Folks, The IETF is based on the key principle of open participation. The benefits of this have been massive, even as the project management challenges have been frequently frustrating. However, open does not require free, as long as we are careful to ensure that charging is not a major filter. We charge meeting attendees who are physically present. We do not charge multicast attendees. We do not charge mailing list attendees. We do not charge I-D issuers. The charge for meeting attendance covers more than the pure cost of meetings. This suggests that it would entirely reasonable to consider introducing cost-recovery charging for participation in some or all of the IETF's other activities. I said "consider". That means that the idea, itself, does not violate IETF precepts. Of course, particular choices need to be balanced carefully, against other IETF precepts. We don't not want the solution to our financial problems to destroy our productivity or quality. My own feeling is that we must not charge for RFC publication. The quantity is pretty small, and the bulk of the RFCs represent IETF work product. On the other hand, I-Ds and IETF mailing lists have large volume and not much filtering prior to issuance. This means that it is likely to be fair and productive to push the direct costs onto the individual contributors. Choosing to charge for things like I-D authorship or mailing list posting (or subscription) carries some practical challenges. In particular how do we charge efficiently and authentically? So this makes the considerations even more delicate. I suspect we can find a reasonable set of mechanisms and prices. d/ -- Dave Crocker <mailto:dcrocker@brandenburg.com> Brandenburg InternetWorking <http://www.brandenburg.com> Sunnyvale, CA USA <tel:+1.408.246.8253>, <fax:+1.866.358.5301>
