Lynn, Inline > -----Original Message----- > From: ietf-bounces@xxxxxxxx [mailto:ietf-bounces@xxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of > Lynn St.Amour > Sent: Monday, December 13, 2004 01:45 > To: ietf@xxxxxxxx > Subject: IASA BCP -02 Reserves - section 2.2 /7 and 5.6 > > > Bert, Rob, > > please find below comments on "reserves". Thanks again for > all your efforts. > > > >Section 2.2 > > > >7. The IASA shall > > work with ISOC to (?) > Mmm... it seems to me that the IASA should establish a target. Having said that, I could live with the addition. I agree that IASA and ISOC together need to work on a plan to actually build the reserve. That is actually stated later on in the sentence. > >establish a target for a reserve fund to cover normal operating > >expenses and meeting expenses in accordance with prudent planning, > >and ISOC shall work with the IASA to build up and maintain the > > s/reserve./reserve as part of ISOC's overall reserve strategy and > provisioning./ > > The changes above are to reflect the last known agreement (at least > from ISOC's perspective it was the last known :-) . Some additional > comments below. > Lynn, since this is a "principle", I would rather see harald declare consensus on it first. I think you are right, in that we do have similar text in sect 5.6 but I am still not sure it is just an editorial change that I can just make. Harald? > >5.6 Operating Reserve > > > > As an initial guideline and in normal operating circumstances, the > >IASA should have an operating reserve for its activities > >sufficient to cover 6-months of non-meeting operational expenses, > >plus twice the recent average for meeting contract guarantees. > >However, the IASA shall establish a target for a reserve fund to > >cover normal operating expenses and meeting expenses in accordance > >with prudent planning. Rather than having the IASA attempt to > >build that reserve in its separate accounts, > > I don't believe this sentence reads properly given we're following a > divisional accounting model (more appropriately called a cost center > model?) as the accounts will not be held physically separate. Not physical, I understand that. But Sect 5.1 starts off to talk about "separate set of accounts". And so this text in sect 5.6 just tries to be consistent with that. W.r.t. the "divisional" vs "cost center" coounting.... We got the text on "Divisional Accounting" and on "sepearet set of accounts" from Glenn Ricart, so what should it be. If we do make a change we need to make it consistent over the whole doc. Probably best to keep that for working out when we sit down with the accountants? > Perhaps delete that part and begin the sentence with: "the IASA looks > to ISOC to build ...." ? > ?? > >the IASA looks to ISOC to build and provide that operational > >reserve, through whatever mechanisms ISOC deems appropriate: line > >of credit, financial reserves, meeting cancellation insurance, and > >so forth. Such reserves do not appear instantaneously; the goal is > >to reach this level of reserves within 3 years after the creation > >of the IASA. Such funds shall be held in reserve for use by IASA > >for use in the event of IETF meeting cancellation or other > >unexpected fiscal emergencies. These reserves shall only be spent > >on IETF support functions. > > The penultimate sentence above seems to be redundant, and in any case > the last two sentences are not in agreement with the earlier ones > that say it may be held as a line of credit, etc. nor with the notion > that the IASA would not be holding a separate reserve (2.2 - 7 seems > to imply the same thing?). Finally, access to these reserves would > expect to follow normal IAOC and ISOC approval processes for any > budget overruns and would not automatically be available for use by > IASA in the event of meeting cancellations or other emergencies. > Maybe replace the last two sentences with some variation of "Access > to these reserves would expect to follow normal IAOC and ISOC > approval processes for any budget overruns." > I believe that the current text was quite extensively discussed in the past. I am not sure I can just go ahaead and make changes based on one person bringing it up. So I'd like to see more support on the list first. Bert > Best regards, > Lynn > > _______________________________________________ > Ietf mailing list > Ietf@xxxxxxxx > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf > _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf