On Nov 14, 2010, at 5:08 AM, Yoav Nir wrote:
On Nov 14, 2010, at 10:06 AM, SM wrote:
At 04:03 12-11-10, Shane Kerr wrote:
It is sometimes possible to create systems to meet the needs of privacy
and oversight - for example a closed review board - but I think just
publishing a list of who gets free access to each IETF is probably good
a good idea.
There is already an IETF Administrative Oversight Committee (see BCP
101). Approximately 2% of attendees received complementary tickets
How many of those are volunteers/host/NOC/future host, and how many are
"discretionary comp"?
There was exactly 1 "discretionary" in Beijing.
Wearing no hats, and just my own personal opinion, this seems like making a
mountain out of a molehill to me.
Regards
Marshall
Does the IAOC have access to the actual list of names? If so, I think that's
good enough, because the corruption that we're trying to solve would require
collaboration between the IETF chair and the IAOC. I would say that the risk
is low enough that privacy trumps transparency.
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf