[ncc-services-wg] Re: [address-policy-wg] Re: ICANN vs RIPE NCC, was Re: Summary of the PI ......
Kurt Erik Lindqvist kurtis at kurtis.pp.se
Tue Aug 19 23:04:44 CEST 2003
On onsdag, aug 13, 2003, at 10:56 Europe/Stockholm, Hank Nussbacher wrote: > >> I dont know if im right, but i figure, that the main idea for >> everybody to >> pay for the training is getting everybody trained -- as it is >> included. >> I only see one aspect/situation against it: a trained LIR person >> exchanges >> jobs, going into a company that will manage a new LIR. In this case >> should >> this LIR pay for the training of its already-trained human resource? >> Or it >> is paying for the training that person got some time ago? >> > > when i go to an MS course or a Cisco course, I do not expect your > company to partially fund my attendence. I fail to see how a newly > trained LIR benefits me - anymore so than a newly trained CCIE in some > place 1000km away might benefit me. I would actually prefer that MS and Cisco trained people so that they would not need all that support staff and could lower the costs of my products. You will end up paying for that one way or the other. Best regards, - kurtis -