So, I agree with you that this doesn't have to say "of that cost
center" and could
easily say "the IASA". But, when you say "in the form of a P&L statement",
I get a little scared ... as you know from your periodic reviews of the ISOC
overall finances, an income statement without a balance sheet
doesn't make a lot
You are correct, of course. Which may only underline the silliness of having a
bunch of engineers specify the accounting details at this level. :-)
While keeping implementation details out of the BCP is a good thing, I do
think it is appropriate to get the general principle across: full visibility
and transparency of the IASA activity through the use of regular reporting
using standard financial statements that show the IETF community the
income, expenses, assets, and liabilities of this particular activity.
Yes. If we said this (and nothing about cost centers and general ledgers,
etc.) I'd be happier.
The general principle is that, because this is a community activity,
we're all agreeing that more visibility than usual is appropriate
here. That seems like a reasonable request/requirement, particularly
given the past history of minimal reporting by the secretariat. Not
your fault, I know, but this is a sensitive issue given the history and
thus requires a little extra attention.
Yes, I agree.
Ietf mailing list