Re: IETF, IAB, & RFC-Editor

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

All,

I suppose you are aware of the next ISOC board meeting in Marrakesh is
on the 1/2 July 2006 (www.isoc.org)

While I have kept an eye on the IETF list for qite some time, I still
consider myself a newbie in the relationship ISOC/IETF. I'm trying to
better understand it especially with this reform process, so any point
of view is interesting for me.

I also find the IETF is doing a great job but not sure how to best
help it.

IETF is 20 years old, I also hope to learn more during a workshop at
www.egeni.org on the historic role of IETF (22 June 2006, Paris).

Cheers

Brian E Carpenter wrote:

| Ran,
|
| RJ Atkinson wrote:
|
|> Previously, someone wrote:
|>
|>> I finished reading the RFC editor document and have one major
|>> concern.
|>>
|>> Ultimately, the rfc-editor function needs to be accountable to
|>> the IETF community because we're the ones paying for it.
|>
|>
|>
|> Incorrect.  As I pointed out some weeks ago, and Leslie has
|> recently repeated, IETF has never paid for the RFC-Editor.
|>
|> Historically, RFC-Editor was created by (D)ARPA and paid by
|> (D)ARPA.  More recently, some large commercial firms have donated
|> substantial funds to ISOC -- with the understanding that the
|> RFC-Editor would be among the functions paid for from those
|> funds. [1]
|
|
| I would like to suggest a qualification to this. Things have
| changed over time. When DARPA stopped funding ISI to perform the
| RFC Editor function, ISOC stepped in to fill the gap. Subsequently,
| ISOC also provided a discretionary fund for the IETF Chair, and
| extended its liability insurance to cover the IETF leadership. (At
| some point, the discretionary fund was split between the IETF Chair
| and the IAB Chair.) In 2000/2001, ISOC consolidated these
| expenditures in its "standards pillar" accounting. Subsequently,
| and most recently, ISOC agreed to host IASA, which is now the
| funding agency for all of the above plus meeting expenses and the
| Secretariat. So whatever the historical situation, the *current*
| situation is that a single budget is fed by ISOC member
| contributions, ISOC donations, and IETF attendance fees, and the
| RFC Editor contract is just one item in that budget.
|
| This doesn't contradict Ran's statement of the history in the
| least.
|
| With reference to Ran's note [1], my recollection of numerous
| meetings of the ISOC Advisory Council of organizational members is
| that representatives there consistently stated support of the
| "standards pillar" as their primary motivation for supporting ISOC.
| Of course they knew that historically the bulk of the money in that
| pillar was going to support the RFC publication process, prior to
| the creation of IASA.
|
|

- --
- -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Franck Martin
franck(_at_)sopac(_dot_)org
"Toute connaissance est une réponse à une question"
G. Bachelard
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mandriva - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFEhCTlvnmeYIHZEyARAtTBAJwLUb5A7+mdSjDPGxaVY/9LGSDMlACeIYxh
MWceB9CzA8a/Wr6V7oZZSfM=
=vYIH
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf