Dave,
Dave Crocker wrote:
... I believe that policy concerns are best addressed by
ISOC. Because ISOC's role in the standards process is at one
remove, it can work to educate legislatures and
administrations without appearing to favor one participant
over the other.
That sounds wonderful, excep
Brian,
> > > ... I believe that policy concerns are best addressed by
> > > ISOC. Because ISOC's role in the standards process is at
> > > one remove, it can work to educate legislatures and
> > > administrations without appearing to favor one
> > > participant over the other.
> > That soun
t; From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
> Dave Crocker
> Sent: Monday, October 11, 2004 10:00 AM
> To: Brian E Carpenter
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: isoc's skills
>
> Brian,
>
> > > > ... I believe that policy concern
Tony,
Thanks for the followup.
> You are correct we need a detailed documentation of the
> interface before we deal with any corporate entity. As I see
> it the differences between your opinion and others has more
> to do with your focus on the interface than the
> organizational structure
On 10/12/04 at 6:37 PM -0700, Dave Crocker wrote:
Before we make strategic choices it is our responsibility. And that
means before we even go out for 'bids'.
If we only worry about the details after we have chosen the
contractor, we will probably choose the wrong contractor and we
certainly wi
Hi Dave,
I appreciate your feedback on the AdminRest process and documents,
and I have no doubt that your comments are motivated by a desire to
help the IETF make the best decisions possible. I think that is true
of everyone involved in this process, even when we are strongly
disagreeming abou
> "Dave" == Dave Crocker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Dave> My focus is on knowing what the details of the jobs are that
Dave> we want done. Referring to the interface(s) is a convenient
Dave> technique for trying to surface those details.
Dave> Currently we do not have the det
Dear Margaret and Pete,
I understand your position. It would be OK if status quo was the target.
Who hires the contractors would then be neutral. But the situation calls
for improvements. The first improvement is financial stability. This means
to make the IETF deliverable pay better and to crea
On Tue, 12 Oct 2004 21:11:32 -0500, Pete Resnick wrote:
> Let me repeat: ISOC is not the contractor.
>
> ISOC, in scenario O, will hire the contractors to support the
> IETF (according to IETF specifications). The structures we
> desire in ISOC to do the hiring and (more importantly)
> facilit
Dave,
Dave Crocker wrote:
Brian,
... I believe that policy concerns are best addressed by
ISOC. Because ISOC's role in the standards process is at
one remove, it can work to educate legislatures and
administrations without appearing to favor one
participant over the other.
That sounds wonderful,
Dave Crocker wrote:
The IETF is choosing ISOC to do a job. The IETF is specifying
the job. If the IETF does not like the job that ISOC is doing,
the IETF will get someone else to do it.
And you think that isn't called "contractor"?
See below.
What label would you use? And how does it describ
What label would you use? And how does it describe something
different from contracting?
How about "parent organization"?
I prefer the term "organizational home", because it doesn't raise the
issue of who conceived whom. But, close enough.
As far as the organizational chart goes, I'll take t
Crocker
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: isoc's skills
>
> On 10/12/04 at 6:37 PM -0700, Dave Crocker wrote:
>
> >Before we make strategic choices it is our responsibility. And that
> >means before we even go out for 'bids'.
> >
> >If
Dave,
...
ISOC won't be making any operational decisions? They will not
control the purse strings? They will not make any hire/fire
decisions? The IAOC will live inside ISOC, but ISOC will not
have any actual power over the activities?
Is that how everyone else is understanding this?
I reall
--On Tuesday, 12 October, 2004 18:37 -0700 Dave Crocker
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>...
> My focus is on knowing what the details of the jobs are that we
> want done. Referring to the interface(s) is a convenient
> technique for trying to surface those details.
>
> Currently we do not have the
15 matches
Mail list logo