RE: Scenario C or Scenario O ?

> 
> Bert said:
> > From what I have seen/read sofar, my preference is to go for Scenario C. 
> > Yes, Scenario O seems somewhat simpler. 
> > Yes, Scenario O seems acceptable today.
> 
Scott answered
> just to be clear it is my opinion that
> Scenario O is significantly simpler
> and that Scenario C intruduces significant risks to the future of the
> IETF for no supportble reasons
> 
> I have seen no convincing justification from anyone to support an
> adoption of Scenario C 
> 

Besides my (wordy) response to you back on Sept 4th (or 3rd in US) 
as availabe at:
   http://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf/current/msg31057.html

Let me offer this summary:

To me it seems that starting a corporation is pretty straight forward
if I understand the report from our consultant correctly.
It seems we can do this without a huge corporate bureaucracy.
In other words: we can make this lightweight (when operational).
I understand we need to do some extra steps to get it started.

The advantages I see are:

- if done properly, this allows the IETF support function
  to be carried out by a SHARPLY FOCUSED operation.
  We won't get sidetracked into things that are non-IETF.

- if done properly, this allows for a very straight forward
  governance mechanism that is *directly* accountable to
  the IETF and where change control is clearly vested in that
  same community.  Again, the corporate solution is the
  lightweight and straightforward solution.

"Ability to focus on IETF support" is the big thing and tight 
change control is another advantage.I 

Bert

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

RE: Scenario C or Scenario O ? - I say let us go for C !