open from last version
This does not seem to admit to the possibility that the ISOC board might
say 'wait a minute - you are asking for twice as much money as you got
last year - we need to work with you to figure out a funding level that
the ISOC can support' - i.e. it is not reasonable to assume that the
ISOC BoT can carry out the above mentioned fiduciary responsibility
without being able to engage in a dialogue over budget amounts.
An open question in my mind is the degree of detail and itemization that
the ISOC BoT needs to have to carry out the fiduciary responsibility
i.e. it seems like the ISOC might have a hard time with its auditors if
what it approved is just a line item for the IETF expenditures with no
breakdown. But on the other hand we do not want the ISOC BoT to be
arguing over how many copies of the newcomer's presentation handouts get
made. We need to figure out a reasonable process that permits the ISOC
to understand what the money is going for, be able to suggest
alternatives if they might be more efficient, and have an ability to
have input to the review of RFP responses without limiting the ability
and authority of the IAD/IAHC to make the final decisions (as long as
they stay within a budget)
basically - no discussion between the ISOC and the IAD is called
for in putting the budget together - that seems to be an error (if
the assumption is that the ISOC reps on the IASA will be the
dhisussion path then it would be good to state that - it is
better to be clear than to have people in the future assume that
the ISOC BoT just gets to approve a proposed IETF budget rather than
think about it and teh implications for ISOC's overall budget
Scott
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf