Re: Anotherj RFP without IETF community input (was: Re: RFP for Remote Participation Services Specifications Development)

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

 



On Oct 20, 2011, at 3:21 PM, Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote:

One thing to consider is charging for this service

I have no problem paying some fee to the IETF in order to get better remote participation capability when I am unable to travel to the location chosen.

I would much rather pay $200-$300 to have good remote attendance capability (video etc.) than get by on 'free'.

This would be assuming that there would be some markup on the remote attendance cost to finance the secretariat etc.

I disagree. If the remote participation service is high quality, it should require the same registration fee structure as on-site participation.

Thanks,
Acee



This is not something I would have suggested until recently because the broadband connectivity has not been up to it until very recently.


On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 12:29 PM, Randy Bush <randy@xxxxxxx<mailto:randy@xxxxxxx>> wrote:
i read the message from ray as an rfp for someone to write the rfp for
remote services.  aside from being a very amusing bureaucratic layer
cake, this would not seem to need a lot of experience with remote
access, but rather good ears and a taste for the bureaucracy and discord
the ietf has become.

randy



--
Website: http://hallambaker.com/


_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf


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