RG must review the document for editorial and technical quality.
如果IRTF研究小组希望将文件发布为IRTF RFC，则必须遵循本文件中的流程。首先，RG必须审查文件的编辑和技术质量。
The following guidelines should be adhered to:
应遵守以下指南：
o There must be a statement in the abstract identifying it as the product of the RG.
o 摘要中必须有一个声明，将其标识为RG的产品。
o There must be a paragraph near the beginning (for example, in the introduction) describing the level of support for publication. Example text might read: "this document represents the consensus of the FOOBAR RG" or "the views in this document were considered controversial by the FOOBAR RG but the RG reached a consensus that the document should still be published".
o 开头附近必须有一段（例如，在引言中）描述对发布的支持级别。示例文本可能为：“本文件代表FOOBAR RG的共识”或“FOOBAR RG认为本文件中的观点有争议，但RG达成共识，认为该文件仍应出版”。
o The breadth of review the document has received must also be noted. For example, was this document read by all the active research group members, only three people, or folks who are not "in" the RG but are expert in the area?
o 还必须注意该文件已收到的审查范围。例如，本文件是否由所有活跃的研究小组成员阅读，只有三个人，或者不是RG中的人，但在该领域是专家？
o It must also be very clear throughout the document that it is not an IETF product and is not a standard.
o 在整个文件中还必须非常清楚，它不是IETF产品，也不是标准。
o If an experimental protocol is described, appropriate usage caveats must be present.
o 如果描述了实验协议，则必须提供适当的使用注意事项。
o If the protocol has been considered in an IETF working group in the past, this must be noted in the introduction as well.
o 如果过去IETF工作组曾考虑过该协议，那么在导言中也必须注意这一点。
o There should be citations and references to relevant research publications.
o 应该有相关研究出版物的引文和参考文献。
The Research Group identifies a document shepherd whose responsibility is to track and facilitate document progression through RFC publication. The shepherd should be copied on all correspondence relating to the document.
研究小组确定了一个文档管理员，其职责是通过RFC发布跟踪和促进文档进展。所有与该文件相关的信函均应抄送牧羊人。
The IRSG functions similar to an editorial review board. It is the IRSG's responsibility to ensure high technical and editorial quality. The IRSG will review and approve all documents intended for RFC publication from the IRTF stream.
IRSG的职能类似于编辑评审委员会。IRSG有责任确保高技术和编辑质量。IRSG将审查和批准IRTF流中用于RFC发布的所有文件。
The purpose of the IRSG review is to ensure consistent technical clarity and editorial quality for IRTF publications. The IRSG review is not a deep technical review (this should take place within the RG). At least one IRSG member who is not a chair of that research group must review the document and the RG's editorial process.
IRSG审查的目的是确保IRTF出版物的一致技术清晰性和编辑质量。IRSG审查不是深入的技术审查（应在RG内进行）。至少有一名不是该研究小组主席的IRSG成员必须审查该文件和RG的编辑过程。
IRSG reviewers should look for clear, cogent, and consistent writing. An important aspect of the review is to gain a critical reading from reviewers who are not subject matter experts and, in the process, assure the document will be accessible to those beyond the authoring research group. Also, reviewers should assess whether sufficient editorial and technical review has been conducted within the RG and the requirements of this process document have been met, for example, reviewers should evaluate whether the breadth of review the document has received is adequate for the material at hand. Finally, reviewers should check that appropriate citations to related research literature have been made.
IRSG评审员应寻找清晰、有说服力和一致的文字。审查的一个重要方面是从非主题专家的审查者那里获得批判性的阅读，并在审查过程中确保该文件将被创作研究小组以外的人访问。此外，评审员应评估RG内是否进行了充分的编辑和技术评审，以及是否满足本流程文件的要求，例如，评审员应评估收到的文件的评审范围是否足以满足手头的材料。最后，评审员应检查相关研究文献是否被适当引用。
Reviews should be written to be public. Review comments should be sent to the IRSG and RG mailing lists and entered into the IRTF's document tracker. All IRSG review comments must be addressed. However, the RG need not accept every comment. It is the responsibility of the shepherd to understand the comments and ensure that the RG considers them, including adequate dialog between the reviewer and the author and/or RG.
评论应该是公开的。审查意见应发送至IRSG和RG邮件列表，并输入IRTF的文件跟踪器。必须处理所有IRSG审查意见。然而，RG不需要接受每一条评论。牧羊人有责任理解评论并确保RG考虑这些评论，包括评审员与作者和/或RG之间的充分对话。
Following resolution of the editorial review, the IRSG will make a decision as to whether to approve the document for publication. If the IRSG does not approve the document, it returns to the research group with feedback on what would need to be fixed for publication. In rare cases, the IRSG may determine that a document is not suitable for publication as an IRTF RFC. (For example, members of the RG may assert to the IRSG that there was no RG consensus to publish the document.) Other publication streams would still be available to those authors.
编辑评审通过后，IRSG将决定是否批准该文件出版。如果IRSG不批准该文件，它将返回给研究小组，并反馈需要确定哪些内容才能发布。在极少数情况下，IRSG可能会确定文件不适合作为IRTF RFC发布。（例如，RG成员可能会向IRSG声明，RG没有达成发布该文件的共识。）这些作者仍然可以使用其他发布流。
The IRTF Chair will then extend the Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG) an opportunity to review the document according to the process and scope described in [RFC5742]. The scope of this review is confined to that described in Section 4.2.3 of [RFC2026] for non-IETF documents, specifically it is "to ensure that the non-standards track Experimental and Informational designations are not misused to circumvent the Internet Standards Process."
然后，IRTF主席将向互联网工程指导小组（IESG）提供机会，根据[RFC5742]中所述的流程和范围审查文件。本审查的范围仅限于[RFC2026]第4.2.3节对非IETF文件所述的范围，具体而言是“确保非标准跟踪实验和信息指定不会被滥用以规避互联网标准过程。”
The IESG (via the IETF Secretariat) is expected to provide the IRTF chair and document shepherd with a response, normally within four weeks, as to whether publication of the draft is perceived to be at odds with the Internet Standards Process.
IESG（通过IETF秘书处）预计将向IRTF主席和文件管理员提供回复，通常在四周内，以确定草案的发布是否被视为与互联网标准流程不一致。
The IRTF Chair will then ask the RFC Editor to publish the document, after which it will be enqueued for publication.
然后，IRTF主席将要求RFC编辑发布该文档，然后该文档将排队等待发布。
The document enters the RFC Editor queue at the same priority as non-standard IETF-stream and IAB-stream documents. The document shepherd is responsible for ensuring that the document authors are responsive to the RFC Editor and that the RFC editing process goes smoothly. The AUTH48 review stage of RFC publication is an area where the shepherd may be of particular assistance, ensuring a) authors respond promptly in reviewing about-to-be-published RFCs and b) authors don't inject changes into the document at the last minute which would not be supported by the research group or other reviewers.
文档以与非标准IETF流和IAB流文档相同的优先级进入RFC编辑器队列。文档管理员负责确保文档作者响应RFC编辑器，并确保RFC编辑过程顺利进行。RFC出版物的AUTH48审查阶段是一个牧羊人可能会提供特别帮助的领域，确保a）作者在审查即将出版的RFC时及时做出响应，b）作者不会在最后一刻将研究小组或其他审查人不支持的更改注入到文件中。
If not already present, the RFC Editor will insert labels and text for the "Status of this Memo" section that identify the document as the product of the IRTF. The current text is defined in [RFC5741].
如果尚未出现，RFC编辑器将在“此备忘录的状态”部分插入标签和文本，将文档标识为IRTF的产品。当前文本在[RFC5741]中定义。
The goals of the IRTF Stream are based on a desire that research within the IRTF have broad impact and the publication rights should, in general, not restrict republication (with appropriate citations). However, in uncommon cases, it may be desirable to publish a document that does not permit derivative works. This section, adapted from [RFC5744], describes rules and procedures supporting these goals. See [RFC5744] for a discussion of the background and rationale for the specific language. (From a historical perspective, the goal has been to preserve the rights that IRTF authors have previously had when publishing documents as RFC Editor Independent Submissions. [RFC5744] defines those rights.)
IRTF流的目标基于这样一种愿望，即IRTF内的研究具有广泛的影响，并且出版权一般不应限制再版（适当引用）。然而，在不常见的情况下，可能需要发布不允许衍生作品的文件。本节改编自[RFC5744]，描述了支持这些目标的规则和程序。有关特定语言的背景和基本原理的讨论，请参见[RFC5744]。（从历史的角度来看，目标是保护IRTF作者以前作为RFC编辑器独立提交文件发布文档时所拥有的权利。[RFC5744]定义了这些权利。）
IRTF Stream authors will submit their material as Internet-Drafts. These drafts will be submitted to, and stored in, the IETF Internet-Drafts repository in the same fashion as IETF Internet-Drafts. During Internet-Draft submission, authors who intend to submit their document for publication in the IRTF Stream will grant rights as described in [RFC5378]. To request that the contribution be published as an RFC that permits no derivative works, an author may use the form specified for use with RFC 5378. The IETF Trust will indicate that, in cooperation with the IRTF, the Trust grants to readers and users of material from IRTF Stream RFCs the right to make unlimited derivative works, unless the RFC specifies that no derivative works are permitted. This will permit anyone to copy, extract, modify, or otherwise use material from IRTF Stream RFCs as long as suitable attribution is given. Contributors of Internet-Drafts intended for the IRTF Stream will include suitable boilerplate defined by the IETF Trust. This boilerplate shall indicate compliance with RFC 5378 and shall explicitly indicate either that no derivative works can be based on the contribution, or, as is preferred, that unlimited derivative works may be crafted from the contribution. It should be understood that the final publication decision for the IRTF Stream rests with the IRTF Chair. Compliance with these terms is not a guarantee of publication. In particular, the IRTF Chair may question the appropriateness of a "no derivative works" restriction requested by an author. The appropriateness of such usage must be negotiated among the authors and the IRTF Chair.
IRTF流作者将以互联网草稿的形式提交他们的材料。这些草案将以与IETF互联网草案相同的方式提交并存储在IETF互联网草案存储库中。在互联网草案提交期间，打算提交其文件以在IRTF流中发布的作者将授予[RFC5378]中所述的权利。为了要求以RFC的形式出版稿件，不允许衍生作品，作者可以使用RFC 5378指定的格式。IETF信托将表明，与IRTF合作，信托授予IRTF流RFC材料的读者和用户制作无限衍生作品的权利，除非RFC规定不允许衍生作品。这将允许任何人复制、提取、修改或以其他方式使用IRTF流RFC中的材料，只要给出适当的属性。用于IRTF流的互联网草案的贡献者将包括由IETF信托定义的适当样板。该样板文件应表明符合RFC 5378的要求，并应明确说明不得基于该贡献创作任何衍生作品，或者，如首选，可根据该贡献创作无限衍生作品。应当理解，IRTF流的最终发布决定取决于IRTF主席。遵守这些条款并不是发布的保证。特别是，IRTF主席可能会质疑作者要求的“无衍生作品”限制的适当性。这种用法的适当性必须在作者和IRTF主席之间进行协商。
The IRTF requests that the IETF Trust and its Trustees assist in meeting the goals and procedures set forth in this document. The Trustees are requested to publicly confirm their willingness and ability to accept responsibility for the Intellectual Property Rights for the IRTF Stream. They are also requested to indicate their willingness and intent to work according to the procedures and goals defined by the IRTF. Specifically, the Trustees are asked to develop the necessary boilerplate to enable the suitable marking of documents so that the IETF Trust receives the rights as specified in RFC 5378. These procedures need to also allow documents to grant either no rights to make derivative works, or preferentially, the right to make unlimited derivative works from the documents. It is left to the Trust to specify exactly how this shall be clearly indicated in each document.
IRTF要求IETF信托基金及其受托人协助实现本文件规定的目标和程序。受托人被要求公开确认其愿意并有能力承担IRTF流的知识产权责任。他们还被要求表明他们愿意并打算按照IRTF规定的程序和目标开展工作。具体而言，受托人被要求开发必要的样板文件，以便对文件进行适当标记，从而使IETF信托获得RFC 5378中规定的权利。这些程序还需要允许文件不授予制作衍生作品的权利，或者优先授予从文件制作无限衍生作品的权利。信托基金应明确规定如何在每份文件中明确说明这一点。
As specified above, contributors of documents for the IRTF stream are expected to use the IETF Internet-Draft process, complying therein with the rules specified in the latest version of BCP 9, whose
如上所述，IRTF流文件的投稿人应使用IETF互联网草稿流程，遵守最新版本BCP 9中规定的规则，其
version at the time of writing was [RFC2026]. This includes the disclosure of Patent and Trademark issues that are known, or can be reasonably expected to be known, to the contributor. Disclosure of license terms for patents is also requested, as specified in the most recent version of BCP 79. The version of BCP 79 at the time of this writing was RFC 3979 [RFC3979], which is updated by [RFC4879]. The IRTF Stream has chosen to use the IETF's IPR disclosure mechanism, www.ietf.org/ipr/, for this purpose. The IRTF would prefer that the most liberal terms possible be made available for specifications published as IRTF Stream documents. Terms that do not require fees or licensing are preferable. Non-discriminatory terms are strongly preferred over those which discriminate among users. However, although disclosure is required, there are no specific requirements on the licensing terms for intellectual property related to IRTF Stream publication.
撰写本文时的版本为[RFC2026]。这包括向投稿人披露已知或合理预期已知的专利和商标问题。根据BCP 79最新版本的规定，还要求披露专利许可条款。撰写本文时，BCP 79的版本为RFC 3979[RFC3979]，更新版本为[RFC4879]。为此，IRTF流选择使用IETF的知识产权披露机制www.IETF.org/IPR/。IRTF希望尽可能为作为IRTF流文件发布的规范提供最宽松的条款。不需要收费或许可的条款更可取。与歧视用户的条款相比，非歧视性条款更受青睐。然而，尽管需要披露，但对与IRTF流发布相关的知识产权的许可条款没有具体要求。
In its capacity as the body that approves the creation of document streams (see [RFC4844]), the IAB has reviewed this proposal and supports it as an operational change that is in line with the respective roles of the IRTF, IESG, and RFC Editor.
作为批准创建文件流的机构（参见[RFC4844]），IAB审查了该提案，并将其作为符合IRTF、IESG和RFC编辑器各自角色的操作变更予以支持。
There are no security considerations in this document.
本文档中没有安全注意事项。
This document was developed in close collaboration with the Internet Research Steering Group (IRSG), see Appendix A for membership. Useful contributions were made by Mark Allman, Bob Braden, Brian Carpenter, Leslie Daigle, Stephen Farrell, Tom Henderson, Rajeev Koodli, Danny McPherson, Allison Mankin, Craig Partridge, Juergen Schoenwaelder, Karen Sollins, and Mark Townsley who contributed to development of the process defined in this document.
本文件是与互联网研究指导小组（IRSG）密切合作编写的，成员名单见附录A。Mark Allman、Bob Braden、Brian Carpenter、Leslie Daigle、Stephen Farrell、Tom Henderson、Rajeev Koodli、Danny McPherson、Allison Mankin、Craig Partridge、Juergen Schoenwaelder、Karen Sollins和Mark Townsley对本文件中定义的流程的开发做出了贡献。
[RFC2014] Weinrib, A. and J. Postel, "IRTF Research Group Guidelines and Procedures", BCP 8, RFC 2014, October 1996.
[RFC2014]Weinrib，A.和J.Postel，“IRTF研究小组指南和程序”，BCP 8，RFC 2014，1996年10月。
[RFC2026] Bradner, S., "The Internet Standards Process -- Revision 3", BCP 9, RFC 2026, October 1996.
[RFC2026]Bradner，S.，“互联网标准过程——第3版”，BCP 9，RFC 2026，1996年10月。
[RFC3979] Bradner, S., "Intellectual Property Rights in IETF Technology", BCP 79, RFC 3979, March 2005.
[RFC3979]Bradner，S.，“IETF技术中的知识产权”，BCP 79，RFC 3979，2005年3月。
[RFC4844] Daigle, L. and Internet Architecture Board, "The RFC Series and RFC Editor", RFC 4844, July 2007.
[RFC4844]Daigle，L.和互联网架构委员会，“RFC系列和RFC编辑器”，RFC 48442007年7月。
[RFC4879] Narten, T., "Clarification of the Third Party Disclosure Procedure in RFC 3979", BCP 79, RFC 4879, April 2007.
[RFC4879]Narten，T.，“RFC 3979中第三方披露程序的澄清”，BCP 79，RFC 4879，2007年4月。
[RFC5378] Bradner, S. and J. Contreras, "Rights Contributors Provide to the IETF Trust", BCP 78, RFC 5378, November 2008.
[RFC5378]Bradner，S.和J.Contreras，“IETF信托基金的权利出资人”，BCP 78，RFC 5378，2008年11月。
[RFC5741] Daigle, L., Ed., and O. Kolkman, Ed., "On RFC Streams, Headers, and Boilerplates", RFC 5741, December 2009.
[RFC5741]Daigle，L.，Ed.，和O.Kolkman，Ed.，“关于RFC流、标题和样板文件”，RFC 57412009年12月。
[RFC5742] Alvestrand, H. and R. Housley, "IESG Procedures for Handling of Independent and IRTF Stream Submissions", BCP 92, RFC 5742, December 2009.
[RFC5742]Alvestrand，H.和R.Housley，“IESG处理独立和IRTF流提交的程序”，BCP 92，RFC 5742，2009年12月。
[RFC5744] Braden, R. and J. Halpern, "Procedures for Rights Handling in the RFC Independent Submission Stream", RFC 5744, December 2009.
[RFC5744]Braden，R.和J.Halpern，“RFC独立提交流中的权限处理程序”，RFC 57442009年12月。
IRSG members at the time of this writing:
在撰写本文时，IRSG成员：
Bill Arbaugh, MOBOPTS RG; Bob Braden; John Buford, SAM RG; Ran
Canetti, CFRG; Leslie Daigle; Wes Eddy, ICCRG; Aaron Falk, IRTF
Chair; Kevin Fall, DTN RG; Stephen Farrell, DTN RG; Sally Floyd,
TMRG; Andrei Gurtov, HIPRG; Tom Henderson, HIPRG; Rajeev Koodli,
MOBOPTS RG; Olaf Kolkman, IAB Chair; John Levine, ASRG; Tony Li,
RRG; Dave McGrew, CFRG; Jeremy Mineweaser, SAM RG; Craig
Partridge, E2E RG; Juergen Schoenwaelder, NMRG; Karen Sollins, E2E
RG; Michael Welzl, ICCRG; John Wroclawski; Lixia Zhang, RRG
Bill Arbaugh, MOBOPTS RG; Bob Braden; John Buford, SAM RG; Ran
Canetti, CFRG; Leslie Daigle; Wes Eddy, ICCRG; Aaron Falk, IRTF
Chair; Kevin Fall, DTN RG; Stephen Farrell, DTN RG; Sally Floyd,
TMRG; Andrei Gurtov, HIPRG; Tom Henderson, HIPRG; Rajeev Koodli,
MOBOPTS RG; Olaf Kolkman, IAB Chair; John Levine, ASRG; Tony Li,
RRG; Dave McGrew, CFRG; Jeremy Mineweaser, SAM RG; Craig
Partridge, E2E RG; Juergen Schoenwaelder, NMRG; Karen Sollins, E2E
RG; Michael Welzl, ICCRG; John Wroclawski; Lixia Zhang, RRG
Author's Address
作者地址
Aaron Falk BBN Technologies 10 Moulton Street Cambridge, MA 02138 USA
美国马萨诸塞州剑桥莫尔顿街10号Aaron Falk BBN Technologies 02138
Phone: +1-617-873-2575
EMail: falk@bbn.com
Phone: +1-617-873-2575
EMail: falk@bbn.com