Melinda,
I was trying to avoid weighing in on this discussion.
The discussion is essentially inane, and that's (at least
part of) your point. After all, the thought that someone
might be asked to work on an ID, and then - in addition to
volunteering their time to do the work - they then need to
pay (per iteration) for the privilege of submitting it is
utterly absurd.
The whole idea of taxing volunteers is, as you said,
ghastly.
But - while we're on the subject of volunteering - your
comment that reviews are at "no cost to the IETF" isn't quite
correct. As a well-known SciFi author used to say -
"there ain't no such thing as a free lunch"
- (or TANSTAAFL). The effort to find sufficient volunteers
to review documents is not a "no cost" exercise.
--
Eric Gray
Principal Engineer
Ericsson
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Melinda Shore [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, July 31, 2007 11:02 AM
> To: Stephane Bortzmeyer; Thierry Ernst
> Cc: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: Charging I-Ds
>
> On 7/31/07 10:51 AM, "Stephane Bortzmeyer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > If an I-D is reviewed by several persons in the WG, one AD, two
> > members of IESG, etc, then, yes, it costs money but such an in-depth
> > review does not happen for random student-published I-D.
>
> There is still no cost to the IETF, since review time is volunteer
> time. The costs are for the secretariat, since someone has to extract
> the attachments or retrieve the drafts, get them into the database,
> keep the systems up and running, etc.
>
> That said, I think the idea of charging for draft publication is
> ghastly. Incentives matter, and structures that encourage more
> openness are better than structures that discourage more openness.
>
> Melinda
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ietf mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
>
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
[email protected]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
