Re: [Iasa20] Benjamin Kaduk's No Objection on draft-ietf-iasa2-rfc4071bis-09: (with COMMENT)

> On Apr 11, 2019, at 1:28 PM, Benjamin Kaduk <kaduk@mit.edu> wrote:
> 
> On Thu, Apr 11, 2019 at 10:25:00AM -0700, Ted Hardie wrote:
>> Howdy,
>> 
>> On Thu, Apr 11, 2019 at 8:48 AM Joseph Lorenzo Hall <joe@cdt.org> wrote:
>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Thu, Apr 11, 2019 at 11:05 AM Joseph Lorenzo Hall <joe@cdt.org> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Section 7.7
>>>>> 
>>>>>   The IETF LLC exists to support the IETF, IAB, and IRTF.  Therefore,
>>>>>   the IETF LLC's funding and all revenues, in-kind contributions, and
>>>>>   other income that comprise that funding shall be used solely to
>>>>>   support activities related to the IETF, IAB, IRTF, and RFC Editor,
>>>>>   and for no other purposes.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Why are the lists in the first and second sentences different?
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Because the RFC Editor is contracted through the IAB, but that somewhere
>>>> in the WG discussion it felt important to call out in the second list. I
>>>> don't think we can just add the RFC Editor to the first list... but we
>>>> could do something like this: "The IETF LLC exists to support the IETF,
>>>> IRTF, and IAB (through which the RFC Editor receives support)."
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> Mirja pointed out correctly that the RFC Editor is contracted by the LLC,
>>> so I am wrong here. best, Joe
>>> 
>> 
>> It's a bit more complicated than that, but since we are creating a 6635bis,
>> maybe leave this topic to the that?
> 
> To be clear, I'm not insisting on a change here, and just wondered if the
> lists were supposed to be synchronized (or not).

As noted in the other thread, the RFC Editor is mentioned in places related to the budget/finances because (I think) the WG wanted it written down that the LLC budget would account for the expense associated with the RFC Editor.

Alissa

> 
> -Ben
> 
> _______________________________________________
> iasa20 mailing list
> iasa20@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iasa20