RE: Scenario O Re: Upcoming: further thoughts on where from here

"Joel M. Halpern" <joel@stevecrocker.com> Thu, 23 September 2004 15:42 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 LAA24115; Thu, 23 Sep 2004 11:42:00 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CAVqC-0002Mi-Ry; Thu, 23 Sep 2004 11:49:06 -0400
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1CAVQl-0007Se-F9; Thu, 23 Sep 2004 11:22:47 -0400
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1CAVOE-0006iM-GG for ietf@megatron.ietf.org; Thu, 23 Sep 2004 11:20:10 -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 LAA22136 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Thu, 23 Sep 2004 11:20:07 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ns.execdsl.net ([208.184.15.238] helo=EXECDSL.COM) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CAVUy-0001pZ-Kx for ietf@ietf.org; Thu, 23 Sep 2004 11:27:12 -0400
Received: from [64.254.114.114] (HELO JLaptop.stevecrocker.com) by EXECDSL.COM (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.3) with ESMTP id 7624514 for ietf@ietf.org; Thu, 23 Sep 2004 11:20:04 -0400
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.0.20040923111738.02347060@localhost>
X-Sender: joel@stevecrocker.com@localhost
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Thu, 23 Sep 2004 11:19:27 -0400
To: ietf@ietf.org
From: "Joel M. Halpern" <joel@stevecrocker.com>
In-Reply-To: <7D5D48D2CAA3D84C813F5B154F43B15503C79CC7@nl0006exch001u.nl .lucent.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed"
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 4d87d2aa806f79fed918a62e834505ca
Subject: RE: Scenario O Re: Upcoming: further thoughts on where from here
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: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 5a9a1bd6c2d06a21d748b7d0070ddcb8

Yes, in minor comment 1 I meant the IASA bank account(s) or fund 
account(s), not the IASF accounts.  (I believe that the scenario C document 
avoid this particular pitfall, since it did not need to talk about 
segregation of funds.)

Sorry to mix names.

Yours,
Joel

At 05:12 PM 9/23/2004 +0200, Wijnen, Bert (Bert) wrote:
>Joel... just to be clear...
>I suspect that in the below you meant
>     IASA (IETF Administrative Support Activity)
>     which is defined in Scenario O
>and not
>     IASF (IETF Administartive Support Foundation)
>     which is defined in Scenario C
>
>Bert
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Joel M. Halpern [mailto:joel@stevecrocker.com]
> > Sent: Thursday, September 23, 2004 16:35
> > To: ietf@ietf.org
> > Subject: Re: Scenario O Re: Upcoming: further thoughts on where from
> > here
> >
> >
> > I think that this (scenario 0) is the right approach to
> > follow.  It appears
> > to me to be the lowest risk path consistent with the needs
> > that have been
> > identified.
> >
> >
> > Two minor comments:
> > 1) The references to "the IASF bank account" should probably be relaxed to
> > "IASF fund accounts" or "IASF accounts".  As written, it presumes that
> > there is exactly one bank account, and that separation of funds is by bank
> > control.  While the later is probably a good idea, I don't think this BCP
> > is the place to call that out.  And the exact number of bank accounts used
> > by IASF (0, 1, 5, or ...) is not a concern for this BCP.
> >
> > 2) The schedule calls for seating the IAOC on January 15, and hiring the
> > IAD by the end of January.  Given that the search committee can not be
> > appointed until the board is seated, it seems that item is either an
> > impossible schedule or assumes facts not in evidence.
> >
> > Yours,
> > Joel M. Halpern


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