RE: Options for IETF administrative restructuring

Christian,

apologies for the slow response - my mailbox has been out of commission 
since Monday (crashed disk and informal recovery procedures).

--On 30. august 2004 12:26 +0100 Christian de Larrinaga 
<cdel@firsthand.net> wrote:

> Firstly congratulations to all those involved in compiling this work.
>
> I have three questions before being able to comment in more detail.
>
> 1/ Has a decision been made not to sub contract out (under formal
> agreements) the tasks currently being managed fairly informally by
> Foretec/CNRI to professional adminstration organisations?

No decisions have been made - this document lays out options for the IETF 
community, and the IESG and IAB has not made its recommendation yet.
However, I believe that everything we have seen so far indicates that the 
tasks currently being managed by Foretec/CNRI should be managed under 
formal arrangements, and that we should choose the provider of such 
services that is best for the IETF.
Staying with Foretec has the advantage that transition costs can be 
minimized; we don't have information on other possible providers yet.

That's a long way of answering "no" to your question.....

> 2/ What funding requirement is expected from ISOC and ISOC members to
> manage the IETF functions outlined?

We do not know yet. The minimum extra cost to be covered is the cost of the 
administrative director (section 3.1). There is a transition cost, and a 
cost (which may be higher or lower than the existing cost) of the new mode 
of operation. ISOC has put aside a significant chunk of money in its 2004 
budget (see the report annex B.2) to cover the cost of transition.

> 3/ Do we have an analysis of the policy implications in bringing
> responsibility for the administration of Internet Standards negotiation
> into the same body that is responsible for their oversight (via
> appointment of IAB and Trustee appeal role)?

That's what the discussion in section 4.2.3 (Scenario B) is intended to 
cover. See also the comment in section 4.5 (Scenario D).
So there has been thought applied to this topic. I don't know whether you 
consider that an "analysis" or not - this is one topic where I would like 
to get feedback from the community.

                     Harald

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf