I think John's formulation is right > It seems to me that, realistically, the total IASA budget > consists of two parts: > > * Whatever the IAOC chooses to try to spend out of > IETF-designated cash on hand, e.g., meeting fees as well > as any targeted funds. > > * Everything else, which the IAOC would like ISOC to > come up with out of other funds or raise. > > Rather than dancing around that issue, why not make it explicit > that the request to ISOC gets submitted in two parts. For the > first, the ISOC would need really good reasons to say "no", with > the assumption going in that there are no such reasons (but I > don't think the BCP should overconstrain things). For the > second, the IAOC is expected to ask nicely with the > understanding that there might be some negotiation. my worry centers on the 2nd part - I think it would be real bad all around for the IAD to ask for the world (in ISOC funds) in public then have the ISOC board say thte the money is not there - that brings on a confrontation that could have easily been avoided if the original budget were worked out with the ISOC 'in the loop' but that said - I can live with the what is in the document since principle 3 covers the situation Scott _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf