Proposed Membership and Sponsorship Model
I'm not a candidate and will not be a candidate for the Board. However, I propose the following Membership and Sponsorship Model, including both Membership Dues and Sponsorship levels for MICE Members and Non-Member Sponsors. The dollar values are just my suggestions, I think they should work but they are primarily intended to illustrate the model. With this Model, any network may connect to the Exchange, but all networks participating in governance, known as Members, will have some minimal skin-in-the-game. Further, the Model implies Networks with 10G or larger ports probably should participate at a more significant level, but this is not a requirement for access to 10G or larger ports or even to participate in governance. The Friends of MICE Sponsorship level is intended to be accessible to anyone interested, including individual users of the Internet. My proposal; As an Open Internet Exchange any network with a uniquely registered Autonomous System Number (ASN) may connect to MICE. However, Non-Member networks are provided ports on the Exchange on an as-available basis only and Non-Members do not participate in the governance of the Exchange or the MICE Organization, but may observe and participate in its discussions. Networks connected to the Exchange, or Data Centers hosting an Exchange switch, may become Members and participate in the governance of the Exchange and the MICE Organization by paying Membership Dues at either level listed below. Members are provided prefered access to 1G Exchange ports, and are provided access to 10G or larger Exchange ports on an as-available basis. Sustaining or higher Members are committed to sustaining and growing the Exchange by electing to pay Sustaining Membership Dues and/or paying Basic Membership Dues and providing other Sponsorship to the Exchange of a value totaling $1000 or more. In recognition to this additional commitment, Sustaining or higher Members are provided prefered access to 10G or larger Exchange ports. Basic Membership Dues - $100 Sustaining Membership Dues - $1000 (Dues are paid in cash or cash equivalents only, and may not be provided through in-kind services or equipment) Beyond Dues from Members, MICE accepts Sponsorship both from Members and Non-Members Sponsors as cash, cash equivalents, in-kind services or equipment. Sponsorship is recognized at the following escalating levels based on the total value provided annually. Friends of MICE - Sponsorship of $50 ore more annually Sustaining Members or Sponsors - Sponsorship of $1,000 or more annually Silver Members or Sponsors - Sponsorship of $2,500 or more annually Gold Members or Sponsors - Sponsorship of $5,000 or more annually Platinum Members or Sponsors - Sponsorship of $10,000 or more annually Sponsorship of $20,000 or more are recognized with multiple years at the Platinum level. Friends of MICE are list on a page on the MICE website. Sustaining or higher Members are annotated as such in their listings on the MICE website. All Sustaining or higher Members and Sponsors are listed on the MICE website, with higher levels receiving more prominent placement. Silver or higher Members and Sponsors are recognized in MICE marketing materials, with higher levels receiving more prominent placement. Thanks -- =============================================== David Farmer Email:farmer@umn.edu Networking & Telecommunication Services Office of Information Technology University of Minnesota 2218 University Ave SE Phone: 612-626-0815 Minneapolis, MN 55414-3029 Cell: 612-812-9952 ===============================================
I personally like this plan, as it preserves the open nature of the exchange and provides a way that any interested party can participate in the governance of the exchange with a relatively minimal poll tax, as it were, yet provides a good clear path for people who get more value from the exchange and have the ability to contribute more to it to do so. In the interest of transparency, Akamai may be perceived to benefit from this model vs. a flat-rate model. However, I would prefer this model, even if that were not the case because I believe this model is sustainable yet lowers the barrier of entry to participation in the exchange. Each additional connection to the exchange provides value to all members of the exchange. Active participants provide even more value. This model encourages active participation as well as a mechanism for financial sustainability. I do not believe this would rise to the level of COI if this were to come before the board during my tenure (if I am elected), but I am open to input from others who may feel differently. Owen On Sep 8, 2016, at 11:05 , David Farmer <farmer@UMN.EDU<mailto:farmer@umn.edu>> wrote: I'm not a candidate and will not be a candidate for the Board. However, I propose the following Membership and Sponsorship Model, including both Membership Dues and Sponsorship levels for MICE Members and Non-Member Sponsors. The dollar values are just my suggestions, I think they should work but they are primarily intended to illustrate the model. With this Model, any network may connect to the Exchange, but all networks participating in governance, known as Members, will have some minimal skin-in-the-game. Further, the Model implies Networks with 10G or larger ports probably should participate at a more significant level, but this is not a requirement for access to 10G or larger ports or even to participate in governance. The Friends of MICE Sponsorship level is intended to be accessible to anyone interested, including individual users of the Internet. My proposal; As an Open Internet Exchange any network with a uniquely registered Autonomous System Number (ASN) may connect to MICE. However, Non-Member networks are provided ports on the Exchange on an as-available basis only and Non-Members do not participate in the governance of the Exchange or the MICE Organization, but may observe and participate in its discussions. Networks connected to the Exchange, or Data Centers hosting an Exchange switch, may become Members and participate in the governance of the Exchange and the MICE Organization by paying Membership Dues at either level listed below. Members are provided prefered access to 1G Exchange ports, and are provided access to 10G or larger Exchange ports on an as-available basis. Sustaining or higher Members are committed to sustaining and growing the Exchange by electing to pay Sustaining Membership Dues and/or paying Basic Membership Dues and providing other Sponsorship to the Exchange of a value totaling $1000 or more. In recognition to this additional commitment, Sustaining or higher Members are provided prefered access to 10G or larger Exchange ports. Basic Membership Dues - $100 Sustaining Membership Dues - $1000 (Dues are paid in cash or cash equivalents only, and may not be provided through in-kind services or equipment) Beyond Dues from Members, MICE accepts Sponsorship both from Members and Non-Members Sponsors as cash, cash equivalents, in-kind services or equipment. Sponsorship is recognized at the following escalating levels based on the total value provided annually. Friends of MICE - Sponsorship of $50 ore more annually Sustaining Members or Sponsors - Sponsorship of $1,000 or more annually Silver Members or Sponsors - Sponsorship of $2,500 or more annually Gold Members or Sponsors - Sponsorship of $5,000 or more annually Platinum Members or Sponsors - Sponsorship of $10,000 or more annually Sponsorship of $20,000 or more are recognized with multiple years at the Platinum level. Friends of MICE are list on a page on the MICE website. Sustaining or higher Members are annotated as such in their listings on the MICE website. All Sustaining or higher Members and Sponsors are listed on the MICE website, with higher levels receiving more prominent placement. Silver or higher Members and Sponsors are recognized in MICE marketing materials, with higher levels receiving more prominent placement. Thanks -- =============================================== David Farmer Email:farmer@umn.edu<mailto:Email%3Afarmer@umn.edu> Networking & Telecommunication Services Office of Information Technology University of Minnesota 2218 University Ave SE Phone: 612-626-0815<tel:612-626-0815> Minneapolis, MN 55414-3029 Cell: 612-812-9952<tel:612-812-9952> =============================================== ________________________________ To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link: http://lists.iphouse.net/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__lists.iphouse.net_cgi-2Dbin_wa-3FSUBED1-3DMICE-2DDISCUSS-26A-3D1&d=DQMFaQ&c=96ZbZZcaMF4w0F4jpN6LZg&r=Q_d8tNiSzoBecM8os8iGQA&m=Pg0YxJttWrinFLmyPi2c8Qc3JUsOEESk7Luk2oUjNwo&s=-qlwRyN4tol7c-qfTXTMTEANA6BlbDczyHk-TtuyPe0&e=>
As a person and company that has donated hardware and services to MICE but I am not directly a member, rather I take advantage of MICE as a customer of IPHouse this provides a believer in MICE to direct assist and be recognized as working as part of the MICE community without actually being a directly connected network. Just my take on this idea and as someone that would sponsor both directly and in-kind. -Nevin -- Nevin Lyne -- Founder & Director of Technology -- Arcustech, LLC. - arcustech.com -- Gippy's Internet Solutions, LLC. - enginehosting.com On Thursday, September 8, 2016 2:19pm, "DeLong, Owen" <owen@AKAMAI.COM> said:
I personally like this plan, as it preserves the open nature of the exchange and provides a way that any interested party can participate in the governance of the exchange with a relatively minimal poll tax, as it were, yet provides a good clear path for people who get more value from the exchange and have the ability to contribute more to it to do so.
In the interest of transparency, Akamai may be perceived to benefit from this model vs. a flat-rate model. However, I would prefer this model, even if that were not the case because I believe this model is sustainable yet lowers the barrier of entry to participation in the exchange. Each additional connection to the exchange provides value to all members of the exchange. Active participants provide even more value. This model encourages active participation as well as a mechanism for financial sustainability.
I do not believe this would rise to the level of COI if this were to come before the board during my tenure (if I am elected), but I am open to input from others who may feel differently.
Owen
On Sep 8, 2016, at 11:05 , David Farmer <farmer@UMN.EDU<mailto:farmer@umn.edu>> wrote:
I'm not a candidate and will not be a candidate for the Board. However, I propose the following Membership and Sponsorship Model, including both Membership Dues and Sponsorship levels for MICE Members and Non-Member Sponsors.
The dollar values are just my suggestions, I think they should work but they are primarily intended to illustrate the model.
With this Model, any network may connect to the Exchange, but all networks participating in governance, known as Members, will have some minimal skin-in-the-game. Further, the Model implies Networks with 10G or larger ports probably should participate at a more significant level, but this is not a requirement for access to 10G or larger ports or even to participate in governance.
The Friends of MICE Sponsorship level is intended to be accessible to anyone interested, including individual users of the Internet.
My proposal;
As an Open Internet Exchange any network with a uniquely registered Autonomous System Number (ASN) may connect to MICE. However, Non-Member networks are provided ports on the Exchange on an as-available basis only and Non-Members do not participate in the governance of the Exchange or the MICE Organization, but may observe and participate in its discussions.
Networks connected to the Exchange, or Data Centers hosting an Exchange switch, may become Members and participate in the governance of the Exchange and the MICE Organization by paying Membership Dues at either level listed below. Members are provided prefered access to 1G Exchange ports, and are provided access to 10G or larger Exchange ports on an as-available basis.
Sustaining or higher Members are committed to sustaining and growing the Exchange by electing to pay Sustaining Membership Dues and/or paying Basic Membership Dues and providing other Sponsorship to the Exchange of a value totaling $1000 or more. In recognition to this additional commitment, Sustaining or higher Members are provided prefered access to 10G or larger Exchange ports.
Basic Membership Dues - $100 Sustaining Membership Dues - $1000 (Dues are paid in cash or cash equivalents only, and may not be provided through in-kind services or equipment)
Beyond Dues from Members, MICE accepts Sponsorship both from Members and Non-Members Sponsors as cash, cash equivalents, in-kind services or equipment. Sponsorship is recognized at the following escalating levels based on the total value provided annually.
Friends of MICE - Sponsorship of $50 ore more annually Sustaining Members or Sponsors - Sponsorship of $1,000 or more annually Silver Members or Sponsors - Sponsorship of $2,500 or more annually Gold Members or Sponsors - Sponsorship of $5,000 or more annually Platinum Members or Sponsors - Sponsorship of $10,000 or more annually
Sponsorship of $20,000 or more are recognized with multiple years at the Platinum level.
Friends of MICE are list on a page on the MICE website. Sustaining or higher Members are annotated as such in their listings on the MICE website. All Sustaining or higher Members and Sponsors are listed on the MICE website, with higher levels receiving more prominent placement. Silver or higher Members and Sponsors are recognized in MICE marketing materials, with higher levels receiving more prominent placement.
Thanks
-- =============================================== David Farmer Email:farmer@umn.edu<mailto:Email%3Afarmer@umn.edu> Networking & Telecommunication Services Office of Information Technology University of Minnesota 2218 University Ave SE Phone: 612-626-0815<tel:612-626-0815> Minneapolis, MN 55414-3029 Cell: 612-812-9952<tel:612-812-9952> ===============================================
David, I like the premise of this plan and it preserves the multiple options/levels that have been consistently requested in our meetings and discussions on this topic over the past several years. s *Shaun Carlson*Director of Information Technology | Arvig ph: (218) 346-8673 | em: shaun.carlson@arvig.com On Thu, Sep 8, 2016 at 2:36 PM, Nevin Lyne <nevin@enginehosting.com> wrote:
As a person and company that has donated hardware and services to MICE but I am not directly a member, rather I take advantage of MICE as a customer of IPHouse this provides a believer in MICE to direct assist and be recognized as working as part of the MICE community without actually being a directly connected network.
Just my take on this idea and as someone that would sponsor both directly and in-kind.
-Nevin
-- Nevin Lyne -- Founder & Director of Technology -- Arcustech, LLC. - arcustech.com -- Gippy's Internet Solutions, LLC. - enginehosting.com
On Thursday, September 8, 2016 2:19pm, "DeLong, Owen" <owen@AKAMAI.COM> said:
I personally like this plan, as it preserves the open nature of the exchange and provides a way that any interested party can participate in the governance of the exchange with a relatively minimal poll tax, as it were, yet provides a good clear path for people who get more value from the exchange and have the ability to contribute more to it to do so.
In the interest of transparency, Akamai may be perceived to benefit from this model vs. a flat-rate model. However, I would prefer this model, even if that were not the case because I believe this model is sustainable yet lowers the barrier of entry to participation in the exchange. Each additional connection to the exchange provides value to all members of the exchange. Active participants provide even more value. This model encourages active participation as well as a mechanism for financial sustainability.
I do not believe this would rise to the level of COI if this were to come before the board during my tenure (if I am elected), but I am open to input from others who may feel differently.
Owen
On Sep 8, 2016, at 11:05 , David Farmer <farmer@UMN.EDU<mailto:farmer@ umn.edu>> wrote:
I'm not a candidate and will not be a candidate for the Board. However, I propose the following Membership and Sponsorship Model, including both Membership Dues and Sponsorship levels for MICE Members and Non-Member Sponsors.
The dollar values are just my suggestions, I think they should work but they are primarily intended to illustrate the model.
With this Model, any network may connect to the Exchange, but all networks participating in governance, known as Members, will have some minimal skin-in-the-game. Further, the Model implies Networks with 10G or larger ports probably should participate at a more significant level, but this is not a requirement for access to 10G or larger ports or even to participate in governance.
The Friends of MICE Sponsorship level is intended to be accessible to anyone interested, including individual users of the Internet.
My proposal;
As an Open Internet Exchange any network with a uniquely registered Autonomous System Number (ASN) may connect to MICE. However, Non-Member networks are provided ports on the Exchange on an as-available basis only and Non-Members do not participate in the governance of the Exchange or the MICE Organization, but may observe and participate in its discussions.
Networks connected to the Exchange, or Data Centers hosting an Exchange switch, may become Members and participate in the governance of the Exchange and the MICE Organization by paying Membership Dues at either level listed below. Members are provided prefered access to 1G Exchange ports, and are provided access to 10G or larger Exchange ports on an as-available basis.
Sustaining or higher Members are committed to sustaining and growing the Exchange by electing to pay Sustaining Membership Dues and/or paying Basic Membership Dues and providing other Sponsorship to the Exchange of a value totaling $1000 or more. In recognition to this additional commitment, Sustaining or higher Members are provided prefered access to 10G or larger Exchange ports.
Basic Membership Dues - $100 Sustaining Membership Dues - $1000 (Dues are paid in cash or cash equivalents only, and may not be provided through in-kind services or equipment)
Beyond Dues from Members, MICE accepts Sponsorship both from Members and Non-Members Sponsors as cash, cash equivalents, in-kind services or equipment. Sponsorship is recognized at the following escalating levels based on the total value provided annually.
Friends of MICE - Sponsorship of $50 ore more annually Sustaining Members or Sponsors - Sponsorship of $1,000 or more annually Silver Members or Sponsors - Sponsorship of $2,500 or more annually Gold Members or Sponsors - Sponsorship of $5,000 or more annually Platinum Members or Sponsors - Sponsorship of $10,000 or more annually
Sponsorship of $20,000 or more are recognized with multiple years at the Platinum level.
Friends of MICE are list on a page on the MICE website. Sustaining or higher Members are annotated as such in their listings on the MICE website. All Sustaining or higher Members and Sponsors are listed on the MICE website, with higher levels receiving more prominent placement. Silver or higher Members and Sponsors are recognized in MICE marketing materials, with higher levels receiving more prominent placement.
Thanks
-- =============================================== David Farmer Email:farmer@umn.edu<mailto:Em ail%3Afarmer@umn.edu> Networking & Telecommunication Services Office of Information Technology University of Minnesota 2218 University Ave SE Phone: 612-626-0815<tel:612-626-0815> Minneapolis, MN 55414-3029 Cell: 612-812-9952<tel:612-812-9952> ===============================================
Classes create inequities. Im not in favor of this proposal. Open to discuss, but this degrades the premise of neutrality and equality IMHO. Its a great start! /myself Best, -M< On Sep 8, 2016, at 23:02, Shaun Carlson <shaun.carlson@ARVIG.COM<mailto:shaun.carlson@arvig.com>> wrote: David, I like the premise of this plan and it preserves the multiple options/levels that have been consistently requested in our meetings and discussions on this topic over the past several years. s Shaun Carlson Director of Information Technology | Arvig ph: (218) 346-8673 | em: shaun.carlson@arvig.com<mailto:shaun.carlson@arvig.com> On Thu, Sep 8, 2016 at 2:36 PM, Nevin Lyne <nevin@enginehosting.com<mailto:nevin@enginehosting.com>> wrote: As a person and company that has donated hardware and services to MICE but I am not directly a member, rather I take advantage of MICE as a customer of IPHouse this provides a believer in MICE to direct assist and be recognized as working as part of the MICE community without actually being a directly connected network. Just my take on this idea and as someone that would sponsor both directly and in-kind. -Nevin -- Nevin Lyne -- Founder & Director of Technology -- Arcustech, LLC. - arcustech.com<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__arcustech.com&d=DQMFaQ&c=96ZbZZcaMF4w0F4jpN6LZg&r=XDN_BIPGnpb6V0w5M9FADw&m=Q0wrjWHyNQrNnMf8yl4R-H3NwHTsVq2fji3sO7gkS8w&s=Fp9ZTDOBmND2tTWIxSOb0_dpl1OQ8QDgtZqqCJiBTx0&e=> -- Gippy's Internet Solutions, LLC. - enginehosting.com<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__enginehosting.com&d=DQMFaQ&c=96ZbZZcaMF4w0F4jpN6LZg&r=XDN_BIPGnpb6V0w5M9FADw&m=Q0wrjWHyNQrNnMf8yl4R-H3NwHTsVq2fji3sO7gkS8w&s=9u5yj0gYJFim2x6FdA8waxCqq-gl34_8qcHhDRt_SKU&e=> On Thursday, September 8, 2016 2:19pm, "DeLong, Owen" <owen@AKAMAI.COM<mailto:owen@AKAMAI.COM>> said:
I personally like this plan, as it preserves the open nature of the exchange and provides a way that any interested party can participate in the governance of the exchange with a relatively minimal poll tax, as it were, yet provides a good clear path for people who get more value from the exchange and have the ability to contribute more to it to do so.
In the interest of transparency, Akamai may be perceived to benefit from this model vs. a flat-rate model. However, I would prefer this model, even if that were not the case because I believe this model is sustainable yet lowers the barrier of entry to participation in the exchange. Each additional connection to the exchange provides value to all members of the exchange. Active participants provide even more value. This model encourages active participation as well as a mechanism for financial sustainability.
I do not believe this would rise to the level of COI if this were to come before the board during my tenure (if I am elected), but I am open to input from others who may feel differently.
Owen
On Sep 8, 2016, at 11:05 , David Farmer <farmer@UMN.EDU<mailto:farmer@UMN.EDU><mailto:farmer@umn.edu<mailto:farmer@umn.edu>>> wrote:
I'm not a candidate and will not be a candidate for the Board. However, I propose the following Membership and Sponsorship Model, including both Membership Dues and Sponsorship levels for MICE Members and Non-Member Sponsors.
The dollar values are just my suggestions, I think they should work but they are primarily intended to illustrate the model.
With this Model, any network may connect to the Exchange, but all networks participating in governance, known as Members, will have some minimal skin-in-the-game. Further, the Model implies Networks with 10G or larger ports probably should participate at a more significant level, but this is not a requirement for access to 10G or larger ports or even to participate in governance.
The Friends of MICE Sponsorship level is intended to be accessible to anyone interested, including individual users of the Internet.
My proposal;
As an Open Internet Exchange any network with a uniquely registered Autonomous System Number (ASN) may connect to MICE. However, Non-Member networks are provided ports on the Exchange on an as-available basis only and Non-Members do not participate in the governance of the Exchange or the MICE Organization, but may observe and participate in its discussions.
Networks connected to the Exchange, or Data Centers hosting an Exchange switch, may become Members and participate in the governance of the Exchange and the MICE Organization by paying Membership Dues at either level listed below. Members are provided prefered access to 1G Exchange ports, and are provided access to 10G or larger Exchange ports on an as-available basis.
Sustaining or higher Members are committed to sustaining and growing the Exchange by electing to pay Sustaining Membership Dues and/or paying Basic Membership Dues and providing other Sponsorship to the Exchange of a value totaling $1000 or more. In recognition to this additional commitment, Sustaining or higher Members are provided prefered access to 10G or larger Exchange ports.
Basic Membership Dues - $100 Sustaining Membership Dues - $1000 (Dues are paid in cash or cash equivalents only, and may not be provided through in-kind services or equipment)
Beyond Dues from Members, MICE accepts Sponsorship both from Members and Non-Members Sponsors as cash, cash equivalents, in-kind services or equipment. Sponsorship is recognized at the following escalating levels based on the total value provided annually.
Friends of MICE - Sponsorship of $50 ore more annually Sustaining Members or Sponsors - Sponsorship of $1,000 or more annually Silver Members or Sponsors - Sponsorship of $2,500 or more annually Gold Members or Sponsors - Sponsorship of $5,000 or more annually Platinum Members or Sponsors - Sponsorship of $10,000 or more annually
Sponsorship of $20,000 or more are recognized with multiple years at the Platinum level.
Friends of MICE are list on a page on the MICE website. Sustaining or higher Members are annotated as such in their listings on the MICE website. All Sustaining or higher Members and Sponsors are listed on the MICE website, with higher levels receiving more prominent placement. Silver or higher Members and Sponsors are recognized in MICE marketing materials, with higher levels receiving more prominent placement.
Thanks
-- =============================================== David Farmer Email:farmer@umn.edu<mailto:Email%3Afarmer@umn.edu><mailto:Email%3Afarmer@umn.edu<mailto:Email%253Afarmer@umn.edu>> Networking & Telecommunication Services Office of Information Technology University of Minnesota 2218 University Ave SE Phone: 612-626-0815<tel:612-626-0815><tel:612-626-0815<tel:612-626-0815>> Minneapolis, MN 55414-3029 Cell: 612-812-9952<tel:612-812-9952><tel:612-812-9952<tel:612-812-9952>> ===============================================
________________________________ To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link: http://lists.iphouse.net/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__lists.iphouse.net_cgi-2Dbin_wa-3FSUBED1-3DMICE-2DDISCUSS-26A-3D1&d=DQMFaQ&c=96ZbZZcaMF4w0F4jpN6LZg&r=XDN_BIPGnpb6V0w5M9FADw&m=Q0wrjWHyNQrNnMf8yl4R-H3NwHTsVq2fji3sO7gkS8w&s=nmqz8X2bw__lDrw-seUlM6CZGeh87XkjXW8IDq7VcFk&e=>
I like Mr. Farmer's proposal, it's got a little bit of an MPR feel to it, but I won't hold it against him :) So, there's Neutrality-- which I think everyone connected to MICE has a common mindset in this department. But many of us connect to MICE for very different reasons, so I suspect it will never be equal. Neutral, yes. But probably never completely equal. ~Matthew On Thu, Sep 8, 2016 at 10:08 PM, Hannigan, Martin <marty@akamai.com> wrote:
Classes create inequities.
Im not in favor of this proposal. Open to discuss, but this degrades the premise of neutrality and equality IMHO.
Its a great start!
/myself
Best,
-M<
On Sep 8, 2016, at 23:02, Shaun Carlson <shaun.carlson@ARVIG.COM <shaun.carlson@arvig.com>> wrote:
David,
I like the premise of this plan and it preserves the multiple options/levels that have been consistently requested in our meetings and discussions on this topic over the past several years.
s
*Shaun Carlson *Director of Information Technology | Arvig ph: (218) 346-8673 | em: shaun.carlson@arvig.com
On Thu, Sep 8, 2016 at 2:36 PM, Nevin Lyne <nevin@enginehosting.com> wrote:
As a person and company that has donated hardware and services to MICE but I am not directly a member, rather I take advantage of MICE as a customer of IPHouse this provides a believer in MICE to direct assist and be recognized as working as part of the MICE community without actually being a directly connected network.
Just my take on this idea and as someone that would sponsor both directly and in-kind.
-Nevin
-- Nevin Lyne -- Founder & Director of Technology -- Arcustech, LLC. - arcustech.com <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__arcustech.com&d=DQMFaQ&c=96ZbZZcaMF4w0F4jpN6LZg&r=XDN_BIPGnpb6V0w5M9FADw&m=Q0wrjWHyNQrNnMf8yl4R-H3NwHTsVq2fji3sO7gkS8w&s=Fp9ZTDOBmND2tTWIxSOb0_dpl1OQ8QDgtZqqCJiBTx0&e=> -- Gippy's Internet Solutions, LLC. - enginehosting.com <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__enginehosting.com&d=DQMFaQ&c=96ZbZZcaMF4w0F4jpN6LZg&r=XDN_BIPGnpb6V0w5M9FADw&m=Q0wrjWHyNQrNnMf8yl4R-H3NwHTsVq2fji3sO7gkS8w&s=9u5yj0gYJFim2x6FdA8waxCqq-gl34_8qcHhDRt_SKU&e=>
On Thursday, September 8, 2016 2:19pm, "DeLong, Owen" <owen@AKAMAI.COM> said:
I personally like this plan, as it preserves the open nature of the exchange and provides a way that any interested party can participate in the governance of the exchange with a relatively minimal poll tax, as it were, yet provides a good clear path for people who get more value from the exchange and have the ability to contribute more to it to do so.
In the interest of transparency, Akamai may be perceived to benefit from this model vs. a flat-rate model. However, I would prefer this model, even if that were not the case because I believe this model is sustainable yet lowers the barrier of entry to participation in the exchange. Each additional connection to the exchange provides value to all members of the exchange. Active participants provide even more value. This model encourages active participation as well as a mechanism for financial sustainability.
I do not believe this would rise to the level of COI if this were to come before the board during my tenure (if I am elected), but I am open to input from others who may feel differently.
Owen
On Sep 8, 2016, at 11:05 , David Farmer <farmer@UMN.EDU<mailto:farmer@ umn.edu>> wrote:
I'm not a candidate and will not be a candidate for the Board. However, I propose the following Membership and Sponsorship Model, including both Membership Dues and Sponsorship levels for MICE Members and Non-Member Sponsors.
The dollar values are just my suggestions, I think they should work but they are primarily intended to illustrate the model.
With this Model, any network may connect to the Exchange, but all networks participating in governance, known as Members, will have some minimal skin-in-the-game. Further, the Model implies Networks with 10G or larger ports probably should participate at a more significant level, but this is not a requirement for access to 10G or larger ports or even to participate in governance.
The Friends of MICE Sponsorship level is intended to be accessible to anyone interested, including individual users of the Internet.
My proposal;
As an Open Internet Exchange any network with a uniquely registered Autonomous System Number (ASN) may connect to MICE. However, Non-Member networks are provided ports on the Exchange on an as-available basis only and Non-Members do not participate in the governance of the Exchange or the MICE Organization, but may observe and participate in its discussions.
Networks connected to the Exchange, or Data Centers hosting an Exchange switch, may become Members and participate in the governance of the Exchange and the MICE Organization by paying Membership Dues at either level listed below. Members are provided prefered access to 1G Exchange ports, and are provided access to 10G or larger Exchange ports on an as-available basis.
Sustaining or higher Members are committed to sustaining and growing the Exchange by electing to pay Sustaining Membership Dues and/or paying Basic Membership Dues and providing other Sponsorship to the Exchange of a value totaling $1000 or more. In recognition to this additional commitment, Sustaining or higher Members are provided prefered access to 10G or larger Exchange ports.
Basic Membership Dues - $100 Sustaining Membership Dues - $1000 (Dues are paid in cash or cash equivalents only, and may not be provided through in-kind services or equipment)
Beyond Dues from Members, MICE accepts Sponsorship both from Members and Non-Members Sponsors as cash, cash equivalents, in-kind services or equipment. Sponsorship is recognized at the following escalating levels based on the total value provided annually.
Friends of MICE - Sponsorship of $50 ore more annually Sustaining Members or Sponsors - Sponsorship of $1,000 or more annually Silver Members or Sponsors - Sponsorship of $2,500 or more annually Gold Members or Sponsors - Sponsorship of $5,000 or more annually Platinum Members or Sponsors - Sponsorship of $10,000 or more annually
Sponsorship of $20,000 or more are recognized with multiple years at the Platinum level.
Friends of MICE are list on a page on the MICE website. Sustaining or higher Members are annotated as such in their listings on the MICE website. All Sustaining or higher Members and Sponsors are listed on the MICE website, with higher levels receiving more prominent placement. Silver or higher Members and Sponsors are recognized in MICE marketing materials, with higher levels receiving more prominent placement.
Thanks
-- =============================================== David Farmer Email:farmer@umn.edu<mailto:E mail%3Afarmer@umn.edu> Networking & Telecommunication Services Office of Information Technology University of Minnesota 2218 University Ave SE Phone: 612-626-0815<tel:612-626-0815> Minneapolis, MN 55414-3029 Cell: 612-812-9952<tel:612-812-9952> ===============================================
------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link: http://lists.iphouse.net/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1 <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__lists.iphouse.net_cgi-2Dbin_wa-3FSUBED1-3DMICE-2DDISCUSS-26A-3D1&d=DQMFaQ&c=96ZbZZcaMF4w0F4jpN6LZg&r=XDN_BIPGnpb6V0w5M9FADw&m=Q0wrjWHyNQrNnMf8yl4R-H3NwHTsVq2fji3sO7gkS8w&s=nmqz8X2bw__lDrw-seUlM6CZGeh87XkjXW8IDq7VcFk&e=>
------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link: http://lists.iphouse.net/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1
On Thu, Sep 8, 2016 at 10:28 PM, Matthew Beckwell <matthewb@aitech.net> wrote:
I like Mr. Farmer's proposal, it's got a little bit of an MPR feel to it, but I won't hold it against him :)
Well close, I think it was the recent PBS pledge drive echoing in my head, at least the "sustaining member" bit. :) Actually, I think they are both apt analogies, PBS and MPR are community funded public services, that many people benefit from, but in varying and unequal ways.
So, there's Neutrality-- which I think everyone connected to MICE has a common mindset in this department. But many of us connect to MICE for very different reasons, so I suspect it will never be equal. Neutral, yes. But probably never completely equal.
~Matthew
-- =============================================== David Farmer Email:farmer@umn.edu Networking & Telecommunication Services Office of Information Technology University of Minnesota 2218 University Ave SE Phone: 612-626-0815 Minneapolis, MN 55414-3029 Cell: 612-812-9952 ===============================================
On Fri, Sep 09, 2016 at 03:08:14AM +0000, Hannigan, Martin wrote:
Classes create inequities.
Im not in favor of this proposal. Open to discuss, but this degrades the premise of neutrality and equality IMHO.
I'm on team M< right now. And I agree, it's a great start. -- Mike Horwath, reachable via drechsau@Geeks.ORG
On Fri, Sep 09, 2016 at 03:08:14AM +0000, Hannigan, Martin wrote:
Classes create inequities.
Im not in favor of this proposal. Open to discuss, but this degrades the premise of neutrality and equality IMHO.
I'm on team M< right now.
And I agree, it's a great start.
As long as the Sponsorship levels in no way mean you have more voting ability I am not sure how this hurts neutrality or equality. Technically we already do this to some degree on the web site by simply a) listing members and b) listing people/companies that have donated money, equipment or other services. As not all members have donated time, money or resources to the exchange. I am seeing this as: a) members of the exchange are members of the exchange and have voting rights along with a port or ports on the exchange. b) sponsors at any level, may not be exchange members with a port active (like myself) but want to support the efforts of the exchange and would be nice to have voting rights like a member of the exchange has. But I guess I fail to see how you wanting to donate $10k/yr to the exchange for some web site level of recognition vs. my $1000/yr donate all that much power to you. Might be good for some bragging rights somewhere, but again as long as the sponsorship levels in no way give more control/voting rights/etc. over the affairs of the exchange I am not seeing how sponsorship levels hurts equality. Something like this actually I think helps equality for people/companies like mine where we do not have a need of direct ports on the exchange, but indirectly benefit from the exchange and would like to both support the exchange and have some say (a vote) as a member of the exchange. Currently I can't be a voting member of the exchange unless I have an active port, which I don't need, but we actively donate resources and hardware to the exchange. -Nevin -- Nevin Lyne -- Founder & Director of Technology -- Arcustech, LLC. - arcustech.com -- Gippy's Internet Solutions, LLC. - enginehosting.com
On Thu, Sep 8, 2016 at 11:06 PM, Nevin Lyne <nevin@enginehosting.com> wrote:
.... Something like this actually I think helps equality for people/companies like mine where we do not have a need of direct ports on the exchange, but indirectly benefit from the exchange and would like to both support the exchange and have some say (a vote) as a member of the exchange. Currently I can't be a voting member of the exchange unless I have an active port, which I don't need, but we actively donate resources and hardware to the exchange.
-Nevin
-- Nevin Lyne -- Founder & Director of Technology -- Arcustech, LLC. - arcustech.com -- Gippy's Internet Solutions, LLC. - enginehosting.com
I added paying member dues in addition to being attached as a membership requirement for two reasons; 1. It ensures at least some minimal financial contribution by everyone participating in the governance of the exchange. 2. And, by requiring an additional action beyond simply connecting to be a member, organizations that can't or simply don't want to be part of the governance can connect and exchange traffic, without causing issues for themselves or the good governance of the exchange. If a network that never intends to participate in the governance is counted as part of the membership, that will mess with quorum for meetings. I very much appreciate your participation and donations and wish there was a good way to give you and others like you a vote in the governance of the exchange. However, requiring a network attached to the exchange for membership provides important protections. It helps prevent hostile or malicious takeovers. If sponsors got a vote simply by donating money, anyone with sufficient money could essentially stuff the ballot box. Less conspiratorial, it helps ensure that those governing the exchange, are tightly bound to the consequences of their decisions, which is usually a good thing from a governance perspective. If you have suggestions to safely allow broader participation I'd love to hear them. Thanks. -- =============================================== David Farmer Email:farmer@umn.edu Networking & Telecommunication Services Office of Information Technology University of Minnesota 2218 University Ave SE Phone: 612-626-0815 Minneapolis, MN 55414-3029 Cell: 612-812-9952 ===============================================
I very much appreciate your participation and donations and wish there was a good way to give you and others like you a vote in the governance of the exchange. However, requiring a network attached to the exchange for membership provides important protections. It helps prevent hostile or malicious takeovers. If sponsors got a vote simply by donating money, anyone with sufficient money could essentially stuff the ballot box. Less conspiratorial, it helps ensure that those governing the exchange, are tightly bound to the consequences of their decisions, which is usually a good thing from a governance perspective.
Forgive me I likely read something slightly wrong, pain meds from oral surgery can do that. That does make sense.
If you have suggestions to safely allow broader participation I'd love to hear them.
For cases like mine there could be a two part process a) I am indirectly part of the network as we are connected to a network of a member, IPHouse. We have both IP space from them, and they announce our own IP ranges via BGP for us. So traffic to our web hosting clients are routed via MICE to us via IPHouse's connection to MICE. We are also a large user of CloudFlare, and an Optimized Hosting Partner of theirs supplying a second connection to some degree of how traffic routes through MICE members to our clients. Just showing a case in how we could be seen as a connected member though not currently directly through our own port on the exchange. b) For a case like this that a sponsor can show a direct routing of traffic to them through a connected member, could leave it up to a vote of existing members if that sponsor qualifies enough to be a member? Regardless of sponsorship level. Just as you pointed out that some members of the exchange may not want to do anything to exchange traffic and not deal with governance you may have cases of a company that passes traffic over the exchange because of routing through a member's port and do want to be involved with a vote as what the exchange does, does impact traffic to my network too. Again semantics at this point as this of course is just the start of how your suggestion might work as a membership model, but I wanted to get my thoughts out there, again though I am not an official member of the exchange but have been involved from early on in the exchange to some degree. -Nevin -- Nevin Lyne -- Founder & Director of Technology -- Arcustech, LLC. - arcustech.com -- Gippy's Internet Solutions, LLC. - enginehosting.com
On 09/09/2016 12:14 AM, David Farmer wrote:
I added paying member dues in addition to being attached as a membership requirement for two reasons ...
I agree with this point 100%. I believe any solution should have this as a component. I am very opposed to the rest of proposal. I highly doubt that the slightly increased recognition that comes from established sponsorship levels will increase donations in any significant way. I see how donations equal priority access to ports, but I'm very concerned about the "enforcement" of that. If we have a non-trivial number of non-member participants, who gets kicked off when a member needs the last available port? Do we kick off the participant with the lowest amount of traffic, which gives big players an advantage? Do we kick off the participant who connected last, entrenching older participants? Do we make the board decide, putting them in a complicated and conflict-prone position? If we don't kick anybody off, which seems like the most likely outcome, then priority access isn't very meaningful, and thus disappears as an incentive. More importantly, the "MPR model" does nothing to address the fact that invoices and donations are handled very differently in organizations. Ironically, I don't think this even works for the University of Minnesota. I believe it was your position that you needed an invoice, as "the University doesn't give donations; it accepts them". -- Richard
On 9/9/2016 1:28 AM, Richard Laager wrote:
Ironically, I don't think this even works for the University of Minnesota. I believe it was your position that you needed an invoice, as "the University doesn't give donations; it accepts them".
I was actually going to bring this up, but it wasn't the U of M that had this issue, it was Wisconsin/BadgerNet. I believe they stated that even a "membership" might be problematic, but port fees could definitely be paid. -Ben Ben Franske Inver Hills Community College (MICE via MNSCU via UMN)
I would like to humbly suggest that we first focus the discussion on the revenue model we want to achieve (flat fee vs. voluntary differentiations vs. differentiated services). Once we come to consensus on that, it will be much easier to look at all the corner cases for making sure that each organization can provide money in a way that meets both our and their accounting needs. Owen
On Sep 9, 2016, at 10:09 , Ben Franske <ben.lists@FRANSKE.COM> wrote:
On 9/9/2016 1:28 AM, Richard Laager wrote:
Ironically, I don't think this even works for the University of Minnesota. I believe it was your position that you needed an invoice, as "the University doesn't give donations; it accepts them".
I was actually going to bring this up, but it wasn't the U of M that had this issue, it was Wisconsin/BadgerNet. I believe they stated that even a "membership" might be problematic, but port fees could definitely be paid.
-Ben
Ben Franske Inver Hills Community College (MICE via MNSCU via UMN)
Is it the tying of Membership with the Sponsorship levels that you object to? I could see networks just being Members or not, ditching the idea of any distinction amongst Members by their sponsorship levels. With sponsors recognized by their level of sponsorship only, completely independent of their membership status. Would that be better? Thank you for the feedback. On Thu, Sep 8, 2016 at 10:08 PM, Hannigan, Martin <marty@akamai.com> wrote:
Classes create inequities.
Im not in favor of this proposal. Open to discuss, but this degrades the premise of neutrality and equality IMHO.
Its a great start!
/myself
Best,
-M<
On Sep 8, 2016, at 23:02, Shaun Carlson <shaun.carlson@ARVIG.COM <shaun.carlson@arvig.com>> wrote:
David,
I like the premise of this plan and it preserves the multiple options/levels that have been consistently requested in our meetings and discussions on this topic over the past several years.
s
*Shaun Carlson *Director of Information Technology | Arvig ph: (218) 346-8673 | em: shaun.carlson@arvig.com
On Thu, Sep 8, 2016 at 2:36 PM, Nevin Lyne <nevin@enginehosting.com> wrote:
As a person and company that has donated hardware and services to MICE but I am not directly a member, rather I take advantage of MICE as a customer of IPHouse this provides a believer in MICE to direct assist and be recognized as working as part of the MICE community without actually being a directly connected network.
Just my take on this idea and as someone that would sponsor both directly and in-kind.
-Nevin
-- Nevin Lyne -- Founder & Director of Technology -- Arcustech, LLC. - arcustech.com <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__arcustech.com&d=DQMFaQ&c=96ZbZZcaMF4w0F4jpN6LZg&r=XDN_BIPGnpb6V0w5M9FADw&m=Q0wrjWHyNQrNnMf8yl4R-H3NwHTsVq2fji3sO7gkS8w&s=Fp9ZTDOBmND2tTWIxSOb0_dpl1OQ8QDgtZqqCJiBTx0&e=> -- Gippy's Internet Solutions, LLC. - enginehosting.com <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__enginehosting.com&d=DQMFaQ&c=96ZbZZcaMF4w0F4jpN6LZg&r=XDN_BIPGnpb6V0w5M9FADw&m=Q0wrjWHyNQrNnMf8yl4R-H3NwHTsVq2fji3sO7gkS8w&s=9u5yj0gYJFim2x6FdA8waxCqq-gl34_8qcHhDRt_SKU&e=>
On Thursday, September 8, 2016 2:19pm, "DeLong, Owen" <owen@AKAMAI.COM> said:
I personally like this plan, as it preserves the open nature of the exchange and provides a way that any interested party can participate in the governance of the exchange with a relatively minimal poll tax, as it were, yet provides a good clear path for people who get more value from the exchange and have the ability to contribute more to it to do so.
In the interest of transparency, Akamai may be perceived to benefit from this model vs. a flat-rate model. However, I would prefer this model, even if that were not the case because I believe this model is sustainable yet lowers the barrier of entry to participation in the exchange. Each additional connection to the exchange provides value to all members of the exchange. Active participants provide even more value. This model encourages active participation as well as a mechanism for financial sustainability.
I do not believe this would rise to the level of COI if this were to come before the board during my tenure (if I am elected), but I am open to input from others who may feel differently.
Owen
On Sep 8, 2016, at 11:05 , David Farmer <farmer@UMN.EDU<mailto:farmer@ umn.edu>> wrote:
I'm not a candidate and will not be a candidate for the Board. However, I propose the following Membership and Sponsorship Model, including both Membership Dues and Sponsorship levels for MICE Members and Non-Member Sponsors.
The dollar values are just my suggestions, I think they should work but they are primarily intended to illustrate the model.
With this Model, any network may connect to the Exchange, but all networks participating in governance, known as Members, will have some minimal skin-in-the-game. Further, the Model implies Networks with 10G or larger ports probably should participate at a more significant level, but this is not a requirement for access to 10G or larger ports or even to participate in governance.
The Friends of MICE Sponsorship level is intended to be accessible to anyone interested, including individual users of the Internet.
My proposal;
As an Open Internet Exchange any network with a uniquely registered Autonomous System Number (ASN) may connect to MICE. However, Non-Member networks are provided ports on the Exchange on an as-available basis only and Non-Members do not participate in the governance of the Exchange or the MICE Organization, but may observe and participate in its discussions.
Networks connected to the Exchange, or Data Centers hosting an Exchange switch, may become Members and participate in the governance of the Exchange and the MICE Organization by paying Membership Dues at either level listed below. Members are provided prefered access to 1G Exchange ports, and are provided access to 10G or larger Exchange ports on an as-available basis.
Sustaining or higher Members are committed to sustaining and growing the Exchange by electing to pay Sustaining Membership Dues and/or paying Basic Membership Dues and providing other Sponsorship to the Exchange of a value totaling $1000 or more. In recognition to this additional commitment, Sustaining or higher Members are provided prefered access to 10G or larger Exchange ports.
Basic Membership Dues - $100 Sustaining Membership Dues - $1000 (Dues are paid in cash or cash equivalents only, and may not be provided through in-kind services or equipment)
Beyond Dues from Members, MICE accepts Sponsorship both from Members and Non-Members Sponsors as cash, cash equivalents, in-kind services or equipment. Sponsorship is recognized at the following escalating levels based on the total value provided annually.
Friends of MICE - Sponsorship of $50 ore more annually Sustaining Members or Sponsors - Sponsorship of $1,000 or more annually Silver Members or Sponsors - Sponsorship of $2,500 or more annually Gold Members or Sponsors - Sponsorship of $5,000 or more annually Platinum Members or Sponsors - Sponsorship of $10,000 or more annually
Sponsorship of $20,000 or more are recognized with multiple years at the Platinum level.
Friends of MICE are list on a page on the MICE website. Sustaining or higher Members are annotated as such in their listings on the MICE website. All Sustaining or higher Members and Sponsors are listed on the MICE website, with higher levels receiving more prominent placement. Silver or higher Members and Sponsors are recognized in MICE marketing materials, with higher levels receiving more prominent placement.
Thanks
-- =============================================== David Farmer Email:farmer@umn.edu<mailto:E mail%3Afarmer@umn.edu> Networking & Telecommunication Services Office of Information Technology University of Minnesota 2218 University Ave SE Phone: 612-626-0815<tel:612-626-0815> Minneapolis, MN 55414-3029 Cell: 612-812-9952<tel:612-812-9952> ===============================================
------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link: http://lists.iphouse.net/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1 <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__lists.iphouse.net_cgi-2Dbin_wa-3FSUBED1-3DMICE-2DDISCUSS-26A-3D1&d=DQMFaQ&c=96ZbZZcaMF4w0F4jpN6LZg&r=XDN_BIPGnpb6V0w5M9FADw&m=Q0wrjWHyNQrNnMf8yl4R-H3NwHTsVq2fji3sO7gkS8w&s=nmqz8X2bw__lDrw-seUlM6CZGeh87XkjXW8IDq7VcFk&e=>
------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link: http://lists.iphouse.net/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1
-- =============================================== David Farmer Email:farmer@umn.edu Networking & Telecommunication Services Office of Information Technology University of Minnesota 2218 University Ave SE Phone: 612-626-0815 Minneapolis, MN 55414-3029 Cell: 612-812-9952 ===============================================
I am a fan of the SIX model of revenue: you pay to connect to the exchange up front and bigger ports (ie 10-Gig) cost more than smaller (ie 1-Gig). This fee applies to MICE core equipment only. Port costs on extension switches are dictated by the respective extension switch operators. As there are already many existing connected ports I would also be in favor of retroactively charging each connected port based on their current port type(s) in use at the time of the implementation of said fees. Already connected organizations that want to take a bit of time to budget can make arrangements with the board. Also, I would be in favor of implementing this soon instead of waiting for the desired but elusive non-profit status unless someone has knowledge of its actual pending completion. I feel this method alleviates the problem of non-payment induced disconnects, switch port reservations, tracking payments, etc. I don't know the history of other exchanges with regards to disconnecting organizations, freeing up port and IP number resources, but clearly sometimes companies go under or otherwise have a change in strategy and no longer desire to be connected yet do not formally announce they are disconnecting. So to that end, after some period of time (X months) of being in an unreachable state via their IXP IP addresses, a disconnect is implemented unless said organization otherwise scheduled or coordinated with MICE to be offline for an extended period of time. I am guessing there is some historical data available from other exchanges or other best practices that could be used to guide us on how to do this. With regards to gaining membership/voting rights I like the notion of requiring an active port connection to the exchange (core or extension) with an ASN and reachable exchange assigned IP address(es). An alternate method of gaining membership/voting rights would be from serving on the board of the exchange which would not require one to be an already connected organization of the exchange. Summary of member voting eligibility Provides Eligibility to Vote: * Elected board members. Board members may or may not represent a connected organization, I assume the bylaws cover the 1-vote max per organization but that is implied here * Connected organizations with ASN and at least one reachable exchange assigned IP number Does Not Provide Eligibility to Vote: * Sponsors, 3rd parties, etc (eg Cologix, operators of extension switches) * Organizations exclusively using ancillary exchange services (eg pvlans) ________________________________ From: MICE Discuss [MICE-DISCUSS@LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET] on behalf of Steve Howard [showard@PAULBUNYAN.NET] Sent: Thursday, September 15, 2016 7:22 PM To: MICE-DISCUSS@LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET Subject: Re: [MICE-DISCUSS] Proposed Membership and Sponsorship Model I'm a little "late to the party" for this discussion, but I'd like to add a few of my thoughts: First off, I'd like to thank Dave for coming up with great ideas and points for discussion. MICE is a cooperative (not a charity). As a cooperative, we need to treat everybody equally. I feel that everybody should have to pay membership dues at some level, perhaps an amount based upon port size. If we fail to require the payment of dues, we will have different classes of users and the potential for discontent as some people don't pay their fair share. Like Martin said, "Classes create inequities". If people don't pay, they need to be disconnected (after a reasonable grace period). The dollar amounts due will likely be very small, the exchange has gotten by without any payments required for several years. I don't think that the fees that would need to be charged would be anything that an organization connecting to the exchange cannot absorb. If they can't handle ~$9/month (using Dave's example numbers), they won't be around long in this industry. I agree with Richard Laager's points about enforcement. We need to enforce whatever policy is decided. I don't like any scenario where the board might have the option to waive fees. That will create the feeling of the "good 'ol boy" system. I also think that all newly connected members should get their initial connect period free, primarily as a sales tool. I'd like to give new members a chance to "try before you buy" to see if it works for them. Perhaps we bill annually and they don't pay until the next billing cycle starts (or some variation thereof)? Until they pay, they should be subject to their port being assigned to somebody else, not be official members, and not able to vote. How do we handle members that are connected to remote switches? Is the switch owner the member? The downstream users? Both? Who pays the port charges? Only the switch owner? Steve On 09/08/2016 01:05 PM, David Farmer wrote: I'm not a candidate and will not be a candidate for the Board. However, I propose the following Membership and Sponsorship Model, including both Membership Dues and Sponsorship levels for MICE Members and Non-Member Sponsors. The dollar values are just my suggestions, I think they should work but they are primarily intended to illustrate the model. With this Model, any network may connect to the Exchange, but all networks participating in governance, known as Members, will have some minimal skin-in-the-game. Further, the Model implies Networks with 10G or larger ports probably should participate at a more significant level, but this is not a requirement for access to 10G or larger ports or even to participate in governance. The Friends of MICE Sponsorship level is intended to be accessible to anyone interested, including individual users of the Internet. My proposal; As an Open Internet Exchange any network with a uniquely registered Autonomous System Number (ASN) may connect to MICE. However, Non-Member networks are provided ports on the Exchange on an as-available basis only and Non-Members do not participate in the governance of the Exchange or the MICE Organization, but may observe and participate in its discussions. Networks connected to the Exchange, or Data Centers hosting an Exchange switch, may become Members and participate in the governance of the Exchange and the MICE Organization by paying Membership Dues at either level listed below. Members are provided prefered access to 1G Exchange ports, and are provided access to 10G or larger Exchange ports on an as-available basis. Sustaining or higher Members are committed to sustaining and growing the Exchange by electing to pay Sustaining Membership Dues and/or paying Basic Membership Dues and providing other Sponsorship to the Exchange of a value totaling $1000 or more. In recognition to this additional commitment, Sustaining or higher Members are provided prefered access to 10G or larger Exchange ports. Basic Membership Dues - $100 Sustaining Membership Dues - $1000 (Dues are paid in cash or cash equivalents only, and may not be provided through in-kind services or equipment) Beyond Dues from Members, MICE accepts Sponsorship both from Members and Non-Members Sponsors as cash, cash equivalents, in-kind services or equipment. Sponsorship is recognized at the following escalating levels based on the total value provided annually. Friends of MICE - Sponsorship of $50 ore more annually Sustaining Members or Sponsors - Sponsorship of $1,000 or more annually Silver Members or Sponsors - Sponsorship of $2,500 or more annually Gold Members or Sponsors - Sponsorship of $5,000 or more annually Platinum Members or Sponsors - Sponsorship of $10,000 or more annually Sponsorship of $20,000 or more are recognized with multiple years at the Platinum level. Friends of MICE are list on a page on the MICE website. Sustaining or higher Members are annotated as such in their listings on the MICE website. All Sustaining or higher Members and Sponsors are listed on the MICE website, with higher levels receiving more prominent placement. Silver or higher Members and Sponsors are recognized in MICE marketing materials, with higher levels receiving more prominent placement. Thanks -- =============================================== David Farmer Email:farmer@umn.edu<mailto:Email%3Afarmer@umn.edu> Networking & Telecommunication Services Office of Information Technology University of Minnesota 2218 University Ave SE Phone: 612-626-0815<tel:612-626-0815> Minneapolis, MN 55414-3029 Cell: 612-812-9952<tel:612-812-9952> =============================================== ________________________________ To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link: http://lists.iphouse.net/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1 ________________________________ To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link: http://lists.iphouse.net/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1
I fully support this model as well. (see: https://www.seattleix.net/join) The large expenditures of new equipment are all member growth or new member driven. Recouping a 1/nth portion of those switch upgrade costs per member, plus some small overhead for the rest, seems to be a totally viable model and has worked well for SIX. (plus donations). The rest of the expense side of the house is pennies in comparison. For those that don’t think an IX can be driven, at least partially by donations, maybe review this as well: https://www.seattleix.net/contributors This simplifies things on the backend too: - one time payment vs monthly deposits via multiple methods that someone on MICE board would need to manage for 60+ members - members joining the IX have an easy sell internally of one time fee vs MRC above and beyond a cross connect (always infinitely harder to justify) Solves the root issue of new members and more bandwidth (higher speed ports) driving growth, and doesn’t penalize the little guys. Remote switches can charge their own rates, however, still need to pay the main core switch port costs. (https://www.seattleix.net/rules) -- Andrew Hoyos hoyosa@gmail.com
On Sep 19, 2016, at 2:35 PM, Justin Krejci <jkrejci@usinternet.com> wrote:
I am a fan of the SIX model of revenue: you pay to connect to the exchange up front and bigger ports (ie 10-Gig) cost more than smaller (ie 1-Gig). This fee applies to MICE core equipment only. Port costs on extension switches are dictated by the respective extension switch operators.
As there are already many existing connected ports I would also be in favor of retroactively charging each connected port based on their current port type(s) in use at the time of the implementation of said fees. Already connected organizations that want to take a bit of time to budget can make arrangements with the board. Also, I would be in favor of implementing this soon instead of waiting for the desired but elusive non-profit status unless someone has knowledge of its actual pending completion.
I've looked at this and I support the SIX style of user fees for MICE. I also very much like that the remotes can charge their own rates. This should create options for members who prefer a different style of payment (perhaps monthly with little upfront?). The other shared resource is address space. We may want to consider a cap per ASN. Perhaps 2 without board/tech committee approval? In the propose scenario there would be no direct cost to the end user for these. I'd also selfishly support membership voting rights for remote switch operators. Jay On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 4:56 PM, Andrew Hoyos <hoyosa@gmail.com> wrote:
I fully support this model as well. (see: https://www.seattleix.net/join)
The large expenditures of new equipment are all member growth or new member driven. Recouping a 1/nth portion of those switch upgrade costs per member, plus some small overhead for the rest, seems to be a totally viable model and has worked well for SIX. (plus donations). The rest of the expense side of the house is pennies in comparison.
For those that don’t think an IX can be driven, at least partially by donations, maybe review this as well: https://www.seattleix.net/ contributors
This simplifies things on the backend too: - one time payment vs monthly deposits via multiple methods that someone on MICE board would need to manage for 60+ members - members joining the IX have an easy sell internally of one time fee vs MRC above and beyond a cross connect (always infinitely harder to justify)
Solves the root issue of new members and more bandwidth (higher speed ports) driving growth, and doesn’t penalize the little guys.
Remote switches can charge their own rates, however, still need to pay the main core switch port costs. (https://www.seattleix.net/rules)
-- Andrew Hoyos hoyosa@gmail.com
On Sep 19, 2016, at 2:35 PM, Justin Krejci <jkrejci@usinternet.com> wrote:
I am a fan of the SIX model of revenue: you pay to connect to the exchange up front and bigger ports (ie 10-Gig) cost more than smaller (ie 1-Gig). This fee applies to MICE core equipment only. Port costs on extension switches are dictated by the respective extension switch operators.
As there are already many existing connected ports I would also be in favor of retroactively charging each connected port based on their current port type(s) in use at the time of the implementation of said fees. Already connected organizations that want to take a bit of time to budget can make arrangements with the board. Also, I would be in favor of implementing this soon instead of waiting for the desired but elusive non-profit status unless someone has knowledge of its actual pending completion.
-- Jay Hanke CTO Neutral Path Communications 3 Civic Center Plaza, Suite 204 Mankato, MN 56001 (507) 327-2398 mobile jayhanke@neutralpath.net www.neutralpath.net
participants (13)
-
Andrew Hoyos -
Ben Franske -
David Farmer -
DeLong, Owen -
Hannigan, Martin -
Jason Hanke -
Justin Krejci -
Matthew Beckwell -
Mike Horwath -
Nevin Lyne -
Richard Laager -
Shaun Carlson -
Steve Howard