At 4:58 PM -0500 12/21/04, Scott Bradner wrote:
> So... why is it an issue when I suggest it?
nothing special for you Bert :-)
But does your text not boil down to the same process?
it might or it might mean that a big pool of money is maintained
whatever - the bottom line is that the IASA needes to be able to
count on money being available - why not just say that?
Scott
Scott,
Your text:
5.4 Other ISOC Support
Other ISOC support shall be based on the budget process as specified
in Section 6. ISOC will periodically ensure that there are sufficient
funds available in the IASA accounts to cover anticipated
expenditures for that period within the yearly budget.
seems to me to say "ISOC checks on things periodically", and
implies "and does something about them if needed". Where Bert's
text:
5.4 Other ISOC Support
Other ISOC support shall be based on the budget process as specified
in Section 6. ISOC will periodically credit additional funds to the
IASA accounts to cover anticipated expenditures for that period
within the yearly budget.
looks to me much more like "ISOC adds funds periodically, as required
by the budget" and implies that if the funds needed are zero, it doesn't
add anything.
I agree with Bert that the upshot may well be the same, but I prefer
Bert's formulation, as it looks like it makes explicit the more critical
bit.
regards,
Ted
_______________________________________________
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
_______________________________________________
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf