idnits 2.17.1 draft-arkko-ietf-finance-thoughts-00.txt: Checking boilerplate required by RFC 5378 and the IETF Trust (see https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info): ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/1id-guidelines.txt: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/checklist : ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ** The document seems to lack a Security Considerations section. ** The document seems to lack an IANA Considerations section. (See Section 2.2 of https://www.ietf.org/id-info/checklist for how to handle the case when there are no actions for IANA.) Miscellaneous warnings: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == The copyright year in the IETF Trust and authors Copyright Line does not match the current year -- The document date (February 28, 2017) is 2614 days in the past. Is this intentional? Checking references for intended status: Informational ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- Obsolete informational reference (is this intentional?): RFC 4071 (Obsoleted by RFC 8711) Summary: 2 errors (**), 0 flaws (~~), 1 warning (==), 2 comments (--). Run idnits with the --verbose option for more detailed information about the items above. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 Internet Engineering Task Force J. Arkko 3 Internet-Draft Ericsson 4 Intended status: Informational February 28, 2017 5 Expires: September 1, 2017 7 Thoughts on IETF Finance Arrangements 8 draft-arkko-ietf-finance-thoughts-00.txt 10 Abstract 12 This short memo outlines the author's thoughts of current status and 13 future development questions around IETF's financing mechanisms. 15 This memo is also input for discussion that the IETF community should 16 have. The memo is the first part of the author's goal to document 17 the status and various challenges and opportunities associated with 18 the IETF Administrative Activity (IASA), in the context of the so 19 called "IASA 2.0" project. 21 The memo has no particular official standing, nor does it claim to 22 represent more than the authors' thinking at the time of writing. 24 Status of This Memo 26 This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the 27 provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. 29 Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering 30 Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute 31 working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- 32 Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. 34 Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months 35 and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any 36 time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference 37 material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." 39 This Internet-Draft will expire on September 1, 2017. 41 Copyright Notice 43 Copyright (c) 2017 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the 44 document authors. All rights reserved. 46 This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal 47 Provisions Relating to IETF Documents 48 (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of 49 publication of this document. Please review these documents 50 carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect 51 to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must 52 include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of 53 the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as 54 described in the Simplified BSD License. 56 Table of Contents 58 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 59 2. Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 60 3. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 61 4. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 62 Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 64 1. Introduction 66 The purpose of the IETF is to "... produce high quality, relevant 67 technical and engineering documents that influence the way people 68 design, use, and manage the Internet ..." [RFC3935]. This is of 69 course only possible when the organisation offers a platform: 70 process, and basic services that allow IETF participants to work 71 Internet technology in an effective way. One part of this platform 72 is sufficient funding to run those services, maintain archives, have 73 web presence, have staff that can do the final publication editing, 74 etc. 76 The IETF's funding situation is generally in good shape: The IETF has 77 multiple sources of funds, from corporate supporters to participants 78 to Internet Society and to donors interested ensuring in the long- 79 term sustainability of the efforts. 81 But there are issues as well, such as a rising cost trend in a 82 setting where the basis of our funding from attendees and sponsors is 83 staying largely the same. 85 And, it is always good to evaluate our arrangements, and the ongoing 86 "IASA 2.0" effort to assess the IETF Administrative Activity (IASA) 87 organisation is a good moment to do this analysis [RFC4071] [IASA20]. 88 For the finance aspects as well as other organisational matters. 90 This short memo outlines the author's view of the current status and 91 future development questions around IETF's financing mechanisms. The 92 memo is the first part of the author's goal to document the status 93 and various challenges and opportunities associated with IASA. 95 This memo is also input for discussion that the IETF community should 96 have. 98 The memo has no particular official standing, nor does it claim to 99 represent more than the author's thinking at the time of writing. 101 2. Discussion 103 Some of the trends affecting our financing arrangements include: 105 Community size is stable 107 The size of the IETF community both in participants and 108 participating companies has been relatively stable for over ten 109 years. This is by itself neither good or bad, and it reflects 110 IETF's role in the world. While the Internet technology business 111 keeps growing tremendously, standards for core Internet technology 112 are only one part of the overall picture. That is a very 113 important part, and one where there has been a lot of activity. 114 But one should not necessarily expect a tremendous growth. 116 Continuously rising costs 118 On the other hand, costs for running the operation have increased, 119 and are predicted to increase. This is partially due to external 120 cost pressures, for instance the of cost hotel services such as 121 meeeting space continue to increase. But the trend is also 122 affected by the need to provide more services, for instance 123 related to remote attendance or tools migrating to the 124 secretariat. 126 Over-the-net participation 128 The ability to work together without being in the same place 129 continues to improve; global communities can be built based on - 130 at least to large extent - over-the-net collaboration. As 131 engineers working on real-time communication among other things, 132 this trend should be apparent to IETF participants. This is not 133 to say that in-person meetings will cease to be useful. 135 This will affect one leg of the IETF's funding structure: 136 participant fees. Even where remote participation might be an 137 activity that can have a fee associated with it, such fees are 138 likely smaller than those in physical meetings. 140 While the IETF financing models have recently started evolving, 141 they are still based primarily on meeting fees and meeting-based 142 sponsorship. It would be useful to build also sponsorship models 143 that allow supporting the IETF's work, not just a given meeting 144 for instance. 146 Professionally run services 148 IETF services are increasingly run on a professional, commercial 149 model, as overall number of services continues to grow, volunteer 150 tools are left to be run by the secretariat as the volunteers move 151 on to develop more tools, etc. 153 Different types of sponsors 155 There are many willing supporters of the IETF's work. But it is 156 important to recognise how they -- due to their background or in 157 some cases even legal or accounting reasons -- have different sets 158 of expectations. 160 It is useful to cater for different classes of donors, for 161 instance both large corporations capabable of, for instance, 162 hosting a meeting, as well as smaller corporations still 163 interested in supporting the IETF but unable to take a hosting 164 commitment. 166 Similarly, most corporate sponsorships are typically to support 167 the current activities. Meeting sponsorships are an example of 168 this. On the other hand, IETF Endowment donations are an example 169 of a more long-term support for the long-term. Both models are 170 necessary, and useful. 172 Finally, the IETF is backed by Internet Society, and the support 173 of the IETF is one of core missions that the organisation was 174 founded for. 176 The sponsor experience 178 While there has been a lot of support for, e.g., meeting hosting, 179 getting support for the full sponsorship program is not easy. 181 The value to sponsors is not always obvious, the IETF community is 182 sometimes critical or unappreciative, and the same sponsors get 183 tapped again and again for many related but different 184 opportunities. 186 Also, and this may sound obvious, but the IETF should be open for 187 getting sponsorship from the different sources. There is one area 188 that we are not as open as we should be: Traditionally, meeting 189 sponsorship has been sought from the location that a meeting is 190 at. However, this may not be the best strategy when a significant 191 fraction of these sponsorships come from global multinational 192 companies. 194 A corollary to the desire for supporting multiple different 195 sponsorship models is that the IETF is clear on what the options 196 give, clear how they benefit the IETF. As the number of options 197 have grown, we have not always been clear enough, or provided 198 answers that were aligned with the desires of the sponsors. For 199 instance, the IETF Endowment was re-specified in 2015-2016 to make 200 it about support of the IETF rather than general-purpose support 201 for Internet openness and technology development. But work 202 remains in ensuring that all sponsorship options are crystal 203 clear. 205 Finally, the basis for any financial involvement of the sponsors 206 needs to be viewed in terms of the value that the IETF provides 207 for the participants and the supporters. Articulating that is 208 important, and this needs work from the IETF. Although again, the 209 value is probably slightly different for different sponsors. 210 Ultimately, value is the one that ensures we continue to draw the 211 participants, and attracts sponsors in a thoughtful and long-term 212 fashion, and helps tune IETF activities to meet the needs of the 213 community. 215 Expectations on the IETF 217 Some factors in our environment are changing, and the role of the 218 IETF is also evoling in some ways. For instance, the IETF Trust 219 took a role in managing IANA-related IPR in 2016. 221 3. Acknowledgements 223 The author would like to thank Kathy Brown, Andrew Sullivan, Ray 224 Pelletier, Leslie Daigle, Alissa Cooper, Gonzalo Camarillo, Greg 225 Kapfer, and Sean Turner for interesting discussions in this space. 227 4. Informative References 229 [IASA20] Arkko, J., "Proposed Project: IETF Administrative Support 230 2.0", November 2016 (https://www.ietf.org/blog/2016/11/ 231 proposed-project-ietf-administrative-support-2-0/). 233 [RFC3935] Alvestrand, H., "A Mission Statement for the IETF", 234 BCP 95, RFC 3935, DOI 10.17487/RFC3935, October 2004, 235 . 237 [RFC4071] Austein, R., Ed. and B. Wijnen, Ed., "Structure of the 238 IETF Administrative Support Activity (IASA)", BCP 101, 239 RFC 4071, DOI 10.17487/RFC4071, April 2005, 240 . 242 Author's Address 244 Jari Arkko 245 Ericsson 246 Kauniainen 02700 247 Finland 249 Email: jari.arkko@piuha.net