At Wed, 1 Dec 2004 23:44:35 -0500 (EST), Scott Bradner wrote: > > lots of left over references to a seperate account Scott, Thanks for all the notes. Regarding all the places where you think we forgot to remove the word "account": there's more than one kind of account, and I think you're confusing one with another. That is: if you read section 5.1, you'll see that it still talks about "a separate set of accounts". It's not separate bank accounts anymore, but it is separate bookkeeping, as described in 5.1. Please note that Bert and I didn't cook this up on our own, it was based on a suggestion (for which we are grateful) from ISOC's Treasurer. No doubt there are some places where the phrasing has not completely caught up to this model (in particular, as I look at it now, there are a couple of instances of "deposited" that should be "credited"), but our understanding is that the community does want some visibility into the IASA's accounting and that this mechanism of divisional accounting (see the text) is a way to achieve that. So, with that out of the way: could you please let us know how many of the "leftover references" you cited still look wrong? Thanks. --Rob _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf