Hi Michael -
I actually looked at this issue in drafting this report. bcp8 seems to
place the irtf in the "inner" ietf circle (e.g., iesg, iab, etc...).
And, as Harald notes, their support needs are fairly minor. So,
I lumped their funding needs in the "misc." category of the ietf
financials.
We have enough on our plate for now, so the structure and
funding of the irtf just didn't seem worth calling out as an
issue. At $1000/year, seems like one of those things we can
not worry about for now.
Regards,
Carl
[ Charset ISO-8859-1 unsupported, converting... ]
--On s?ndag, november 14, 2004 15:47:00 +0100 Brian E Carpenter
<brc(_at_)zurich(_dot_)ibm(_dot_)com> wrote:
Michael Richardson wrote:
...
Of the RG people that I know, they all attend IETF.
Of course, I might never meet the RG people that don't attend
IETF. If so, who are they?
There are such people - I know of at least one person who was
in DC on the Saturday before the IETF for an RG meeting, and
who drove home on Saturday night. But I don't think it's
relevant - the question is whether RG support is on or off
the IETF budget. In view of the budget numbers Harald gave us,
the answer surely has to be "off" at present. That doesn't mean IRTF
support should be out of scope for IASA in principle, though.
If the IRTF support is on the order of USD 1000 per year, it really doesn't
matter to the budget whether it's "on" or "off".
As a matter of principle (because I regard the IRTF as part of the "large
tent IETF" that RFC 3716 described), I think it should be "on", and we can
choose whether to give any money to it in a specific year or not.
Telling the IRTF that they need to set up their own funding structures if
they need support for their activities seems "not right" to me.
Harald
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf