On Sun, Jul 29, 2007 at 03:58:53PM -0700, Joel Jaeggli wrote: > > ... missing the heart of the issue. Which in my opinion > is that the operation of the overhead functions that are the general > ietf infrastructure are funded out of the meeting fees which means the > amount made on the meeting has to exceed the actual costs by order of > 50%. At the sane time, the organization is if you haven't noticed > shrinking and it's character is changing. It has more professional > standards folks and fewer of the students, academics and network > operators that made it interesting to me 10 years ago. Pushing higher > costs onto potential attendees isn't likely to attract more of them. > Joel may have hit the nail on the head. Students, Academics, and Network Operators ahve all developed their own conferences that fit their own constraints. The IETF has deliberately chosen this path, with more paid staff, legal fees, and in general higher infrastructure costs - to cater to professional standards folks / corporations. And these folks can afford and expect to pay more for a well run conference that meets their needs. Adopting models that presume paid, outsourced support will only increase costs more. --bill Opinions expressed may not even be mine by the time you read them, and certainly don't reflect those of any other entity (legal or otherwise). _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf