Re: Appointment of a Transport Area Director

Joe Touch <touch@isi.edu> Wed, 06 March 2013 20:15 UTC

Return-Path: <touch@isi.edu>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0E4C911E8103 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 6 Mar 2013 12:15:34 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -103.27
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.27 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.671, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id DXXRJe9nizLj for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 6 Mar 2013 12:15:33 -0800 (PST)
Received: from vapor.isi.edu (vapor.isi.edu [128.9.64.64]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 81A4311E8100 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 6 Mar 2013 12:15:33 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.1.96] (pool-71-105-87-221.lsanca.dsl-w.verizon.net [71.105.87.221]) (authenticated bits=0) by vapor.isi.edu (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id r26KEQY1016149 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 6 Mar 2013 12:14:36 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <5137A3A3.6070809@isi.edu>
Date: Wed, 06 Mar 2013 12:14:27 -0800
From: Joe Touch <touch@isi.edu>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.2; WOW64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130215 Thunderbird/17.0.3
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Henning Schulzrinne <hgs@cs.columbia.edu>
Subject: Re: Appointment of a Transport Area Director
References: <21B86E13-B8DA-4119-BBB1-B5EE6D2B5C1D@ietf.org> <3CB8992B-212A-4776-95FE-71CA1E382FFF@standardstrack.com> <513376DB.7000200@dcrocker.net> <E22ACC99-B465-4769-8B59-BB98A7BA93DF@gmx.net> <79E77523-3D92-4CE9-8689-483D416794EF@standardstrack.com> <D4D47BCFFE5A004F95D707546AC0D7E91F780D2F@SACEXCMBX01-PRD.hq.netapp.com> <071C6ED7-352C-4E74-A483-F5E7A3270FA5@gmail.com> <C726E531-57DC-4C42-9053-1394983126D6@vigilsec.com> <5134D5A0.4050209@gmail.com> <tsllia3m5lh.fsf@mit.edu> <5134F720.5010507@cisco.com> <tsl1ubvlywt.fsf@mit.edu> <CAHBDyN6AM-_b2HMrmmQQVuhxFc-_Rfpfg0=r38mkcJ4zqoJeTw@mail.gmail.com> <tslr4julxmh.fsf@mit.edu> <1C1C0842-BF6A-4A3F-A312-35CF0A994793@lilacglade.org> <BDCCFB12-1F2C-44BD-867A-92E5745F3D39@vigilsec.com> <CAP8yD=tnx0FjRNDro1jzWF_MzDQqRZtNGQU_W0ZzwxLBteTbpQ@mail.gmail.com> <D4D47BCFFE5A004F95D707546AC0D7E91F78757D@SACEXCMBX01-PRD.hq.netapp.com> <51362152.8000507@dcrocker.net> <C5945B21-D3EF-47A8-AB56-A2F63AA43DE5@cs.columbia.edu>
In-Reply-To: <C5945B21-D3EF-47A8-AB56-A2F63AA43DE5@cs.columbia.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-ISI-4-43-8-MailScanner: Found to be clean
X-MailScanner-From: touch@isi.edu
Cc: dcrocker@bbiw.net, IETF discussion list <ietf@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 06 Mar 2013 20:15:34 -0000

On 3/5/2013 2:52 PM, Henning Schulzrinne wrote:
> While the IETF is unique in many ways, the staff-volunteer issue
> isn't all that unique. Many organizations face this. As one example,
> organizations like IEEE and ACM struggle with this. (For example,
> they have, over the years, delegated many functions in conference
> management that used to be done by volunteers to paid staff.) Even
> government regulatory bodies operate with a mixture of volunteer
> labor (advisory councils) and paid staff. The solution space seems
> rather constrained:
...
> (2) Pay the person a salary while on leave from their home
> institution/employer. As an example, NSF and DARPA do this for their
> program managers. The employer still takes a hit and there's some risk
> to the person that they won't get their job back, but it allows a larger
> number of individuals to participate.

In the US government version of this (IPA), the person remains 
officially an employee of their home institution; it's a grant/contract 
to the home institution.

So I would break this into two sub-categories:

	a) pay the person while "on leave"

	b) pay the home institution for the person's work as a
	contract/grant
		(this is closer to how the NSF, DARPA, and other
		US govt visiting positions work)

They work out quite differently; the latter means you're paying 
overhead, and can be quite costly but might be more attractive.

Joe