At 10:16 AM -0500 11/28/04, John C Klensin wrote:
Hi.
As we try to raise other things back to the level of principles, I want to address one that seems to underlie some of the thinking that has led to what I believe to be too-specific, and probably misguided, provisions in the draft.
snip...
(2) Agreements.
Let me argue, as others have, for principles here, not micromanagement specifics. I think Margaret's outline is a little too abstract, but there is a middle ground between it and talking about bank accounts. I think Bernard's idea/ analogy to pre-nuptial agreements is probably exactly right,
This is something ISOC believes could be quite helpful as well.
and I believe that we need to get competent professional advice on how one of those should be structured and what needs to be in it ...
As a way of moving forward, I'd like to suggest the pre-nuptial be something the IASA Transition Team looks into as a priority, and then reports back to the community. This would set context for the next level of discussions below.
not start slipping "bank account" or equivalent provisions into a BCP based on the financial administration experience of the IESG and IAB. Even from the standpoint of my limited knowledge in the area, there is a huge difference between asking for "separation of funds" and "sound accounting and administrative practices" or even "escrow arrangements" and getting down to bank accounts and lengths of times funds can be held.
_______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf