At Wed, 1 Dec 2004 23:44:35 -0500 (EST), Scott Bradner wrote:
lots of left over references to a seperate account
Scott,
Thanks for all the notes.
Regarding all the places where you think we forgot to remove the word
"account": there's more than one kind of account, and I think you're
confusing one with another.
That is: if you read section 5.1, you'll see that it still talks about
"a separate set of accounts". It's not separate bank accounts
anymore, but it is separate bookkeeping, as described in 5.1. Please
note that Bert and I didn't cook this up on our own, it was based on a
suggestion (for which we are grateful) from ISOC's Treasurer.
No doubt there are some places where the phrasing has not completely
caught up to this model (in particular, as I look at it now, there are
a couple of instances of "deposited" that should be "credited"), but
our understanding is that the community does want some visibility into
the IASA's accounting and that this mechanism of divisional accounting
(see the text) is a way to achieve that.
So, with that out of the way: could you please let us know how many of
the "leftover references" you cited still look wrong?
Thanks.
--Rob
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf