Special IAOC Call at 1300 EDT, Friday, September 26, 2008 Participants: Lynn St. Amour [Not Present] Fred Baker [Present] Bob Hinden [Present] Russ Housley [Present] Ole Jacobsen [Present] Ed Juskevicius [Present] Olaf Kolkman [Not Present] Ray Pelletier [Present, IAD] Jonne Soininen [Present; Chair] Marshall Eubanks [Secretary] --------- Agenda 1. Budget and Large Interim Meetings 2. IAOC Goals 2008 – 2009 A. RFC Editor Restructuring/RFP - IAOC 1. RFP Schedule, RFP B. IETF Sustainable Financial Model Project - IAOC/ISOC 1. Diversify revenue streams – ISOC 2. Assure sustainable IETF Funding – IETF C. Document Processes – IAD 1. Milestones, RFPs, IT, Contracts, wiki outline D. 5 Year Review E. IAD 1. Community Reporting 2. Contracts Management 3. Budget Management 4. RFPs - Secretariat, RFC Editor, Network F. IT Infrastructure Project ------ There was a roll call and Jonne called the meeting to order. 1. Budget and Large Interim Meetings (LIM) Two large interim meeting during the next year have been proposed, which will affect the budget. The IESG is planning an experiment with two large interim meetings next year. The purpose was to schedule some meetings that people could plan for in order to accelerate the work of the IETF. The purpose for scheduling these large meetings was to remove the logistical barriers to scheduling and having interim meetings. The first meeting is the RAI area in January, plus any additional WG that might raise their hand. The plan is for a second IM in the fall if the first is a success. Attendance in January is expected to be 300, and in the fall would be a 25% increase. The Committee estimated that for each interim they hold they would lose 25 folks from the next regular IETF meeting. One assumption was the LIM registration fee of 3/5 of the IETF fee and a $100 late fee. The IAOC are expecting a $50K sponsor in Europe and $40K in the US. The Committee doesn’t anticipate any volunteers in the NOC. Meeting progress: there are responses from 5 Hilton hotels in Europe plus a VeriLAN quote. A motion to take two interim meetings as the basis for budgeting was made by Jonne. The motion was seconded by Russ. A roll call was taken: Fred Baker [Yes] Marshall Eubanks [Yes] Bob Hinden [Yes] Russ Housley [Yes] Ole Jacobsen [Yes] Ed Juskevicius [Yes] Jonne Soininen [Yes] The motion carried. The Committee discussed putting an action point on the IESG to come up with some objective measurements to determine the success or failure of these two experimental large interim meetings. Additionally, the Committee will put an AP on themselves to see how the January interim affects the March financials. 2. IAOC Goals 2008 – 2009 The Committee then discussed the goals for IASA. A. RFC Editor Restructuring/RFP - IAOC Committee wants an RFP in February, or March at the latest, and the Committee has to be prepared to negotiate more than one contract at that time. It was noted that an Independent Stream Editor, and maybe the RFC Editor, need to be selected by October of next year so they can take over next January of 2010. The IAOC is expecting to get choices back from the IAB that would allow either a RFP or a community-based process and once decided then the Committee needs to begin that process. The Committee will do an RFI this fall, so a decision needs to be made next month as this has both Community and financial implications. It is the Committee’s thought that they would like the IAB to have a community process for selecting the RFC and the Independent Stream Editor, rather than through an RFP process because the community is a better vehicle for selecting the Editor than left to the vagaries of an RFP process. It was generally agreed by the Committee members that they would publish the RFP before a change in Committee members occurred. B. IETF Sustainable Financial Model Project - IAOC/ISOC The general idea behind the IETF Sustainable Financial Model Project is that there needs to be a new stream of a 1 or 2 million dollars into the budget. The current model of funding the IETF is to increase registration fees to address increased costs is not sustainable as there has been a slow erosion in the number of attendees and this could eventually collapse. So, anticipating that that will happen some day, the Committee is considering what is plan B. It was noted that when the IETF was having the admin discussion it was suggested that the IETF should become a membership organization. As part of a review of establishing a sustainable funding model It was decided that this should be looked at in detail with Lynn St. Amour and Greg Kapfer, ISOC CFO, should be included. C. Document Processes – IAD Processes should be documented. It was suggested by Jonne that the meeting process should be documented and should be the basis for the IAOC meeting planning (there could be operational issues which would need additional meetings), and there would be a fixed agenda for the regular meetings. Question was raised as to where the documented processes should be stored. D. 5-Year Review The question was brought up of when is the five years actually over, and when does the IAOC start the review? It was suggested that the start depends on how all-encompassing the review is going to be. If it is going to be very all-encompassing the IAOC might want to hire a company to do it. It needs to be determined what exactly the IAOC is looking to assess, such as how well BCP 101 was implemented. The IAD noted that is a baseline and that there is also whether or not BCP 101 needs to be updated. It was suggested that the questions about BCP 101 should be left to the IESG. Question was asked if the IAOC needs an internal review (is this working as it is supposed to work)? It was suggested receiving feedback from the Community, as it is a night and day difference. It was said the IAOC needs to ask the community about how well the IASA model is working against the BCP. The IAD was asked if there is a way the IAOC can benchmark its internal operations and the answer given was, yes; he suggests looking at BCP 101 and looking at the things the IAOC is supposed to have done and see if they’ve been done. It was noted that if the IAOC hires an outside company to do the review it won't be cheap. It was said that if someone is willing to do the review for free then their motives would have to be questioned; although some help would be beneficial and it could be ISOC. It was suggested that maybe the IAOC could ask the ISEG to do an assessment of how well the IAOC is doing against BCP 101. The 5-year review won't be until 2010. In the meantime, the Committee has the network RFP, which is supposed to be done in October and that will need to get that out next month. E. IT Infrastructure Project Russ was asked whether he still expects the project to start next year. Russ said he’s still looking for the database design to be done next week, so a decision can be made in March, in San Francisco. Jonne asked if it is still on track. Russ said that it was the last time he talked to Henrik. The IAD noted that there will be an IT Infrastructure project; it's just a matter of which direction the IAOC takes, ARO or Django. Russ said the big decision isn't going to be made until March. That's why the IAOC needs the IQID contract first. A motion to adjourn the IAOC Committee meeting was made by Jonne. The motion passed unanimously and the meeting was adjourned at 2:34 PM EDT.