Re: draft-lyons-proposed-changes-statement-01.txt

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Margaret,

You appear to be agreeing with my comments about the fundraising issue.
There should be a distinction between routine contributions of funds for
specific IETF events, and more substantial, long term support for IETF
activities. Of course money is received in connection with IETF meetings:
this is essential to the running of such events.  There are also donations
in kind to support such activities as the computer room and possible
entertainment at the venue.  However, such contributions whether in
kind or cash differ considerably from the sustained donations that
may be sollicited in order to provide long term stable support for
IETF purposes and allow it to expand the services provided to
the IETF community, and the Internet more generally.

Regards,

Patrice
----- Original Message ----- From: "Margaret Wasserman" <margaret@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: "Patrice Lyons" <palyons@xxxxxxx>
Cc: <ietf@xxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, October 21, 2004 10:32 AM
Subject: Re: draft-lyons-proposed-changes-statement-01.txt




Hi Patrice,

At 11:07 AM -0400 10/20/04, Patrice Lyons wrote:
You mentioned the importance of keeping support services, such as
management
of cash flow, separate from IETF technical efforts.  I share this concern
in
large part.  However, I would draw a distinction between carrying out
routine administrative, financial (like accounting for expenses and
meeting
fees), technical (such as computer rooms at meetings), legal or other
support services for the IETF ("support services"), and the solicitation,
donation, receipt and other fundraising efforts for IETF purposes
("fundraising").

I don't believe that this distinction is as clean as you have indicated, particularly when it comes to meeting sponsorship, donations-in-kind and preferred contract pricing.

Meeting sponsorship is one means by which large companies can offer
financial support to the IETF (in return for PR and good will), so it is
not really distinct from fund raising.  This lack-of-distinction is
emphasized by the meeting in Korea, where the sponsors donated $150,000 to
the CNRI/Foretec, in addition to usual sponsorship costs which run in 6
figures themselves.  I have no objection, at all, to having our meetings
sponsored and/or having the sponsors make additional donations, but I
think that meeting sponsorship is quite clearly a form of funding.

Another form of funding is donations-in-kind.  CNRI/Foretec currently buys
equipment, software, etc. for running the IETF adminstrative activity.  It
might be possible to get companies to donate these goods, so that we don't
have to pay for them.  But, this is also a form of funding.

Another, even more subtle form of funding is preferred contract pricing.
Carl Malamud's report supposes that there are some people who would offer
preferred (or zero-cost) prices to the IETF for their services, either for
the PR or good will associated with providing those services.  We already
see this today on a smaller level -- the ops.ietf.org site is on Randy
Bush's server, edu.ietf.org is on James Seng's and tools.ietf.org is on
Henrik Levkowetz's.  Many people donate their time to do a number of
system administration tasks for the IETF and/or to run servers for our use
(issue tracking, jabber, etc.) Maybe someone else will agree to run the
IETF mailing lists for free (or cheap)?  Or our web site?  These are also
all donations of goods, services, etc.

So, I propose that we can't realistically separate all fund raising
activities from the administrative support activity, at least not without
eliminating some significant sources of funding.

Please let me know if this clarification of my comments meets your
concerns.
I look forward to resolving the administrative issues that have been under
discussion recently, but would add a note of caution on a rush to
judgment.
The reorganization issues under consideration are of major importance for
the future of the IETF, and the Internet community more generally.

We are in agreement that decisions about the structure of the IETF are important, long-term decisions that should not be taken lightly or made hastily.

Margaret




_______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]