Subject: Community review requested of SOW for Secretariat and Meeting Services

From: Ray Pelletier <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2005 18:06:15 -0500

The IAOC is negotiating a service agreement with NeuStar for secretariat
and meeting services. The statement of work (SOW) is an exhibit to the agreement 
and also in negotiation.

See: http://koi.uoregon.edu/~iaoc/ for either .pdf or .doc of the SOW.

The SOW does not cover general contractual conditions such as final
ownership of tools produced under the SOW, it does not include future
tools development, and it does not include performance targets. These
points will be covered elsewhere. Note also that several provisions are
labelled "Under Discussion" reflecting areas where the parties have
not reached an understanding.

The IAOC is seeking input to refine the statement of work based on
existing and required practices. Any suggestions regarding
apparent omissions of work activities from the SOW or refinements in
definition of the activities would be appreciated.  Please
send comments to [email-masked] by Friday, December 2nd.

The SOW terms and conditions include, among others, the following
elements:

 1. Location, selection and sponsorship of meetings
 2. Meeting calendar
 3. Competitive bids and contracting
 4. Hotel and meeting accommodations
 5. Registration services
 6. Volunteers
 7. Standards process support
 8. IETF Infrastructure (IT) Services
 9. Obligations of the IETF community.

Your time and comments are greatly appreciated.

Regards

Ray Pelletier
IETF Administrative Director

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

---

From: Dave Crocker <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2005 12:21:54 -0800

SOW draft looks good.

small suggestions:

> The Parties agree to review the terms of this SOW within thirty (30) days
> following each of the 65th and 66th IETF meetings to determine whether 
> any modifications to this SOW may be required to reflect more accurately
> the circumstances in which Work is being performed hereunder.

Given the strategic nature of this activity and the challenge of doing a
transition -- especially since we haven't done one in nearly 15
years -- having only 2, near-term reviews called for does not seem enough.

I suggest specifying quarterly reviews for the first year and annual reviews
after that, with public reporting of the review results.

> e. Mailing Lists Services. ...  (iv)
> commercially feasible spam filtering functions;

I do not know what "commercially feasible" means.

Perhaps this is supposed to be "commercial-grade", but even then I would not
know how to translate that into software or the like.

> f. Archive Services.

This is all about storing, and nothing about retrieving.

> IPv6 support. [Still under discussion] All on line services shall 
> be available via IPv4 [or or and] IPv6.

[or or and] IPv6.  =>  and, where feasible, IPv6.

d/

-- 

Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
<http://bbiw.net>