Re: IAB comments on draft-baker-liaisons-00.txt - With which organizationsdoes communications take place?

[Stephen J Trowbridge <sjtrowbridge@lucent.com>]

All,
This concurs with my view as well. This is intended to document how
you communicate once the communication channel has been established,
and the responsibility for deciding who to communicate with remains
with the IAB.

How the IAB decides who to communicate with was not a problem we were
trying to address in this document. Clearly such a procedure could
be written (see, for example, Recommendations A.4 and A.6 in ITU-T).
But we didn't feel that it was our responsibility to tell IAB how to
do this job. Nor did we feel like this was a problem crying for a
solution. The problem seems to be more that for organizations with
whom IETF has a relationship, communications is not very effective.
It has not to date seemed to be a problem that we are communicating
with too many other organizations.
Regards,
Steve

On 8/15/2003 5:05 PM, Scott Bradner wrote:
>>i.e. cut the scope of the document to explicitly refer to communications
>>between the IETF and bodies where there exists a current liaison agreement.
> 
> 
> it sure was my intent that only bodies that the IAB had set up relations with
> would get the authentication tokens to use this system
> 
> (note that some process is needed to be sure that the communication
> is one that the other orgazation knows about - this is not a theoretical
> problem - we have had people claiming to represent the IETF send
> "official" messages to the ITU & vice versa where they had not authority to
> do so
> 
> Scott