Network Working Group S. Krishnan, Ed. Internet-Draft M. Kuehlewind Obsoletes: 4052, 4691 (if approved) Q. Wu Intended status: Informational IAB Expires: 4 January 2027 3 July 2026 IAB Processes for Management of IETF Liaison Relationships draft-iab-rfc4052bis-04 Abstract This document describes the procedures used by the Internet Architecture Board (IAB) to establish and maintain formal liaison relationships between the IETF and other Standards Development Organizations (SDOs), consortia and industry fora. This document also outlines the expectations of the IAB in establishing formal liaison relationships and describes the responsibilities of IAB- appointed IETF liaison managers. About This Document This note is to be removed before publishing as an RFC. Status information for this document may be found at https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-iab-rfc4052bis/. Source for this draft and an issue tracker can be found at https://github.com/intarchboard/draft-iab-rfc4052bis. Status of This Memo This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. 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." This Internet-Draft will expire on 4 January 2027. Krishnan, et al. Expires 4 January 2027 [Page 1] Internet-Draft IAB Liaison Management July 2026 Copyright Notice Copyright (c) 2026 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the document authors. All rights reserved. This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (https://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. Table of Contents 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 1.1. Changes compared to RFC4052 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 1.2. IETF's Preference for Informal Collaboration . . . . . . 6 2. Establishing Formal Liaison Relationships . . . . . . . . . . 6 2.1. Purposes and Expectations for Formal Liaison Relationships . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 2.2. Liaison Communications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 3. Liaison Manager Responsibilities and Expectations . . . . . . 8 3.1. Speaking for the IETF . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 4. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 5. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 6. Appendix A: Document Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 7. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 7.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 7.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 1. Introduction This document describes the procedures to establish and maintain formal liaison relationships between the IETF and other Standards Development Organizations (SDOs), consortia and industry fora. This process is managed by the Internet Architecture Board (IAB) and designed such that the IETF can effectively collaborate with other organizations in the international standards community when a formal relationship is required. The IAB also serves as contact point for any matters regarding liaison management beyond the scope of this document. The IETF, as an organization, has the need to engage in direct communication to coordinate joint activities with various other SDOs or similar formal organizations involving Internet-related technologies. This is useful in order to, e.g., avoid overlap in work efforts, and to manage interactions between their groups. The Krishnan, et al. Expires 4 January 2027 [Page 2] Internet-Draft IAB Liaison Management July 2026 IETF process does not requires any formal handling for such a communication and coordination to happen, however, sometimes a formal process is required by the other organiztaion or seen as beneficial to support the needed level of collaboration. In cases where the mutual effort to communicate and coordinate activities is formalized, these relationships are generically referred to as "formal liaison relationships". In such cases, a person is designated by the IAB to manage a given formal liaison relationship; that person is generally called the "IETF liaison manager" to the other organization. Often, the other organization will similarly designate their own liaison manager to the IETF. This document is chiefly concerned with: * the expectations in and establishment of formal liaison relationships Section 2, and * the appointment and responsibilities of IETF liaison managers Section 3. The management of other organizations' liaison managers to the IETF, whether or not in the context of a formal liaison relationship, is outside the scope of this document. The IETF has tasked the IAB to manage technical liaison relationships, as stated in its charter [BCP39] 2.(f), "The IAB acts as a representative of the interests of the IETF in technical liaison relationships with other organizations concerned with standards, and other technical and organizational issues relevant to the worldwide Internet. Liaison relationships are kept informal whenever possible, and must possess demonstrable value to the IETF's technical mandate. Individual participants from the IETF community are appointed as liaison managers to other organizations by the IAB." Krishnan, et al. Expires 4 January 2027 [Page 3] Internet-Draft IAB Liaison Management July 2026 In general, collaboration between SDOs is needed when there are areas of technical development of mutual interest. For the most part, SDOs would rather leverage existing work done by other organizations than recreate it themselves (and would like the same done with respect to their own work). Collaboration and coordination of efforts between the IETF and other organizations can help to prevent inadvertent duplication of effort, without obstructing either organization from pursuing its own mandate. While technical overlap and the respective desire for collaboration can be handled without establishing a formal liaison relationship, the formalization of the relationship can provide a framework to communicate authoritative information of one organization's dependencies on the other's work, if desired or required. It is important to note that participation in the IETF work is open to everyone, and all working documents and RFCs are freely available to everyone without the need for a formal liaison relationship. Hence, in many cases the need for a formal relationship is mostly driven by process restrictions or other requirements for collaboration within other organizations. Also, in many other cases where no formal relationship with a dedicated liaison manager is required and established, the IETF still closely collaborates with other organizations, using informal or formal communication in form of liaison statements (see also [I-D.iab-rfc4053bis]). If even tighter coordination is needed, independent of the existence of an established formal liaison relationship, the IAB might consider additional activities such as meetings or calls with the relevant people (e.g. chairs, ADs, and authors). Such activities could be one-time events or organized in a standing groups. If a formal liaison relationship exists, the liaison manager should be involved in the organization and the running of these activities. Such activities can e.g. make sense in cases where there are a large number of document dependencies; this often happens when specifications are developed in parallel. Since the IAB is ultimately responsible for liaison management, anyone who has an issue with a relationship (whether an IETF participant or a person from the peer organization) should first consult the IAB's designated liaison manager, and if that does not result in a satisfactory outcome, then consult the IAB itself. 1.1. Changes compared to RFC4052 The text in this section is intended to be removed and replaced with a shorter, high-level summary before publication. This version of the document contains the following updates: Krishnan, et al. Expires 4 January 2027 [Page 4] Internet-Draft IAB Liaison Management July 2026 1. Notes were added in the Introduction and Section 2.1 on "Liaison Relationships" that the IETF process itself does not require a formal liaison relationship, e.g. for document access or meeting participation, and therefore the need for a formal liaison relationship is often driven by processes of the peer organization. 2. Statement that the "IAB acts as representative of the interests of [..] the Internet Society" has been removed. 3. Role of the Liaison Representative (Section 2.3) has been removed since this role is not used in practice. 4. Clarification was added in section on "Liaison Communication" (now 2.3; was 2.4) that informal channels are preferred, with and without a formal liaison relationship, and further that liaison statements have no "special standing" in the IETF process. 5. Section on Summary of IETF Liaison Manager Responsibilities was reworked. 6. Section 4 on "Approval and Transmission of Liaison Statements" has been moved to 4053bis. 7. The description of both the aspects and requirements for establishing a formal relationship ws improved. 8. Text was addded to clarify there are no specific establishment procedures for informal collaboration and formal liaison communications in form of liaison statement don't require a formal liaison relationship 9. Update was made of the description of aspects for establishing a formal relationship and clarifications about informal collaborations 10. Liaison manager responsibilities sections was merged 11. One level in the dcoument structure was removed 12. Section on "Liaison Communication" was moved into a subsection of "Establishing a Liaison Relationship" and some redundant text was merged 13. Wording was aligned to consistently use “formal liaison relationship” Krishnan, et al. Expires 4 January 2027 [Page 5] Internet-Draft IAB Liaison Management July 2026 14. Small clarification was added that the appointment of a liaison manager establishes the formal relationship 15. The intro text was revised including a new initial paragraph to further clarify the scope that aligns with text in 4053bis 16. RFC4691 was added to the obsolete tag 1.2. IETF's Preference for Informal Collaboration G