Re: Sponsors and influence (Re: Making IETF happening in different regions)
Here is a guess at the rule we should impose: A sponsor donating a sufficiently large amount may have a small booth for the sale of a single product that is a) unannounced or has been announced within the last [6] months, and b) appropriate for purchase and use by individuals. I really think any attempt to write a rule is doomed. A guideline or principle would be OK. Such as It's OK to sell really cool geeky stuff. Suggestions for more formal language welcome. Brian ___ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
Sponsors and influence (Re: Making IETF happening in different regions)
Tim Chown wrote: On Thu, Mar 23, 2006 at 11:48:19PM -0600, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ wrote: The results is also better for all (even participants), because the logistics and local-planning is done more coherently. I think there's some unfair handwaving in this thread. One option however would be to seek 'partnerships' between vendors and the IETF that span more than one meeting. Unless that impacted the perceived 'neutrality' of the IETF and its standardisation processes. I suspect that this would indeed be a question. One of the services that ISOC provides to the IETF is a layer of indirection for sponsors; they give money into a pool administered by ISOC (and get a seat on the ISOC AC in return), but the procedures make it pretty clear that they do not get any direct influence over the IETF standardization process that way. Among the issues Ray could want to calculate would be: - the number of new ISOC Platinum members needed to cover the costs currently borne by the hosts - the likely income/percieved influence tradeoff of sponsoring the IETF in smaller chunks (a cookie sponsor, a printer sponsor, a connectivity sponsor, a WLAN sponsor and a router sponsor? some of these could be 1 meeting long; others could last no longer than a single cookie break) - what other creative options there are for cost/benefit tradeoffs One option I do NOT want to consider (and which the 770 stand in the lobby kind of dented a little) is to add a tradeshow to the IETF meeting. The next steps in that progression have been travelled before - soon, the tradeshow has a standards adjunct, not the other way around. Harald ___ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
Re: Sponsors and influence (Re: Making IETF happening in different regions)
Harald Alvestrand wrote: One option however would be to seek 'partnerships' between vendors and the IETF that span more than one meeting. Unless that impacted the perceived 'neutrality' of the IETF and its standardisation processes. I suspect that this would indeed be a question. To invoke a particularly apt cliche punchline: we are merely haggling about price. The IETF's long-term use of hosts already creates these partnerships, albeit one meeting at a time. Hosts can enjoy very considerable marketing benefits during the IETF. Moving to a sponsorship model permits the IETF to enjoy continue to enjoy the financial benefits that we rely on from hosts, but permits us to do vastly more rational (and cost-effective) meeting logistics planning. It well might also permit us to obtain enough funds to reduce attendance fees. By way of a simple goal, it might allow meeting fees to be reduced to cover only meeting costs, rather than also used for funding the basic Secretariat. One of the services that ISOC provides to the IETF is a layer of indirection for sponsors; they give money into a pool administered by ISOC (and get a seat on the ISOC AC in return), but the procedures make it pretty clear that they do not get any direct influence over the IETF standardization process that way. From a marketing standpoint, Hosts currently get a significantly more powerful position than you just described. As for whose name is on the sponsorship check, I don't care. Among the issues Ray could want to calculate would be: sounds like some good examples. One option I do NOT want to consider (and which the 770 stand in the lobby kind of dented a little) is to add a tradeshow to the IETF meeting. The next steps in that progression have been travelled before - soon, the tradeshow has a standards adjunct, not the other way around. Yes, this is an important danger to pay close attention to. d/ -- Dave Crocker Brandenburg InternetWorking http://bbiw.net ___ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
Re: Sponsors and influence (Re: Making IETF happening in different regions)
One option however would be to seek 'partnerships' between vendors and the IETF that span more than one meeting. Unless that impacted the perceived 'neutrality' of the IETF and its standardisation processes. I suspect that this would indeed be a question. To invoke a particularly apt cliche punchline: we are merely haggling about price. ah yes, but perhaps the point of that joke is that there really is a difference between a novelty and a commodity. ___ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
Re: Sponsors and influence (Re: Making IETF happening in different regions)
The wifi phone booth in Japan [...] wildly popular with attendees, was actually at APRICOT in Kyoto, but I know it all blends together after a while :-) At $50, vs the retail price of around $350, it was a loss-leader give-away. I think we'd be happy to get more free stuff like that :-) Ole Ole J. Jacobsen Editor and Publisher, The Internet Protocol Journal Cisco Systems Tel: +1 408-527-8972 GSM: +1 415-370-4628 E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] URL: http://www.cisco.com/ipj On Fri, 24 Mar 2006, Dave Crocker wrote: Harald Alvestrand wrote: One option I do NOT want to consider (and which the 770 stand in the lobby kind of dented a little) is to add a tradeshow to the IETF meeting. Thinking about this further, I am struck by the fact that the 770 booth and the wifi phone booth in Japan were wildly popular with attendees. So the concern you raise is a very real and very serious slippery-slope, but portions of that slope seem to be entirely acceptable to the IETF attendees. Here is a guess at the rule we should impose: A sponsor donating a sufficiently large amount may have a small booth for the sale of a single product that is a) unannounced or has been announced within the last [6] months, and b) appropriate for purchase and use by individuals. d/ -- ___ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
