At 2:41 PM +0100 12/13/04, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
Scott Bradner wrote:
I've gone various ways on this, but I think that imposing a duty of
regular payment on ISOC is appropriate - so that paying the IETF
late doesn't become a tempting cash-flow management tool. I would
be happy with a phrasing that asks for at least 3 payments per
year.
Instead of specifying a number of "payments" per year perhaps we
could say something like: "ISOC will credit additional funds to the
IASA accounts, as necessary to cover the approved budget."?
Elsewhere it says that meeting fees and designated donations will be
credited to the IASA account when they are received, so it seem as
though these additional "payments" (credits?) would only be
necessary if the IASA budget for the given period has not been
covered by meeting fees and designated donations. Right?
Margaret
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf