On Thu, Mar 23, 2006 at 07:34:00PM -0800, Andy Bierman wrote:
> Dave Crocker wrote:
> >Michael StJohns wrote:
> >>What I think Jordi is saying is that he wants the US sponsors to
> >>subsidize the cost of the overseas meetings. At least that's what it
> >>works out to be....
> >
> >This view can be mapped to a classic model that would have significant
> >benefits for the IETF:
> >
> >
> >A "host" gets all sorts of marketing leverage out of the role in
> >producing an IETF.
> >
> >There is nothing that requires that the event site management effort be
> >coupled with a particular host's venue.
> >
> >If we moved to a model of having companies provide sponsorship funds, in
> >return for which they get appropriate marketing presence, then we could
> >have meeting venue management move to the sort of predictable and timely
> >basis -- ie, far enough ahead of time -- that has been a concern for
> >many years.
>
>
> Amen! And maybe the meeting fees could actually go down
> with enough sponsors. An additional room like the terminal
> room (not out in the open) could be used.
>
>
> Also, the IETF could maintain control of the
> network if there were multiple sponsors instead
> of a single host. They would not be allowed to ignore
> the advice of the NOC team, and let the wireless meltdown
> right off the bat.
>
>
>
> >
> >
> >d/
> >
>
>
> Andy
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ietf mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
ah yes, the IETF as a FormulaOne race car.
I'll approach CocaCola & Visa for branding rights
if that would help (esp for those folks denied a 770)
--bill
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
[email protected]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
