Re: [admin-discuss] [IAB] Consultation on IETF Administrative Strategic Plan 2023

"Mirja Kuehlewind (IETF)" <ietf@kuehlewind.net> Fri, 17 November 2023 12:44 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf@kuehlewind.net>
X-Original-To: admin-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: admin-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F346EC151075; Fri, 17 Nov 2023 04:44:33 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.906
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.906 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, LOTS_OF_MONEY=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id qxMJqH65bbQu; Fri, 17 Nov 2023 04:44:31 -0800 (PST)
Received: from wp513.webpack.hosteurope.de (wp513.webpack.hosteurope.de [80.237.130.35]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange ECDHE (P-256) server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 622D5C14F75F; Fri, 17 Nov 2023 04:44:31 -0800 (PST)
Received: from dslb-002-202-177-141.002.202.pools.vodafone-ip.de ([2.202.177.141] helo=smtpclient.apple); authenticated by wp513.webpack.hosteurope.de running ExIM with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) id 1r3yCz-0006Pv-RJ; Fri, 17 Nov 2023 13:44:29 +0100
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 16.0 \(3731.700.6\))
From: "Mirja Kuehlewind (IETF)" <ietf@kuehlewind.net>
In-Reply-To: <B027E90F-B61D-46A7-BAB9-0AF19504EBC4@comcast.com>
Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2023 13:44:18 +0100
Cc: Mirja Kuehlewind <mirja.kuehlewind=40ericsson.com@dmarc.ietf.org>, IETF Executive Director <exec-director@ietf.org>, "admin-discuss@ietf.org" <admin-discuss@ietf.org>, "iesg@ietf.org" <iesg@ietf.org>, IAB <iab@iab.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <2A8E3B8B-2DC9-4F82-8B4D-3873A809337E@kuehlewind.net>
References: <B027E90F-B61D-46A7-BAB9-0AF19504EBC4@comcast.com>
To: "Livingood, Jason" <jason_livingood=40comcast.com@dmarc.ietf.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3731.700.6)
X-bounce-key: webpack.hosteurope.de;ietf@kuehlewind.net;1700225071;ab1ba155;
X-HE-SMSGID: 1r3yCz-0006Pv-RJ
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/admin-discuss/7GsKGYPfQ72YfstN1TawPBwlH6U>
Subject: Re: [admin-discuss] [IAB] Consultation on IETF Administrative Strategic Plan 2023
X-BeenThere: admin-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion list for IETF LLC administrative issues <admin-discuss.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/admin-discuss>, <mailto:admin-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/admin-discuss/>
List-Post: <mailto:admin-discuss@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:admin-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/admin-discuss>, <mailto:admin-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2023 12:44:34 -0000

I don’t think this is only about getting more or even explicit funding and saying sorry we don’t have enough funding, so we can’t really consider this a goal it not appropriate from my point of view. The LLC introduced the remote fee at the beginning of the pandemic for financial reason which I think were well accepted at that time. Then we the pandemic was over the LlC said they cannot remove the fee for financial reasons which is already failure for the LLC in my view. Yes, costs have increased for remote participation because we have improved it but costs have increased for everything and improving remote participation should have been an important goals even without the pandemic. The LLC has to manage costs and therefore this situation was accepted, however, the LLC  has room for decision where to invest the money we have and I don’t see that free remote participation is even considered as a goal in that financial distribution of the budget. It's about priorities and I personally don’t see them reflect the strong statement made by the LLC.

Mirja




> On 16. Nov 2023, at 14:48, Livingood, Jason <jason_livingood=40comcast.com@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:
> 
> On 11/15/23, 17:10, "admin-discuss on behalf of Mirja Kuehlewind" wrote:
> 
> Thanks for the detailed feedback; that is what these consultations are intended to elicit. :-)
> 
>> 5. The long-term aspirational goal is for all participation in the IETF to be free, including IETF Meetings.
>> I don't see this reflected in the strategic plan. I don't know what you mean by aspirational, but I hope it doesn't mean that you don't take it seriously. However, I think a strategic plan needs to reflect these long-term goals. 
> 
> Funding is in the plan, page 3, goal 4 - as well as page 7. It is also on slide 14 of the LLC presentation at IETF-118 as item 2 (https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/118/materials/slides-118-ietf-sessb-ietf-118-ietf-llc-briefing). I was also asked about this at the IETF-118 plenary and noted it remains an important goal. I do not know how else to say that raising more funds is extremely important and a key goal.
> 
> FWIW, in the 2024 budget, we estimate meeting registration fees at $1.9M. We are eager to find new sponsors for these (and other) sorts of things. A sponsor could for example donate that money and make registration free or nearly free for all. We are trying to focus not just on the desire for this to happen but to find people/organizations that might be willing to make those donations. If you have any suggestions on possible donors or other fundraising ideas, please let us know! :-)
> 
> Jason
> 
> 
> 
>