On Wed, 2008-12-03 at 15:58 +0000, michael.dillon@bt.com wrote:
Which leaves the problem of "an entity assigning to itself, and doing a contract with itself" - which can be seen as a problem with neutrality.
We aren't lawyers. Why are you asking us to solve legal problems. Any lawyer will tell you that this is simple. Incorporate an entity separate from the NCC that will organize meetings. It can have the same board of directors as the NCC, or some other arrangement if you wish. This organization can then sign contracts with the RIPE NCC. The RIPE NCC no longer has to worry about RIPE meetings because RIPE now deals with a separate organization to hold the meetings.
I'd just like to mention as a tiny historical note, that the RIPE NCC was founded in part to organise RIPE meetings. Look at 3.3 of the first RIPE NCC Activity Plan: ftp://ftp.ripe.net/ripe/docs/ripe-035.txt The conflict of interest having the RIPE NCC evaluate it's own request for resources is real, but I think we must all admit totally symbolic. We're talking about very small blocks here, so seriously considering the idea of incorporating a new company to fill out some paperwork makes me wonder if I'm about to see a rabbit with a stopwatch running past declaring "I'm late, I'm late!". (*) -- Shane (*) Perhaps the rabbit is talking about the state of his IPv6 deployments though...