On Thu, Mar 23, 2006 at 07:34:00PM -0800, Andy Bierman wrote: > Dave Crocker wrote: > >Michael StJohns wrote: > >>What I think Jordi is saying is that he wants the US sponsors to > >>subsidize the cost of the overseas meetings. At least that's what it > >>works out to be.... > > > >This view can be mapped to a classic model that would have significant > >benefits for the IETF: > > > > > >A "host" gets all sorts of marketing leverage out of the role in > >producing an IETF. > > > >There is nothing that requires that the event site management effort be > >coupled with a particular host's venue. > > > >If we moved to a model of having companies provide sponsorship funds, in > >return for which they get appropriate marketing presence, then we could > >have meeting venue management move to the sort of predictable and timely > >basis -- ie, far enough ahead of time -- that has been a concern for > >many years. > > > Amen! And maybe the meeting fees could actually go down > with enough sponsors. An additional room like the terminal > room (not out in the open) could be used. > > > Also, the IETF could maintain control of the > network if there were multiple sponsors instead > of a single host. They would not be allowed to ignore > the advice of the NOC team, and let the wireless meltdown > right off the bat. > > > > > > > > >d/ > > > > > Andy > > > _______________________________________________ > Ietf mailing list > Ietf@xxxxxxxx > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf ah yes, the IETF as a FormulaOne race car. I'll approach CocaCola & Visa for branding rights if that would help (esp for those folks denied a 770) --bill _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf