Following up on my note from this morning...
Leslie Daigle wrote:
Accordingly, some people volunteered to write down some text
for each, drawing on and extending Carl's documents. The
outcome of that writing exercise will be circulated here
later today -- i.e., a note describing a possible implem
Leslie and Harald somewhat challenged me in private to review
Scenario O more deeply, to indicate the bits of it that may need
more work - since otherwise we might miss showstoppers.
So I have sone so, below, but with the proviso that this
is the scenario I prefer - so my comments should be taken i
I'd like to express general support for scenario O.
I probably will not have time to read the document in sufficient
detail to agree with every point, but this looks like a good
direction.
--Sam
___
Ietf mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://www1.ie
Some comments:
2.1.4 - 6 months for the reserve is a funny number for an organization where
the nominal income period is 4 months. Wouldn't it make more sense to spell
out a reserve that covered a disaster case of a canceled meeting after the
contracts had been signed? Something like:
Also, in nor
I think that this (scenario 0) is the right approach to follow. It appears
to me to be the lowest risk path consistent with the needs that have been
identified.
Two minor comments:
1) The references to "the IASF bank account" should probably be relaxed to
"IASF fund accounts" or "IASF accounts
Hi Tony,
Great feedback. Thanks! A few comments in-line:
At 1:08 AM -0700 9/23/04, Tony Hain wrote:
2.1.4 - 6 months for the reserve is a funny number for an organization where
the nominal income period is 4 months. Wouldn't it make more sense to spell
out a reserve that covered a disaster case o
Joel M. Halpern [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, September 23, 2004 16:35
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Scenario O Re: Upcoming: further thoughts on where from
> here
>
>
> I think that this (scenario 0) is the right approach to
> follow. It appears
>
age-
> From: Joel M. Halpern [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, September 23, 2004 16:35
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Scenario O Re: Upcoming: further thoughts on where from
> here
>
>
> I think that this (scenario 0) is the right approach to
> follow.
> At 1:08 AM -0700 9/23/04, Tony Hain wrote:
> >2.1.4 - 6 months for the reserve is a funny number for an organization where
> >the nominal income period is 4 months. Wouldn't it make more sense to spell
> >out a reserve that covered a disaster case of a canceled meeting after the
> >contracts had
Hi Joel,
At 10:35 AM -0400 9/23/04, Joel M. Halpern wrote:
Two minor comments:
1) The references to "the IASF bank account" should probably be
relaxed to "IASF fund accounts" or "IASF accounts". As written, it
presumes that there is exactly one bank account, and that separation
of funds is by b
--On 23. september 2004 10:35 -0400 "Joel M. Halpern"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
2) The schedule calls for seating the IAOC on January 15, and hiring the
IAD by the end of January. Given that the search committee can not be
appointed until the board is seated, it seems that item is either an
im
--On Thursday, 23 September, 2004 11:09 -0400 Margaret Wasserman
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>...
> Given that the schedule has the interim IAOC formed in
> November and the IAD hired in January, I think that this may
> be reasonable. The interim IAOC would be hard put to organize
> themselves a
--On Thursday, 23 September, 2004 11:09 -0400 Margaret Wasserman
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>...
> Given that the schedule has the interim IAOC formed in
> November and the IAD hired in January, I think that this may
> be reasonable. The interim IAOC would be hard put to organize
> themselves a
> But I bet not for tragic events like terrorist strikes/threats or war related
> issues. So setting up some reserves of our own seems better to me.
those options are not exclusive
it's a very good idea to have reserves, its also a good idea to
explore event cancellation insurance
Scott
__
> > But I bet not for tragic events like terrorist strikes/threats or war related
> > issues. So setting up some reserves of our own seems better to me.
>
> those options are not exclusive
>
> it's a very good idea to have reserves, its also a good idea to
> explore event cancellation insurance
Margaret Wasserman wrote:
...
> >2.3 Budget -
> >> The specific timeline will be established each year, before the
> >> second IETF meeting.
> >
> >Wouldn't it be cleaner to just specify that the budget process will be
> >completed in the first half of the calendar year? That would be mor
On Thursday, September 23, 2004 22:17:14 -0700 Tony Hain
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Well the I-D Editor is a fundamental cornerstone in our document process,
and therefore deserves to be explicit. Personally I don't have a problem
with moving the function to better align with the RFC Editor's off
Scenario O promises a distinctive IETF administrative entity within ISOC's
legal framework.
The problems establishing a directly IETF controlled entity emerge from the
informality and porous boundaries of the IETF. It is perfectly possible to
resolve these but it will take a lot of time and effor
18 matches
Mail list logo
