Re: [Netrqmts] [Inform] Meeting Network Costs

Bob Hinden <> Thu, 20 June 2019 22:03 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2C3DB120230; Thu, 20 Jun 2019 15:03:14 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id HRE9SOxjlmE6; Thu, 20 Jun 2019 15:03:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::434]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C5A91120224; Thu, 20 Jun 2019 15:03:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with SMTP id x4so4548744wrt.6; Thu, 20 Jun 2019 15:03:11 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=l6uHfSsOc5As9HpDDKKOT0YfBU0Ve3RsnWX+7LSMJdY=; b=YzR2jnEaX7cK/UXXgEA8wuza+vS3CJ/aR6lTZARgUfpjJXnr/MQ8i+YRVxxtx6xAf5 R0naxNDA39BvqsSHQeSEEaTOj3Voeht+WJRv9nIaWlEZGErUoR1qn64Czyze1VhaJLg3 InysN2gnbG5Iw3Bm69Kdh/eKtJdfiRN3Eq7JEyJxJeQgbrm+EmVJAut+ghzJqBAsptX/ 2HtL/tECVl+SaU9pP5eMZf7tV7L1eUL8lf9ghCZgCu2DmUbYSKkzeY2zLxqUCY/a8Gjm PyLT5uYFH2n9FkxZd1LJx3OB3gCrE0FcX6dE/9TXoqma8g/r8vzl5JWHWzY3sZj/49KV ZGAQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=l6uHfSsOc5As9HpDDKKOT0YfBU0Ve3RsnWX+7LSMJdY=; b=uDVxMZtX+pCKXUhJY764AGEUBIuyp1BJUdqpqYYUaaG0zU2+crveNBvYNvRZXM0oIQ 9/z6zAPy+9sd64i/GzFiSIBf/A660Exm64fnFkyGw5JcTUdQs5LgixZvm96ezNMbAtdo 8XKtS8JlKfsh7xN5yCtbRJlpG7wrBdAg7/FoZDjJycSzXz5dk6JIf8BnCJd8PX9zimxU wJPah2ybrKfLBGOM8S01x9mqHdjNpUYIg9fKUqHvIlQGwMGgBrIEYXUfTXhTzP+giXRs zTHq2n0douBtv/DBTVJS1eepuXWqB7Qew8tqTep2n5mM38HSl5DUI0UYzWWQERroeM8B zIOw==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAVlmzAYHGStCJgDcZx252Q1e6COVZO2q7KrhxBS/KREaShEVqg7 ze5OYwBJg9Tt6EFPTZ7RrLzYjfbu
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqydvl12yCjdt7LOQy43hgsftbDJRQHMJP8jlMv8JPcAMEklKIc6OS3NruPUChpYM20xS7OzFQ==
X-Received: by 2002:a5d:4703:: with SMTP id y3mr34967890wrq.35.1561068189967; Thu, 20 Jun 2019 15:03:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ?IPv6:2601:647:5a00:ef0b:1d91:c91e:78fe:34be? ([2601:647:5a00:ef0b:1d91:c91e:78fe:34be]) by with ESMTPSA id l16sm645633wrw.42.2019. (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 20 Jun 2019 15:03:08 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 12.4 \(3445.104.11\))
From: Bob Hinden <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2019 15:03:03 -0700
Cc: Bob Hinden <>, Jason Livingood <>, "" <>, Alexa Morris <>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <>
References: <> <> <>
To: Portia Danley <>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.104.11)
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [Netrqmts] [Inform] Meeting Network Costs
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF Meeting Network Requirements <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2019 22:03:14 -0000


Thanks for the quick response.


> On Jun 20, 2019, at 2:17 PM, Portia Wenze-Danley <> wrote:
> Hi Bob,
> Comments below.
> ________________________________
>> If I understand it correctly, “in kind” means services donated to the IETF.   Is that correct?  If so, it’s not an actual cost.  
> 	[pwd] We track “in kind” costs on our budget because although we did not come out of pocket for the expense, we are aware of the costs if a cash outlay is needed.  

Understood, but relevant to looking at the costs of the network at IETF meetings it is not an actual cost.   It’s accounting.   If we loose these donations of time and circuits, it will turn into real costs.

>> Remote Participation Services are not a direct NOC expense.   It is to provide service to remote IETF participants.  Why is it included here?
> 	[pwd] The benefit of Remote Participation Services extends beyond that to remote participants.  Meetecho is an integral part of the NOC as they also record all of the working groups, plenary and related official IETF sessions.  There is a lot that goes into remote participation support including managing the remote queue to raise hands and inject video and audio into the room.  They also monitor the integrated Jabber room.  They work with the NOC as a team.

Let me try again, it’s not part of NOC Support, it’s part of IETF meeting support.   The title of this sheet is “NOC Expenses”.   Even if we were to find a different way provide a network at IETF meetings (for example, use the hotel network), we would still need to provide these meeting services.  It’s not a NOC expense.


>>> On Jun 20, 2019, at 1:14 PM, Livingood, Jason <> wrote:
>>> Hi – In preparation for the BoF at IETF-105, I wanted to share what the LLC’s costs look like (from Portia). This isn’t necessarily to suggest a need to make cuts – so please do **NOT** interpret it in that way! Rather, it is to give a sense of what the costs really are for accommodating our requirements; our direct costs. The indirect costs may be thought of as venues that cannot accommodate our requirements (so Alexa may have some sense of that in advance of the BoF).
>>> Portia is the expert on these costs, and so if you have any questions then she’s the right person to respond.
>>> Thanks!
>>> Jason
>>> <NOC_Expenses_102-104.pdf>-- 
>>> Netrqmts mailing list