Re: Registration details for IETF 108

Michael StJohns <> Mon, 01 June 2020 17:00 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6AF993A1248 for <>; Mon, 1 Jun 2020 10:00:21 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.097
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, LOTS_OF_MONEY=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id rPp9ysT6qReX for <>; Mon, 1 Jun 2020 10:00:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2001:558:fe21:29:69:252:207:38]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 177343A1232 for <>; Mon, 1 Jun 2020 10:00:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ([]) by with ESMTP id fnP5j47tnb02AfnnNjBQCT; Mon, 01 Jun 2020 17:00:17 +0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20190202a; t=1591030817; bh=F+BA1w5ZKE5tMCv0h6NqrBtF3EkLFdQ45cg3RMC9yxE=; h=Received:Received:Subject:To:From:Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version: Content-Type; b=u/YXOvTh6Eeu37YJMjkSTyBiy/Jv3MMtZtK+F/0L8VGGpkOYmQMErbQrmf0R/ZT4q EJf12JLtTP9c1jFliq2oTKssd0LZ8JmS48nUXsOZYtBhyB9kNPCWW5S6IonQy2kLTD WZrEiM8pILU3ae+L0wk2mQfl1UIuNaYQkewzUfqKrcTQuBeV1s5j3vs5y7CWCWNzJ3 vLZ95BWh6RblIQpSBAfdK6NP6iIOg1X3tyEA+LzD6l5Md6wQru67W6MfS+AzB8hI6Y G6lfoeg3MbIrS16EBpgMoG4b9i9XPiqWQT2lLWdEkGNJMu4EHCH5+SFhdvqfhsKrnA P9XAm+n8LQjwQ==
Received: from [] ([]) by with ESMTPSA id fnnDj8wFWDXSWfnnHjOY75; Mon, 01 Jun 2020 17:00:15 +0000
X-Xfinity-VAAS: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeduhedrudefhedgleelucetufdoteggodetrfdotffvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuvehomhgtrghsthdqtfgvshhipdfqfgfvpdfpqffurfetoffkrfenuceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucenucfjughrpefuvfhfhffkffgfgggjtgfgsehtkeertddtfeejnecuhfhrohhmpefoihgthhgrvghlucfuthflohhhnhhsuceomhhsthhjohhhnhhssegtohhmtggrshhtrdhnvghtqeenucggtffrrghtthgvrhhnpeefgffgjeejtdfhvddvudduhfehffeghfelheeifeehvdejudevtefhieeiveehveenucffohhmrghinhepihgvthhfrdhorhhgnecukfhppeejuddrudeifedrudekkedrudduheenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhephhgvlhhopegludelvddrudeikedruddrudduhegnpdhinhgvthepjedurdduieefrddukeekrdduudehpdhmrghilhhfrhhomhepmhhsthhjohhhnhhssegtohhmtggrshhtrdhnvghtpdhrtghpthhtohepihgvthhfsehivghtfhdrohhrgh
X-Xfinity-VMeta: sc=0.00;st=legit
Subject: Re: Registration details for IETF 108
References: <> <> <> <> <> <> <>
From: Michael StJohns <>
Message-ID: <>
Date: Mon, 1 Jun 2020 13:00:06 -0400
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.8.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Language: en-US
Archived-At: <>
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 01 Jun 2020 17:00:21 -0000

Bob et al -

My guess is that the in-person fees were providing at least some subsidy 
for the remote attendees. There are costs to provide the infrastructure 
for recording and streaming each of the sessions (and those include the 
time of the secretariat and other staff to set things up).   My further 
guess is that we have no clue about the actual cost to provide "just 
online" even with all that happened for 107 and that the fee number they 
came up with is nothing more than a good guess which will be refined 
each time we do an on-line only meeting (plus all of the 100+ virtual 
interim/non-interim WG sessions we're still having that have to be paid 
for somehow).

I think the LLC did a good job in balancing conflicting needs by 
providing the possibility of fee waivers.   To be honest, I wish the fee 
waiver were only partial as I think having some skin in the game from 
all of us is important.  I don't remember who said it, but "People don't 
value things they get for free" seems somewhat applicable.

Later, Mike

On 6/1/2020 11:39 AM, Bob Hinden wrote:
> Jason,
> I think the issue here is that we are now charging for something we didn’t before.  That is, we allowed remote participation at IETF meetings without a fee unto and including IETF 107.   As Brian points out, this change in policy was done with out any discussion.
> I also note that everything we do in the IETF has a cost to it.  Every email, internet draft, submission to the IESG, working group charter, IETF tool, etc., etc.  We can see all these costs in the IETF LLC budget.    None of it is free.
> The question is which of these do we charge for?    According the budget at:
> the non-meeting operating expenses are about $5.1 million per year.   Even the meeting revenue (including registration fees) doesn’t cover all of the meeting expenses.   That is, $3.8M revenue vs. $4.1M costs.
> How do we decide what to charge for?   What is the policy?
> Also, what does the budget look like without face to face meetings?
> Bob