Correct, Carl. The issue is oversight -- who leads the committees that
review the financial statements and the IAD performance. Allowing the IAD
to lead the review of his/her own performance does not make sense.
And I'd also argue that while it is the IAD's job to come up with the
budget, that does not happen in a vaccuum -- the ISOC, IAOC and IETF
community need to provide input into the service level that is expected,
and those changes need to be explicit. That was, I think, Bob Kahn's
point at the plenary.
Rather than focussing on timelines (which after all, may change), I'd like
to see more discussion of the expected working relationship. I don't
think we want the "throw it over the wall" process that seems to be
implied.
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf