Is the IETF making itself a wholly-owned subsidiary of ISOC, or is the IETF contracting with ISOC to do some services for the IETF.
I don't see either happening, and perhaps this is part of the disconnect. The latter is clearly what Carl's document called "Scenario D", and the former could be Carl's Scenario C. As I understood the IETF consensus, neither is currently intended to become reality.
At 11:36 PM 12/12/04 +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
are the IETF and ISOC agreeing on a partnership in the administration of the IETF?
Yes.
Scenario A in essence said that "we is both of us": IETF is, as its web page has proclaimed for quite a number of years, an "Organized Activity of ISOC", and a commitment to one implies a commitment to the other. Scenario O, the scenario I understand us to be working with, continues that case, but creates an organization (the IAOC) to act as an interface and give special direction to an office within ISOC (the IASA) that manages contracts and relationships on the part of the IETF.
In Scenario O, the IAOC will advise the IASA on the needs of the IETF community and will discuss how to best get those needs met. This will involve a fair bit of give and take on the budget - when a new need is recognized, either there will be money and resources available to meet it, or someone (ISOC) will have to do some fundraising - which ISOC is already doing anyway, as there are already monetary needs and ISOC signed up to that a long time ago. There may need to be reallocation of resources, or a scheduling of activities to meet various needs. This is all standard management stuff, and is presumably done within the IASA. The IASA will be physically housed in and use various resources of ISOC including other staff on an allocation basis.
_______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
