RE: Adminrest: section 5

Would it not be nice if ISOC could sort of designate a yearly
amount to go to IETF instead of having to just cough up whatever
budget gap we seem to have?


yes but that is unrelated to my comment which only delt with the 
fact that the text seems to rule out ISOC support from sources
other than "Designated donations" - 

Scott

----

From bwijnen(_at_)lucent(_dot_)com  Thu Dec  2 10:08:53 2004

From: "Wijnen, Bert (Bert)" <bwijnen(_at_)lucent(_dot_)com>
To: sob(_at_)harvard(_dot_)edu, ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
Subject: RE: Adminrest: section 5
Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2004 16:08:47 +0100 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain

Personal opinion.

Would it not be nice if ISOC could sort of designate a yearly
amount to go to IETF instead of having to just cough up whatever
budget gap we seem to have?

Bert

-----Original Message-----
From: ietf-bounces(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org 
[mailto:ietf-bounces(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org]On Behalf Of
sob(_at_)harvard(_dot_)edu
Sent: Thursday, December 02, 2004 05:23
To: ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
Subject: Adminrest: section 5

section 5 starts out saying 
   The IASA manages money from three sources:

   1.  IETF meeting revenues.

   2.  Designated donations to ISOC (both monetary and in-kind).

   3.  Other ISOC support.

then goes on to say
   Note that the goal is to achieve and maintain a viable IETF support
   function based on meeting fees and designated donations.

I see no reason whatsoever to eliminate the other ISOC support 
from the second text - what benefit can flow from limiting the
way that the ISOC raises IETF support? - the first part of 
section 5 is
fine - do not negate the flexability in the second part

Scott

_______________________________________________
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