On 10/20/2011 12:02 PM, Acee Lindem wrote:
I disagree. If the remote participation service is high quality,
> it should require the same registration fee structure as on-site
> participation.
It seems to me that any fees (and I've got some issues with that:
see below) should be tied to the expense of providing the service.
But aside from that it seems to me that there's historically been
an interest in keeping IETF processes open. I don't think we want
to get into a situation in which only people whose participation
costs are covered by an employer or someone's got enough money to
fund themselves. I don't think that this would be particularly an
issue if meetings haven't increasingly become the place where
decisions are made (sorry, it does happen far too often) and centers
of working group activity. It's increasingly the case that if you
want to do work at the IETF, you need to go to meetings. I'd have
considerable reservations about asking for the kind of money you're
suggesting.
But first, let's find out what it actually would actually cost
the IETF.
Melinda
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf