Hi,
I had some questions about why the IETF might establish a formal liaison relationship with ETSI, and why that might appear in IAB minutes, rather than in the IETF/IESG. The document in question is here:
https://www.iab.org/documents/minutes/minutes-2020/iab-minutes-2020-05-27/"3. ETSI Liaison Work
Zhenbin Li suggested that the IETF might want to consider trying to establish a formal liaison with ETSI, noting a concern that there might be overlap between work in the IETF TEAS WG and the ETSI Industry Specification Group on Zero touch network and Service Management (ZSM).
....
Zhenbin Li agreed to follow up with Deborah Brungard and the Routing Area Directors about whether there is need for a formal liaison relationship with ETSI, and report back to the IAB."
ETSI had been unfamiliar to me, but I recently reviewed an ETSI application for a TLS code point assignment:
https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tls/bkx_bXcPSt_TwE7iJRM9acOQkDA/I was surprised that the IETF would entertain a 99-page PDF that no individual signed their name to, but I do agree that code point assignment is not meant to be a gatekeeping mechanism.
I did more research into ETSI after that, and this article turned up:
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2019/02/ets-isnt-tls-and-you-shouldnt-use-itI would like to hear more from Zhenbin Li, Deborah Brungard, and the Routing Area Directors about this proposal.
thanks,
Rob
