Re: IESG's support

"Vinton G. Cerf" <0001050002@mcimail.com> Thu, 06 April 1995 01:53 UTC

Received: from ietf.nri.reston.va.us by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa09916; 5 Apr 95 21:53 EDT
Received: from CNRI.Reston.VA.US by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa09912; 5 Apr 95 21:53 EDT
Received: from ietf.cnri.reston.va.us by CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa18509; 5 Apr 95 21:53 EDT
Received: from ietf.nri.reston.va.us by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa09903; 5 Apr 95 21:53 EDT
Received: from CNRI.Reston.VA.US by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa09899; 5 Apr 95 21:53 EDT
Received: from dg02sg.mcimail.com by CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa18499; 5 Apr 95 21:53 EDT
Received: from mailgate.mcimail.com (mailgate.mcimail.com [166.38.40.3]) by dg02sg.mcimail.com (8.6.10/8.6.10) with SMTP id BAA28345; Thu, 6 Apr 1995 01:53:03 GMT
Received: from mcimail.com by mailgate.mcimail.com id aa10654; 6 Apr 95 1:48 WET
Date: Wed, 5 Apr 95 20:48 EST
X-Orig-Sender: iesg-request@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US
Sender: ietf-archive-request@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US
From: "Vinton G. Cerf" <0001050002@mcimail.com>
To: pvm <pvm@isi.edu>
Cc: bev dains <bdains@linus.isoc.org>, isoc trustees <isoc-trustees@isoc.org>, iesg <iesg@CNRI.Reston.VA.US>
Subject: Re: IESG's support
Message-Id: <04950406014840/0001050002NA4EM@MCIMAIL.COM>

>Date:     Wed Apr 5, 1995 08:51 pm EDT
>Source-Date: Wed, 05 Apr 95 17:50:51 PDT
>From:     pvm
>          EMS: INTERNET / MCI ID: 376-5414
>          MBX: pvm@isi.edu
> 
>TO:     * Vinton G. Cerf / MCI ID: 105-0002
>CC:       bev dains
>          EMS: INTERNET / MCI ID: 376-5414
>          MBX: bdains@linus.isoc.org
>CC:       isoc trustees
>          EMS: INTERNET / MCI ID: 376-5414
>          MBX: isoc-trustees@isoc.org
>CC:       iesg
>          EMS: INTERNET / MCI ID: 376-5414
>          MBX: iesg@cnri.reston.va.us
>Subject:  Re: IESG's support
>Message-Id: 53950406005135/0003765414DC6EM
>Source-Msg-Id: <199504060050.AA03994@zephyr.isi.edu>
> 
>Vint,
>
>> 2. Additional funds TBD for other work, and would most likely
>>    be allocated based on a budget developed with IESG. 
>
>It would be easiest if we could at least have a range.  I have heard
>$250K mentioned, but it has never been clear to me if that meant
>legitimate requests up to that point would be honored.
>
>With regard to disbursement, I would suggest the trustees give the
>$250K checkbook to one person empowered to act on proposals within the
>financial ceilings and consistent with the goals outlined.
>
If you mean literally give a checkbook, I'd have to defer to
our accountant about whether that works for us - the alternative
is to have invoices come to ISOC for payment so that we have the
proper audit controls (the auditors usually require that persons
authorizing payments are NOT the ones actually signing checks).
Also, ISOC has some limits on amounts that can be disbursed
(two signatures on amounts $10K and up).

As to the maximum amount, the $250K figure has been proposed but
not yet ratified by the trustees and I suspect you'd help the
process along if we had a set of budgeted items that lay out
the nature of the proposed expenditures.


>> 7. Support for "hostless" IETF meetings? Can you say a bit more
>>    about what that actually might mean? If at INET, it sounds as  
>>    if it might be for space, and perhaps audio-visual equipment,
>>    and consumables? Are these "hostless" meetings intended to be
>>    the same scale and structure at the conventional three meetings
>>    such as the Danvers one, or is this something more informal
>>    and smaller? Just not sure how to respond without a more 
>>    complete understanding of what is intended.
>
>The IETF has grown to the point where it is difficult to find sponsors
>willing to shell out the $50K-100K it takes to do an IETF meeting.
>Hence, we have arrived at the point where we may need to purchase
>multicast and/or terminal room services.  Larry and I have proposed a
>joint meeting with INET 96 and IETF, where this may be necessary
>because there is no IETF host.  I would think this particularly easy
>for the ISOC, since we would just be moving some money from one ISOC
>pocket to another.
>
>I have to tell you that while meeting fee increases will eventually
>cover this, I would really expect ISOC would be willing to address the
>cash flow crunch.  If not, please tell me now.

This certainly strikes me as well within the framework of support
that has been discussed by the trustees in the past. 

Vint

>
>paul
>
>USC/Information Sciences Institute      phone: 310-822-1511 x285
>4676 Admiralty Way, Marina del Rey, CA  fax:   310-823-6714
>90292