+1. I think this is a reasonable decision and allows people to participate without financial barriers, while allowing the ongoing activities funded by IETF meeting fees to proceed without interruption. Regards Suresh > On May 31, 2020, at 5:24 PM, Joel M. Halpern <jmh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > I agree with Eric in his description. From where I sit, this seems a reasonable decision by the leadership. > > Yours, > Joel > > On 5/31/2020 5:13 PM, Eric Rescorla wrote: >> On Sun, May 31, 2020 at 1:56 PM S Moonesamy <sm+ietf@xxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:sm%2Bietf@xxxxxxxxxxxx>> wrote: >> Dear Internet Engineering Steering Group, >> [Reply-To override] >> At 06:12 PM 27-05-2020, IETF Executive Director wrote: >> >This meeting will have a substantial agenda but as the cost of an >> >online meeting is lower, the registration fees have been set at >> >approximately one-third of those for an in-person meeting. A >> >detailed explanation of why we charge a fee for meetings and how the >> >fee reduction was set for IETF 108 is provided in a separate blog >> post [3]. >> In 2013, the IETF Chair affirmed that the Internet Engineering Task >> Force embraced the modern paradigm for standards. One of the points >> in the document is the standards process being open to all interested >> and informed parties. If I recall correctly, I raised a point a few >> months before 2013 about the IETF allowing free access to its >> meetings through the Internet. I could not help noticing that there >> is now a required fee to access the next IETF meeting. Was that >> approved by the IESG? >> I took a look at the meeting policy for the IETF. I never understood >> why that policy is described as an ambition. Anyway, as that policy >> does not specify anything about changing the existing practice for >> fees, it is unlikely that the decision to charge for online meetings >> can be challenged. >> I would like to thank the IETF LLC Directors for acknowledging that >> the fee presents a barrier to participation and their charitable >> offer. I'll leave the charitable offer to those who are in need. >> It took a decade for the IETF to take this pay-to-play decision. Was >> there any discussion about it? >> I don't think the characterization of this as "pay-to-play" is accurate. You >> are certainly free to participate in mailing lists, github, etc. >> What is being charged here is a fee to participate [0] in real-time virtual >> meetings, just as there is one charged for attending in-person meetings. >> -Ekr >> [0] I emphasize "real-time" as I expect that the recordings will be available >> after the fact as usual. >
