wiki:GEC23Agenda/GENIFuturePlanning/ReadAhead/GovernanceModels

Candidate models for GENI governance, administration, and finance

In order to seed discussion of potential approaches to governance, administration, and finance, the GPO conducted several formal and informal interviews. Participants included both members of the GENI community and others who have experience in forming or leading similar entities. Results of these discussions have been anonymized and are listed below.

These lists are very preliminary and should not be treated as complete or final. Expanding, correcting, and revising these lists are important components of the ongoing planning process. In addition, it may not be possible to consider each element of governance, administration, and finance in isolation (e.g., a particular approach to governance may well have financial implications).

Candidate role models and alliances

One strategy for transition is to structure future GENI efforts along the lines of a previous or existing model. This strategy could be pursued by:

  • Mimicing: replicating the approach of another organization
  • Cherry picking: selecting the best aspects of multiple models
  • Merger: joining GENI with an existing organization

Candidate organizations/models include (in no particular order):

  • Internet Society
  • UCAR – University Corporation for Atmospheric Research
  • Standards working group (e.g., IEEE 802.xx)
  • PlanetLab
  • Internet2
  • Internet2 NetPlus services
  • USENIX
  • Educause
  • US Ignite
  • Open Science Grid
  • Open Cloud Consortium
  • NSFNet Network Access Points -> Internet Exchange Points

Candidate tactics for governance

  • Establish a non-profit entity (or join an existing one) to own assets and coordinate funding.
  • Establish a governing body to establish governance policy and assure alignment with future research trends.
  • Choose members of governing body based on established reputation in research community.
  • Choose members of governing body based on prior contributions to project.
  • Choose members of governing body based on financial contribution.
  • Recompete GPO function, positing a declining funding model.
  • Create checks and balances between governers (speak for science & users) and technical director(s).

Candidate tactics for administration (and sustainment)

  • Grow and sustain infrastructure by asking participating sites to contribute and maintain at least a specified minimal configuration.
  • Establish a small cadre of professional operations staff to accomplish most maintenance (hardware and software), as well as response to legal and law enforcement concerns.
  • Enable as much remote administration of equipment as possible.
  • Distribute sustainment responsibility to host institutions.
  • Ensure that each site has someone with "skin in the game" to serve as contact.

Candidate tactics for finance

  • Establish an expectation of declining funding from NSF (e.g. $X, reduced by 1/3 annually over a three-year period).
  • Spread ongoing costs onto a mix of users (researchers, educators, institutions), government funders, sponsors, and/or equipment vendors.
  • Consider success in obtaining non-NSF funding to be a measure of demand for GENI infrastructure and technology.
  • Ask sites to finance their own equipment refresh.
  • Establish a central pool of funding for refresh and expend according to agreed priorities.
  • Seek corporate sponsorships.
  • Avoid corporate sponsorships.
  • Monetize GENI infrastructure and/or technology.
  • Charge end-users, multiple possible models
    • Individual user pays directly (possibly by including cost in research grant proposal)
    • Access is allocated by a science board, based on merit (assumes a different source of funding)
    • Institutions (CIOs) pay for access, which is provided free to individual researchers, via overhead
Last modified 9 years ago Last modified on 06/11/15 15:45:51