ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: An Organized Activity of the ISOC [resent]

2004-09-26 13:20:11
On Sun, 26 Sep 2004, Kurt D. Zeilenga wrote:

Below is a (slightly augmented) version of my poll response.
I note that I have not attempted to review the proposals in
detail (I rather stay out of these weeds), but believe I
understand the general gist of the scenarios.

I view Scenario C as overly complex and risky.  For instance,
one cannot assume the newly formed corporation will achieve
non-profit status in a timely manner (if at all).

I view Scenario O as an natural evolution of our existing
operation model.  We are today "an organized activity of
the ISOC" and would remain so.  Scenario O appears to shifts
certain activities from a service provider (CNRI/Foretec)
to the ISOC and facilitates use of other service providers
if and when that is deemed appropriate.

I am far more willing to trust ISOC (based upon operational
experience) than some new entity (which we have no operational
experience with).

I would be in complete agreement there, particularly since the IETF had
had members seated on the ISOC board for some time now.



For these reasons and more, I strongly prefer Scenario O over C.

-- Kurt


_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf


sleekfreak pirate broadcast
http://sleekfreak.ath.cx:81/


_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>