Re: issue 794: Naming accounts

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



At 4:48 PM +0100 1/19/05, Wijnen, Bert (Bert) wrote:
Harald responds to Lynn
 > Lynn,

I actually disagree here.

 The mind-picture I think we want to establish through using "accounts" is
 "rows of numbers that can be added up to get totals" - we want to know what
 it's costing, and where the money goes.

 The mind-picture I get from "cost center" is "label applied to some group
 of activities".

 I'd have no problem with ISOC saying to IASA "we propose that we implement
 the IASA accounts through the mechanism that we have built for cost
 centers", and I think it's very appropriate that you try to check that the
 BCP contains nothing that prevents you from doing that.

 But I'd prefer for the BCP to continue using the term "accounts".


We have had a call with the accounting people from ISOC. On that call, it was explained to me (and that explanation makes sense) that in normal accounting terminology, one works with:

 - a cost center, which in our case would be the IASA cost center
 - General Ledger Accounts, which would be "accounts" within a cost
   center. So it allos us to separate out (or itemize) various types
   of cost and revenue within the IASA cost center.

Further it was made clear to me that the IAD and IAOC can arrange with
the ISOC accounting staff to define which General Ledger Accounts we
want to see. So that means IAD and IAOC can specify the level of detail
on which to itemize and keep track of cost and revenue.

Lynn, pls correct me if I have not worded things correctly yet.

I think that meets our principle for transparency.
Kurtis (from the Transition Team) also agreed on that.

So I propose that I change the wording/naming of "Divisional Accounting"
into "Cost Center Accounting" and of "accounts" into "general ledger
accounts".

Bert

Hi Bert, I still believe Harald's point is valid. We're not trying to write a document to be read only by ISOC's accountants--we're trying to write one that the IETF community both now and in the future can read and understand. I believe the right thing to do in that case is to use the general term (accounts), with specific references to general ledger accounts or Cost Center accounting as explanatory text on how the ISOC may implement this. regards, Ted Hardie

_______________________________________________

Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]