Jonne,
Soininen Jonne (Nokia-NET/Helsinki) wrote:
Hi,
sorry to tune in late, but keeping up with all the mails that are going
around I needed a vacation at the place of my in-laws...
I think the issue of a yearly audit has been solved already in the past
(Issue 721). However, I think that there is no mention of a special
audit outside the yearly. Special audit - as I understand it - is an
audit that is done by an auditing company _not_ being the one usually
used in the circumstances where there is a doubt that the IAD and/or the
IOAC have used the funds if the IASA improperly. This is a case that
doesn't happen often, but...
Normally, in a company, such audits are decided by the owners of the
company. So, rules in which circumstances such audit is merited is
normally not written down. However, as here is no clear owner, maybe
such a rule should be written down.
Do people understand the issue that I am raising?
Yes
Do people agree with
me?
No, because since by definition the circumstances would be special,
I don't see how we can write down a general rule. It's simply one of the
things that could happen during an appeal under section 3.4.
Brian
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf