At 12:12 PM -0500 12/17/04, Leslie Daigle wrote:
Brian,
I agree, with respect to the specifics (as I said in my note).
However, a principle should be captured. And, to the extent
we do not yet (apparently) have general agreement on the principle,
we still have work to do.
Though, in general, my thinking this morning has been running
along the lines of Carl's proposal of capturing the desired
outcome with an expression of uncertainty ("we would *like*
to be able to do "X""), and a plan of reviewing it for
a year ("will make effort to implement and report back
after a year"). I'm not nearly so worried, on that front,
about the small donations front, as I am about the overall
principles of identifying IETF donations and achieving
some model for dependent sustainability.
I'd like to chime in my agreement with Leslie here. I think
we've been somewhat distracted by the "small donations"
label; I have heard some of the same numbers as Leslie,
and they are a range, including some in the 5 figure range.
Getting the principle down--that people who want to
make a donation to the IETF activity should be able to do
so--is the important part. How that gets structured
may change over time (costs incurred because
of donations to IETF paid from those same funds, an
overhead model similar to University research funding,
whatever). Getting the principle right is a job we shouldn't
put off; it should go into the BCP. Getting the specifics
right is an activity we should expect to revisit, not just once
but over time.
regards,
Ted Hardie
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf