Re: What we need done (Re: first steps (was The other parts of the report...))
avri@psg.com Mon, 13 September 2004 04:08 UTC
Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id AAA05837; Mon, 13 Sep 2004 00:08:08 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C6iD3-0006HF-VY; Mon, 13 Sep 2004 00:12:58 -0400
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C6i5y-0001RL-BL; Mon, 13 Sep 2004 00:05:38 -0400
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C6i59-0001J2-SD for ietf@megatron.ietf.org; Mon, 13 Sep 2004 00:04:48 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id AAA05708 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Mon, 13 Sep 2004 00:04:44 -0400 (EDT)
From: avri@psg.com
Received: from tla.crepundia.net ([194.71.127.149] helo=report.tla-group.com) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C6i9l-0006Ec-6M for ietf@ietf.org; Mon, 13 Sep 2004 00:09:34 -0400
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (report.tla-group.com [194.71.127.149]) by report.tla-group.com (8.12.4/8.12.4) with ESMTP id i8D3jgeq003229 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Mon, 13 Sep 2004 05:46:12 +0200
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v619)
In-Reply-To: <DE760786F29ABDCA5BCD33FB@B50854F0A9192E8EC6CDA126>
References: <20040911210653.A62C48958A@newdev.harvard.edu> <EFB15D2F62C4D0CBEC54E5A4@askvoll.hjemme.alvestrand.no> <00A7150A4512700F34111641@scan.jck.com> <DE760786F29ABDCA5BCD33FB@B50854F0A9192E8EC6CDA126>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"; format="flowed"
Message-Id: <0B233BA4-053A-11D9-95F1-000393CC2112@psg.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2004 00:04:43 -0400
To: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.619)
X-Spam-Score: 0.3 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: ffa9dfbbe7cc58b3fa6b8ae3e57b0aa3
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: What we need done (Re: first steps (was The other parts of the report...))
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: ietf-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: ietf-bounces@ietf.org
X-Spam-Score: 0.3 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: e5ba305d0e64821bf3d8bc5d3bb07228
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
On 12 sep 2004, at 16.39, Harald Tveit Alvestrand wrote: > The things that we need done in the "clerk's office" aren't actually > that novel. It's basic workplan management and document management, > for the most part. Scale and the responsiveness of participants may be > different from other organizations - but not THAT different. > I tend to agree with this. Having worked in other organizations, while some of the details may be different the overall scope of administrative work appears very similar. sure, someone would have to adapt to the IETF culture, but that is what they get paid for. Having said that, I am concerned about the amount of time left in 2004 for finding a new group to do the secretariat work by 2005. I think we need to do a proper search, assuming one hasn't already been done in parallel, receive bids, evaluate them, discuss contracts and have a transition period. I do agree with those who have argued that some aspects of the administrative function might be RFP'ed out separately in the very near future, but think that attempting to RFP the core services in time for 2005 continuity is a risk. I guess this means I support strategy 3. a. _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
- first steps (was The other parts of the report...) scott bradner
- Re: first steps (was The other parts of the repor… Harald Tveit Alvestrand
- Re: first steps (was The other parts of the repor… scott bradner
- Re: first steps (was The other parts of the repor… Margaret Wasserman
- Re: first steps (was The other parts of the repor… John C Klensin
- RE: first steps (was The other parts of the repor… Steve Crocker
- RE: first steps (was The other parts of the repor… Wijnen, Bert (Bert)
- Re: first steps (was The other parts of the repor… Carl Malamud
- What we need done (Re: first steps (was The other… Harald Tveit Alvestrand
- Re: first steps (was The other parts of the repor… John C Klensin
- Re: What we need done (Re: first steps (was The o… avri
- Re: first steps (was The other parts of the repor… Dave Crocker
- Re: first steps (was The other parts of the repor… Harald Tveit Alvestrand
- Re: first steps (was The other parts of the repor… Harald Tveit Alvestrand
- Re: first steps (was The other parts of the repor… Dave Crocker
- RE: first steps (was The other parts of the repor… graham.travers
- RE: first steps (was The other parts of the repor… graham.travers
- RE: first steps (was The other parts of the repor… Steve Crocker
- RE: first steps (was The other parts of the repor… Joel Jaeggli
- IETF 62 (was: Re: first steps) Spencer Dawkins
- Re: IETF 62 (was: Re: first steps) shogunx
- Re: IETF 62 (was: Re: first steps) Michael Richardson
- Re: IETF 62 (was: Re: first steps) Michael Richardson
- Re: IETF 62 (was: Re: first steps) Tim Chown
- Re: IETF 62 (was: Re: first steps) william(at)elan.net
- Re: IETF 62 (was: Re: first steps) Hadmut Danisch
- Re: IETF 62 (was: Re: first steps) Henrik Levkowetz
- Re: IETF 62 (was: Re: first steps) Dick St.Peters
- Re: IETF 62 Lars Eggert
- Re: IETF 62 Sam Hartman
- Re: IETF 62 Lars Eggert
- Re: IETF 62 John C Klensin
- Re: IETF 62 Lars Eggert
- Re: IETF 62 (was: Re: first steps) Mark Allman
- RE: Meeting locations (was IETF 62) Robin Uyeshiro
- Re: IETF 62 Scott Michel
- Re: IETF 62 Michael D Frisch
- Re: IETF 62 Ted Faber