In message <AC1A3EF6-1A0A-11D8-B94E-000A95CD987A(_at_)muada(_dot_)com>,
Iljitsch van Beijn
um writes:
On 18-nov-03, at 19:48, Keith Moore wrote:
I already indicated before: 100-150 Euros more is not a big issue.
I strongly and emphatically disagree, and I strongly object to
attempts to
use of increased meeting feeds to discourage some parties from
participating
at IETF. Basically this kind of fee increase is completely and
absolutely
unacceptable.
Especially considering the fact that based on the budget for 2003 (see
http://www.ietf.org/u/ietfchair/budget-2003.html ) the costs per
attendee are less than 300 dollars, even at the lower than projected
attendance.
Maybe this would be a good time to explain what the IETF needs a 9.33
person secretariat for, and why the secretariat must be entirely funded
by meeting fees.
Y'know, IETFers always have fun comparing the size of our secretariat
to those from other standards organizations. The phrase "order of
magnitude smaller" comes to mind.
The Secretariat handles I-D processing, meeting planning, IESG
telechats, software development and systems administration to support all
that, and much, much more.
As for the network: Vienna has shown that it's possible to do better.
There were at least two major external items that were different this
time: nasty, aggressive worms, both inside and outside -- *why* should
anyone clueful enough to attend an IETF meeting not know how to run AV
software, at the very least! -- and "helpful" operating systems that
think that going into IBSS mode when they don't hear a base station is
"user-friendly".
--Steve Bellovin, http://www.research.att.com/~smb