IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [91attendees] IETF Fee increase alternatives

"Eggert, Lars" <lars@netapp.com> Fri, 14 November 2014 21:21 UTC

Return-Path: <lars@netapp.com>
X-Original-To: 91attendees@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: 91attendees@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DBAD91ACD49 for <91attendees@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 14 Nov 2014 13:21:35 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7.496
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.496 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.594, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id V7LS8yaKH128 for <91attendees@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 14 Nov 2014 13:21:34 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mx12.netapp.com (mx12.netapp.com [216.240.18.77]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7BCA81ACD3E for <91attendees@ietf.org>; Fri, 14 Nov 2014 13:21:34 -0800 (PST)
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.07,387,1413270000"; d="scan'208";a="210453803"
Received: from hioexcmbx05-prd.hq.netapp.com ([10.122.105.38]) by mx12-out.netapp.com with ESMTP; 14 Nov 2014 13:21:32 -0800
Received: from HIOEXCMBX07-PRD.hq.netapp.com (10.122.105.40) by hioexcmbx05-prd.hq.netapp.com (10.122.105.38) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.995.29; Fri, 14 Nov 2014 13:21:30 -0800
Received: from HIOEXCMBX07-PRD.hq.netapp.com ([::1]) by hioexcmbx07-prd.hq.netapp.com ([fe80::b4c7:ccf8:2c6c:3d39%21]) with mapi id 15.00.0995.031; Fri, 14 Nov 2014 13:21:31 -0800
From: "Eggert, Lars" <lars@netapp.com>
To: "DRAGE, Keith (Keith)" <keith.drage@alcatel-lucent.com>
Thread-Topic: [91attendees] IETF Fee increase alternatives
Thread-Index: AQHP/7+BPq5XzXC6JUGZQdZ0JUl6JZxgDuGAgADsuACAAA6SgIAAC4aAgAAM5ACAAAENgIAAAM2AgAAEGAA=
Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2014 21:21:30 +0000
Message-ID: <636AF99A-177F-49AD-A94B-298D4DBA932A@netapp.com>
References: <CB79E3A1-A560-41A3-90CF-E1302AC6997E@bangj.com> <F4CB1B4F-5681-47B8-B522-2C1CFE8989F6@gmail.com> <F96AFD65-DE2A-4A5A-B058-D0B96D96260F@puck.nether.net> <546658E3.2040500@rrbone.net> <1EBC33C7-E093-4166-AA06-95B030AC99C7@cisco.com> <8DE7E39C-5D9E-4D08-BD91-2188D23A0E8D@gmail.com> <20141114210358.GJ3008@mx1.yitter.info> <949EF20990823C4C85C18D59AA11AD8B27B7BD@FR712WXCHMBA11.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com>
In-Reply-To: <949EF20990823C4C85C18D59AA11AD8B27B7BD@FR712WXCHMBA11.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-mailer: Apple Mail (2.1990.1)
x-originating-ip: [10.120.60.36]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <AEC4F67C9B29174DA6C69FAE015C979E@hq.netapp.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/91attendees/o4_2tFFc0v-hd1XM7vTHmGNWKyY
Cc: "91attendees@ietf.org" <91attendees@ietf.org>, Andrew Sullivan <ajs@anvilwalrusden.com>
Subject: Re: [91attendees] IETF Fee increase alternatives
X-BeenThere: 91attendees@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Mailing list of IETF 91 attendees that have opted in on this list." <91attendees.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/91attendees>, <mailto:91attendees-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/91attendees/>
List-Post: <mailto:91attendees@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:91attendees-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/91attendees>, <mailto:91attendees-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2014 21:21:36 -0000

On 2014-11-14, at 11:06, DRAGE, Keith (Keith) <keith.drage@alcatel-lucent.com> wrote:
> The route for donations already exist through becoming an ISOC sponsor.
> https://www.internetsociety.org/form/donation

Do you know if it is possible to indicate that a donation to ISOC should fully benefit the IETF? As compared to ending up in their overall budget?

Lars

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email