Melinda, I was trying to avoid weighing in on this discussion. The discussion is essentially inane, and that's (at least part of) your point. After all, the thought that someone might be asked to work on an ID, and then - in addition to volunteering their time to do the work - they then need to pay (per iteration) for the privilege of submitting it is utterly absurd. The whole idea of taxing volunteers is, as you said, ghastly. But - while we're on the subject of volunteering - your comment that reviews are at "no cost to the IETF" isn't quite correct. As a well-known SciFi author used to say - "there ain't no such thing as a free lunch" - (or TANSTAAFL). The effort to find sufficient volunteers to review documents is not a "no cost" exercise. -- Eric Gray Principal Engineer Ericsson > -----Original Message----- > From: Melinda Shore [mailto:mshore@xxxxxxxxx] > Sent: Tuesday, July 31, 2007 11:02 AM > To: Stephane Bortzmeyer; Thierry Ernst > Cc: ietf@xxxxxxxx > Subject: Re: Charging I-Ds > > On 7/31/07 10:51 AM, "Stephane Bortzmeyer" <bortzmeyer@xxxxxx> wrote: > > If an I-D is reviewed by several persons in the WG, one AD, two > > members of IESG, etc, then, yes, it costs money but such an in-depth > > review does not happen for random student-published I-D. > > There is still no cost to the IETF, since review time is volunteer > time. The costs are for the secretariat, since someone has to extract > the attachments or retrieve the drafts, get them into the database, > keep the systems up and running, etc. > > That said, I think the idea of charging for draft publication is > ghastly. Incentives matter, and structures that encourage more > openness are better than structures that discourage more openness. > > Melinda > > > _______________________________________________ > Ietf mailing list > Ietf@xxxxxxxx > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf > _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf