Brian, On Sun, 2005-01-02 at 12:24, ext Brian E Carpenter wrote: > Jonne, > > Soininen Jonne (Nokia-NET/Helsinki) wrote: > > Hi, > > > > sorry to tune in late, but keeping up with all the mails that are going > > around I needed a vacation at the place of my in-laws... > > > > I think the issue of a yearly audit has been solved already in the past > > (Issue 721). However, I think that there is no mention of a special > > audit outside the yearly. Special audit - as I understand it - is an > > audit that is done by an auditing company _not_ being the one usually > > used in the circumstances where there is a doubt that the IAD and/or the > > IOAC have used the funds if the IASA improperly. This is a case that > > doesn't happen often, but... > > > > Normally, in a company, such audits are decided by the owners of the > > company. So, rules in which circumstances such audit is merited is > > normally not written down. However, as here is no clear owner, maybe > > such a rule should be written down. > > > > Do people understand the issue that I am raising? > > Yes Good. > > > Do people agree with > > me? > > No, because since by definition the circumstances would be special, > I don't see how we can write down a general rule. It's simply one of the > things that could happen during an appeal under section 3.4. What I was maybe more proposing was to have in writing who can order a special audit. For instance, can IAB, IESG, or the ISOC BoT order it? Cheers, Jonne. > > Brian -- Jonne Soininen Nokia Tel: +358 40 527 46 34 E-mail: jonne.soininen@xxxxxxxxx _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf