watch list can work, although in
this case they were a little late.
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20040922/D858EV280.html
Regards,
MDF
Quoting Scott Michel [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Sat, 18 Sep 2004 09:34:17 +0200, Lars Eggert
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
based on your signature, you're presumably
Scott,
some meta-thoughts.
--On 21. september 2004 20:33 -0400 scott bradner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The Scenario C document says that there are 3 prerequisites required
before the option of a corporation can be considered viable at all
1/ IETF consensus on the plan
2/ ISOC
--On 21. september 2004 23:50 -0400 John C Klensin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
(time to change the subject line enough to do some
differentiation)
good principle..
as I said on another thread, I think we should take competent tax advisor's
advise on whether or not we can achieve this, and how
Harald opines:
re: 1/ Considering the level of participation in this discussion on the
IETF list I do not see how one could assert that there was IETF
consensus without an explicit discussion at an IETF plenary - I do not
think that just issuing a last call (as envisioned by the Scenario
Leslie and Harald somewhat challenged me in private to review
Scenario O more deeply, to indicate the bits of it that may need
more work - since otherwise we might miss showstoppers.
So I have sone so, below, but with the proviso that this
is the scenario I prefer - so my comments should be taken
For Release: September 15, 2004
FTC, NIST to Host E-mail Authentication Summit
Adoption of Technology Could Help Thwart Spam
The Federal Trade Commission and National Institute of
Standards and Technology (NIST) will co-host a two-day
summit November 9-10 to explore the development and
deployment
--On Wednesday, 22 September, 2004 05:59 +0200 Harald Tveit
Alvestrand [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
...
re: 3/ Of course, there can be no assurance that a
corporation will be tax exempt unless 1/ it already is, or 2/
the IRS rules that it is. Scenario O covers the 1st case
since the ISOC is
--On Wednesday, 22 September, 2004 05:59 +0200 Harald Tveit
Alvestrand [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
...
re: 3/ Of course, there can be no assurance that a
corporation will be tax exempt unless 1/ it already is, or 2/
the IRS rules that it is. Scenario O covers the 1st case
since the ISOC is
On Wednesday, September 22, 2004 05:59:02 +0200 Harald Tveit Alvestrand
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Being a bit facetious here, the only way to be sure the sun will rise in
the morning is to wait for it to show up. If we get an organizational
charter that a tax attorney is willing to assure us is
On Wed, 22 Sep 2004, Jeffrey Hutzelman wrote:
I think this and a number of other points made here gloss over a key point of
which some of the participants may not be aware.
Under US law, there is a significant difference between not-for-profit and
charitable nonprofit
It might be useful to
Dear Hadmut,
This is a very good piece of information.
Sincerely,
Doo Timbir.
--- Hadmut Danisch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
See:
http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/9710963.htm?template=contentModules/printstory.jsp1c
regards
Hadmut
I'd like to express general support for scenario O.
I probably will not have time to read the document in sufficient
detail to agree with every point, but this looks like a good
direction.
--Sam
___
Ietf mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Karl,
2 cents.
Assuming IETF is going to set up a corporation and it is to be
created in the United States, it appears to me there are strong
reasons for incorporating as a non-profit, and further to obtain
tax-exempt status as a 501(c)(3) organization.
It appears to me that IETF qualifies for
On Wed, 22 Sep 2004, Gene Gaines wrote:
ISOC is non-profit, 501(c)(3) tax-exempt, incorporated in the
District of Columbia.
I suggest it would be a serious mistake for the IETF not to
obtain the same status.
There are many kinds of 501(c) exemptions. They all come with different
kinds of chains
Karl,
Good thoughts. I agree with all.
I suppose the reason for my long writing was to say that 501(3)(?)
status should not be feared, the process is predictable, and I
think you will find the IRS actually will assist in the process.
In any event, requires a good non-profit / tax lawyer to
This is a call for volunteers to participate in the 2004/05
IETF Nominations Committee, the committee that will select
this year's nominees for the IAB and IESG. Details about
the Nominations Committee process can be found in RFC
3777.
The NomCom is the IETF's way of choosing its leadership.
The MTA Authorization Records in DNS (MARID) working group in the
Applications Area has concluded.
The IESG contact persons are Ted Hardie and Scott Hollenbeck.
The mailing list will remain active.
After an assessment of the current state of the MARID working group,
its charter, and its
17 matches
Mail list logo
