the IETF document says:
The IETF is a global organization that produces voluntary standards,
whose goal is to make the Internet work better [RFC3595]. IETF
standards are published in the RFC series. The IETF is responsible
for the key standards that are used on the Internet today, including
IP, TCP, DNS, BGP, and HTTP, to name but a few.
Query: is HTTP maintained by IETF or by W3C? I see the note from Mark
Nottingham referencing HTTPbis WG and RFCs 7230-7235 so I assume this
WG must have collaborative involvement of W3C participants also?
It is important to note that the IETF includes anyone who wishes to
participate. Staff and participants from ICANN or the Regional
Internet Registries (RIRs) regularly participate in IETF activities.
Query: Should any others be mentioned explicitly in addition to the RIRs?
The routing architecture has evolved over time, and is expected to
continue to do so. Such evolution may have an impact on
appropriate IP address allocation strategies. As and when that
happens, we will consult with the RIR community, as we have done
in the past.
Query: should this say "consult and coordinate"?
IETF standards changes may have impact on operations of RIRs and
service providers. A recent example is the extensions to BGP to
carry the Autonomous System numbers as four-octet entities
[RFC6793]. It is important to note that this change occurred out
of operational necessity, and it demonstrated strong alignment
between the RIRs and the IETF.
Query: one would have thought the ISPs and Operator Groups (e.g.
NANOG) would also have been involved?
In the case where someone claims that
the procedures themselves are insufficient or inadequate in some way
to address a circumstance, one may appeal an IAB decision to the
Internet Society Board of Trustees.
Query: Is this still an operational practice?
Appendix A. Changes
NOTE: This section to be removed by RFC Editor at publication.
I assume any references to appendices will be revised to reflect the
elimination of Appendix A?
In appendix C we read:
8 September 2014
Introduction
Under the IANA1 Stewardship Transition Coordination Group (ICG)
Charter,2 the ICG has four main tasks:
Query: some formatting problem has turned IANA <footnote 1> into IANAL
- "I am not a lawyer" !!
"Chater,2..." which also looks odd.
another small formatting error in Appendix C:
(ii) Assess the outputs of the three operational communities for
compatibility and interoperability (iii) Assemble a complete
proposal for the transition
(iv) Information sharing and public communication
Query: presumably section (iii) should be set off with its own paragraph
Generally there appears to be something odd about the paragraph numbering
in Appendix C, with more than one section set off as "0. " followed by a
section numbered Roman Numeral I. Is this intentional?