--On 12. desember 2004 20:33 -0500 Scott Bradner <sob@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
open from last version
This does not seem to admit to the possibility that the ISOC board might say 'wait a minute - you are asking for twice as much money as you got last year - we need to work with you to figure out a funding level that the ISOC can support' - i.e. it is not reasonable to assume that the ISOC BoT can carry out the above mentioned fiduciary responsibility without being able to engage in a dialogue over budget amounts.
An open question in my mind is the degree of detail and itemization that the ISOC BoT needs to have to carry out the fiduciary responsibility i.e. it seems like the ISOC might have a hard time with its auditors if what it approved is just a line item for the IETF expenditures with no breakdown. But on the other hand we do not want the ISOC BoT to be arguing over how many copies of the newcomer's presentation handouts get made. We need to figure out a reasonable process that permits the ISOC to understand what the money is going for, be able to suggest alternatives if they might be more efficient, and have an ability to have input to the review of RFP responses without limiting the ability and authority of the IAD/IAHC to make the final decisions (as long as they stay within a budget)
basically - no discussion between the ISOC and the IAD is called for in putting the budget together - that seems to be an error (if the assumption is that the ISOC reps on the IASA will be the dhisussion path then it would be good to state that - it is better to be clear than to have people in the future assume that the ISOC BoT just gets to approve a proposed IETF budget rather than think about it and teh implications for ISOC's overall budget
I replied on November 22 (same reply as last message):
I don't understand your comment - given that the timeline shown in the BCP has the ISOC BoT working with the IAD over the budget for 4-5 months (July to November/December), how can you think that there will not be a dialogue over that period of time?
This applies to multiple places in your comments - you seem to have read "dialogue is not explicitly mentioned" as "no dialogue is allowed to take place", and I simply can't understand how you came to that reading.
Remember also that the ISOC President is part of the IAOC. There will ALWAYS be channels for making suggestions.
Harald
_______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf