============================================================================== ISOC Document 94-305 Title: Internet Society Strategic Plan Author(s): A.M. Rutkowski Date: 1994.11.28 Body: Board of Trustees Document: 94-305 Revision: basic Supersedes: - Status: Draft Maintainer: A.M. Rutkowski Access: unrestricted ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Internet Society Strategic Plan A. BACKGROUND 1. Evolution of the organization Although precursors of the Internet Society existed in the form of activities and relationships that extend back into the 60s and 70s, the notion of creating a permanent organization for the Internet was significantly advanced only in late 1990 via Email discussions among many of the people subsequently involved in its creation. From the outset, it’s objectives were focussed on pragmatic needs necessary to allow the Internet to scale, by providing permanent global organizational and funding mechanisms around what had been largely disparate volunteer activity, and to develop the Internet worldwide through information dissemination and coordination. See Appendix 1. After several months of discussion, Vint Cerf proceeded in June 1991 at INET'91 (Copenhagen) with the initial form of the organization as a "professional society" dictated largely by a combination of USA tax laws, familiarity with professional societies, and the state of the Internet environment and the needs as they existed at that time - i.e., an emerging global academic and research community. Almost from the outset, the needs being served by the Society, as well as its constituents, began to evolve. The Internet subsequently became more commercially-oriented, more global, and more accepted and used as key public information infrastructure - far faster than anyone anticipated. It order to assure the global recognition of Internet Standards, it also became necessary to maintain the Society as an International Organization and to pursue peer relationships. At the same time, the notion of Internet research and academic professionals became obscured and diminished in these larger developments. These changes were reflected both in the Society's functions and its sources of funding. This evolution and its pace have also been reflected in its organizational trappings, as it proceeded ever more rapidly toward a definitive permanent functional form: o announcement Jun 1991 o initial Board meeting Jun 1992 o incorporation Dec 1992 o establishment of permanent headquarters Apr 1994 o creation of a permanent International Secretariat Jul 1994 2. Needs of the Internet environment today The Internet and internetworking environment today exists on such a major, visible scale in both the business and public policy worlds, that some kind of permanent, global international organization is critical to performing the functions required of such a network infrastructure : o develop and promulgate public international standards, and assume responsibility for their intellectual property o fund, maintain, and coordinate global, regional, and national Internet administrative infrastructure, including secretariats, registration/certification/security centers (NICs, IPRAs, CERTs) o help facilitate the common requirements of Internet providers o provide a central authoritative point of reference information o effect policy coordination and infrastructure development among all affected parties, including other international organizations and national authorities o assist in providing for both global and local Internet collaboration and education These are such basic requirements, that if the Internet Society does not effect them, some other organization will do so; but there is almost universal sentiment that this entity should be ISOC. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- B. BASIC FORM OF THE ORGANIZATION In its form and function, the Society has existed as the non-governmental International Organization for the Internet, its technologies and applications. In proceeding to do this, the Society has followed well-established norms and practices of International Organizations, including eschewing any direct involvement in regional or national standards bodies, and establishing relations directly with other International Organizations. These are important requirements for maintaining international standing. Effecting International Organization stature has been a key component of the organization's strategy for nearly the past three years. Global International Organizations typically have considerable flexibility as to form and constituents. However, they should equitably encompass all the parties of interest in the field they purport to cover, and serve a global constituency. Generally speaking, professional societies or industry groups by themselves do not qualify as international organizations - although aggregates of them may do so. Thus for example, the IEEE does not have standing as an international organization even though it has an international scope, and as a result must submit the standards which it develops to other bodies such as the ISO for promulgation as standards. On the other hand, the International Law Association or the International Association of Astronautics and Aeronautics do have such standing. The exceptions to these general norms are the treaty-based International Organizations which generally consist only of States, but occasionally may include legal persons. Under the general aegis of an International Organization, the Society can construct a broad membership of individuals and organizations. If the Society intends to sustain its broad role as the International Organization for the Internet, it needs to assure that all the parties of interest are fully engaged in the organization. Thus, given the current directions of the Internet, it would seem prudent to have organizational members play a more prominent role in the Society. Unless the Society wants to significantly withdraw from most of the roles it has been providing over the past three years - especially it’s international standards and coordination roles - there is simply no alternative to any other organizational capacity than an international organization. The premise is constantly being tested. For example, the Society has recently been informed of an initiative by the American Telecommunication and Information Standards (ATIS) organization to take over responsibility for Internet Standards, the IETF, and the IETF Secretariat. ATIS is an ANSI affiliated USA telco standards organization. Society representatives also regularly receive requests that ISOC should join domestic standards bodies as members. The case for ISOC continuing as an International Organization includes: 1. Widespread support. The overwhelming preponderance of opinion voiced on the matter - particularly from outside the USA - seems to support the Society maintaining the basic form of an International Organization. 2. Unique opportunity. There are presently no other Internet global International Organizations. TERENA, for example, is a regional International Organization. 3. Minimal requirements. There are relatively few requirements or constraints in maintaining an International Organization other than effecting the proper structural form and running secretariats and other bodies that support global constituency. This does, however, have some significant financial considerations. 4. Supporting Internet standards and standards processes. It is generally accepted that Internet Standards and the associated standards making process is not only the foundation for the Internet's success, but also the best in the business. By undertaking to support and promulgate those standards as an International Organization, the Society: - maintains the independence, speed, and vitality of that process - minimizes non-tariff trade barriers potentially imposed by national, regional, or international regulations 5. Maintaining Internet culture. Establishing the Internet Society as the international organization for the internet field, allows for maintaining the processes and culture that contributed substantially to the success of the technology, the network and its uses. These attributes include: openness, cooperation, technology transfer, non-dominance of any one actor or sector, and freedom from intergovernmental controls. If the Society did not exist as an international organization, a lacuna would exist for another existing or new organization to assume that position, and might not share these same objectives. 6. Providing global focal point. Individuals and organizations of all kinds around the world have sought a neutral, global organization through which they can all cooperate and work toward common ends. 7. Minimizing disputes concerning organization form. The well- established concept of international organization minimizes potential disputes over the character and form or the organization. Other organizational concepts like "professional society" or "trade association" are not well understood across different national cultures, and engender very different reactions among members and trustees. The concept of international organization, on the other hand, encompasses functions that directly benefit industries, professionals, as well as nations and the world in general. The case for ISOC not continuing as an International Organization includes: 1. Greater benefits for professional constituents. Maintaining the Internet Society as only a professional organization with an international focus would in a narrow sense probably serve the interests of individual and professional constituents better. Such an organization could concentrate primarily on conferences and publications, and not deal with tedious and imperfect consensus building necessary to resolve issues and disputes among industry, national authorities, and other parties that are part of operational, standards making, and policy making processes. 2. Minimal legal liability. Legal liability is generally a function of the roles played and the disputes likely to arise. Individual professional organizations that only conduct conferences and publish are unlikely to suffer legal liability. International organizations with major roles in supporting and shaping entire infrastructures and business fields, generally face greater risk of being party to a suit - sometimes in complex jurisdictional settings. The benefits of ISOC as an International Organization would appear to significantly outweigh the case for the converse, as well as more compatible with the initial basis for the organization. *********************************************** RECOMMENDED STRATEGY: Take all needed steps to maintain and enhance the Society's stature as an International Organization. This includes potential changes to the Charter and By-Laws of the Society. *********************************************** ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- C. SCOPE AND PURPOSE OF THE ORGANIZATION Scope. There is a threshold question concerning the subject matter within the purview of the Society. The word "Internet" has several different meanings. The most narrow interpretation is the open aggregate network of networks known as the Internet. Broader interpretations include closed Enterprise Internets, and an endless variety of technologies and applications that are significantly associated with both kinds of Internet. However, because the Internet standards and the associated technology and techniques implicate a broad spectrum of networks, services, and uses - the scope of the Society should be commensurate. Furthermore, these environments are highly intertwined, and result in synergies and economies of scale that significantly benefit. Another dimension of scope involved the ambiguity of "Internet applications" and their use. A broad interpretation includes the skill sets, conditions, and motivations, for operation and use of Internet capabilities - as well as understanding the resulting effects. This in turns invokes significant public policy, societal, educational and legal issues among others. While it might be feasible to cast the Society's scope only in terms of "the Internet" as a technical creature if the Society was only an individual professional organization not dealing with standards, proceeding with such a narrow scope would not be compatible with a broader basis and set of purposes. At the same time, it's work emphasizing that the primary focus of the Society is on developing, propagating, and sustaining the Internet. *********************************************** RECOMMENDED STRATEGY: Emphasize that the Society's scope primarily includes the Internet, its technologies, and applications for both the public and private Internets; and additionally includes broader topics engaged as a result of Internet implementation and use. *********************************************** Purpose. In general, the Internet Society exists for the purpose of developing, propagating, and sustaining the Internet, its technologies and applications. This includes the skill sets, conditions, and motivations, for operation and use of Internet capabilities - as well as understanding the resulting effects. At this level, there is complete consensus. At a more detailed level, the Internet Society serves as the principal mechanism to: 1 develop and promulgate public international standards, and assume responsibility for their intellectual property 2 progressively fund, maintain, and coordinate global, regional, and national Internet administrative infrastructure , including secretariats, registration/certification/security centers (NICs, IPRAs, CERTs) 3 help facilitate the common requirements of Internet providers 4 provide authoritative global reference information about the Internet 5 coordinate and pro-actively advocate Internet infrastructure development policies, 6 provide for both global and local Internet collaboration and education 7 sustain a commonly held "Internet culture" based on autonomous, non-hierarchical, open networking, technology transfer, information sharing and global cooperation among the broadest possible participants. Except for the last, most of these purposes are almost identical to virtually all other international organizations that deal with global networks of any kind: telecom, maritime, aviation, etc. and have persisted over many decades. It is fundamentally a part of operating networks. There is substantial consensus on all these functions being performed by the Society. They are essentially identical to those enumerated in the mission statement adopted by the Board at its 5th meeting (Prague, 1994) and restated in part by the Advisory Council at both its 5th general meeting (Prague, 1994), and its elected Officers. The pursuit of some functions, however, is complicated by pre-existing activities or positions that have been maintained and funded by other entities - primarily contractors receiving monies from USA federal government. To the extent disputes exist, they surround the specific existing contractors and timeframes involved. In 1993, the Society already began to pay some of the IETF infrastructure costs, premised on the general acceptance of the Society's role in assuming funding for administrative infrastructure. Over the past several months, the Society has been involved in several discussions and working groups indicating that existing funding sources wish to see the Society move much more quickly in assuming the responsibility for both funding, and in some cases, undertaking the secretariat activities directly. In addition, as noted above, the USA ATIS organization has independently indicated an interest with respect to the IETF Secretariat. Such a move by ATIS, however, appears severely detrimental to the interests of the Internet community, and would appear only to bolster the case for the Society assuming this responsibility. In summary, a strong consensus on the stated general and specific purposes of the Society. *********************************************** RECOMMENDED STRATEGY: Describe and publicize in basic terms the general and specific purposes of the Society and organize its structure and activities to best effect them. *********************************************** ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- D. MEMBERS AND CONSTITUENTS The members of the Society include both individuals and organizations of all kinds. This diversity and balance is a mirror of the Internet environment, as well as important for providing balance of control and interests in the Society's governance. As both the Internet environment and the Society have evolved over the past three years, it's apparent that the Society's purposes and activities provide major broad-based benefits to organizational members. Correspondingly, the organizational membership has grown rapidly, and provides the preponderance of the Society's income. The individual constituents of the Society include both "Internet professionals" as well as general users. Here it seems that the concept of an "Internet professional" has not materialized in any significant discrete form. And with the explosive growth of the network, general users are essentially the general public. As a result, the concept and benefits of Society individual membership have been difficult to articulate. In addition, the revenue capable of being generated by the "Society membership market" is minor and likely to remain so. Revenue from publications is another matter, and the publication of OnTheInternet as a publication for both the general membership and the general public will test the scalability of the general subscriber marketplace. This evolution suggests needed changes to better balance the structures, responsibilities, benefits, and roles between organizational and individual members. Indeed, the Society potentially may face a very unstable situation where the general public rather than the traditional Internet Community could control the Society - whose funds are largely being provided by organizational members. Such a public may not share any of the original underlying values of the Internet Community, and take the Society in a direction which is fundamentally detrimental to the Internet. It's a potentially untenable situation which calls for mechanisms whereby organizational members play a role commensurate with their level of interests in the functions of the Society and their contribution to its income revenues. The Society minimally should move as soon as possible to include several trustees elected directly by the organizational membership. This would rectify the existing disparaties, appear responsive to organizational members, and perhaps more importantly, move the Society toward a more stable long-term configuration for the overall management of the Internet. *********************************************** RECOMMENDED STRATEGY: Provide an enhanced role for the Society organizational members, including governance, through the replacement of the Charter member seats with those of the officers elected by the Advisory Council. This level of governance should increased to the level an equitable level. *********************************************** Individual membership financials are likely to remain a break-even proposition, but can be justified both in terms of a balance of control within the organization, as well as meeting a significant need by the general public for information and sense of involvement in the evolution of the Internet. The Society's new publication, increased chapter activity, inclusion of materials with Internet products and services, advertising, and its new broad-based publication OnTheInternet, should result in steadily increasing numbers. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- E. ACTIVITIES and BODIES The Society - like any organization - is primarily constituted by the activities and bodies that carry out its purposes and objectives. The bodies are further subdivided into those which meet from time to time to govern or shape the policies of the organization - such as the Board of Trustees, Advisory Council, Internet Architecture Board, Internet Engineering Steering Group, conferences, and workshops - and the administrative infrastructure in the form of permanent secretariats which carry out the day-to-day activities. In addition, the organization may create still other entities such as committees and chapters in order to help govern, advise and carry out activities. Over the past 9 months, the Society has made major strides by establishing its own independent headquarters, international secretariat, network services, and identity. At the same time, the organizational relationships among the different existing bodies necessary to effect the purposes of the Society have been evolving. These include the IAB, the IESG, the IETF, the INET, the NDSS, the International Operations Conference, the workshops, and the associated secretariats and administrative centers such as the NICs and CERTs. The Society has also been sponsored and been part of the International WWW Conference organization. Because of the rapid changes and growth within the Internet environment, these bodies are evolving their organizational relationships and funding mechanisms. One of the primary purposes of the Society is the support of all these bodies - which includes assuming the responsibility for their existence, viability and funding. This calls for pursuing a strategy of continually working with the people who constitute these bodies and secretariats, as well as their funding sources, and effecting a transition toward stable Society relationships and funding. It should be noted that such a pragmatic evolutionary relationship approach has been commonplace among international organizations that have existed much longer than the Society. *********************************************** RECOMMENDED STRATEGY: Bring about a stable Society relationship and funding of the various bodies which are necessary to effect the purposes and objectives of the Society. *********************************************** 1. Governing and Collaborative Bodies Because the development of Internet Standards and practices is so central to the continuing viability of the Internet, its technologies, and applications, one of the most important near-term needs involves the Internet Engineering Task Force and the adoption and promulgation of its recommendations. A key element of the Society's strategy is building a stable, supportive relationship with the IETF that respects its tradition of independence and engineering excellence, yet assures that its standards are effectively and quickly promulgated as international standards. Such a strategy involves some balancing of semi-autonomous management, non-affiliated participation, due process, intellectual property agreements, and liaison relationships with other organizations. In addition to standards making, as the Internet operational environment becomes ever more complex and global, it will be important to have effective collaborative means whereby major network operators can reach effective agreements that provide for the common good of the Internet and its community of users. Many of these agreements will be bilateral or involve other operational related groups. However, there is an important leadership role for the Society in providing suitable international forums for operators to openly meet and discuss common concerns in a manner which avoids anticompetitive implications. *********************************************** RECOMMENDED STRATEGY: provide international forums which may prove necessary for effective collaboration and coordination among the operators of Internet backbone networks. *********************************************** 2. Administrative Bodies Most of the bodies that constitute administrative infrastructure are undergoing significant growth, and perhaps most importantly - changes in their existing relationships and funding. Most of these bodies were created in Jon Postel's words: "simply because this work had to be done." Most of it has also been funded from government monies and sponsorship which is likely to disappear in the near future. Secretariat Contractor Funding Source est Amount/yr IANA ISI US Government $ 200k InterNIC* NSI US Government/(self) $ 1,200k RIPE NCC TERENA TERENA/self $ 1,000k AP-NIC* IIJ IIJ/self $ 100k Country NICs diverse diverse IAB Secr/RFC ISI US Government $ 100k Editor* IETF/IRTF/IESG CNRI USGovernment/ISOC $ 1,000k Secretariat* Operating Groups diverse diverse CERTs diverse diverse $ 800k/ea IETF Chair* ISI US Government $ 200k * Active discussions for ISOC funding/performing in FY95 One of the principal reasons for the Internet Society's creation was the sponsorship and funding of these activities, and a significant consensus supports this direction. In some cases, it may also be desirable to integrate these activities with the International Secretariat to achieve significant synergies and scales of efficiency. In the near-term, this includes the AP-NIC and the IETF Secretariat; in the medium term, the RIPE-NCC. All of these actions would significantly enhance the role and function of the Society, and greatly assist in the necessary funding transitions that need to take place. In addition, the integration of the IETF Secretariat would assist significantly in building a closer and more stable relationship with the IETF and in enhancing the stature and independence of the IETF standards making process. *********************************************** RECOMMENDED STRATEGY: develop a business plan and work with the parties involved to migrate the AP-NIC, IETF, and later the RIPE NCC Secretariats under the Internet Society and employ the existing staff. *********************************************** 3. Chapters With the rapid expansion of the Internet into towns and villages worldwide, there is an immediate and compelling need for national and even metropolitan area chapters that assist others in their common language or local culture to effectively understand and use the Internet. Internet Society chapters are an ideal means of serving this need. It also provides a certain unity and sense of a larger global Internet community that helps maintain it culture of cooperation and collaboration without boundaries. In addition, there are frequently many local policy or regulatory issues with which chapters can most effectively deal, and at the same time inform and draw upon resources at the Society's International Secretariat. *********************************************** RECOMMENDED STRATEGY: vigorously pursue and support Internet Society chapters worldwide. *********************************************** 4. Public policies and practices An activity area of growing importance surrounds the policies and practices in different countries that influence the diffusion of Internet technologies. The principal constraints on Internet diffusion include the adverse regulation or prohibition of Internet services, onorous type acceptance procedures for connecting equipment to the telecom network, and high leased lines tariffs. The Society constantly receives requests to highlight these problems and to work with government officials and PTTs to alter their practices. The Society's International Secretariat has been working to assist in these requests individually and collectively through public statements, server presentations, video conferences and promoting GATT other norms that are intended to rectify these problems. Recently, the Society has obtained initial acceptance of a proposal to the Soros Foundation to fund an international regulatory specialist and an assistant under the umbrella of an ISOC institute to undertake a broad and continuing program to assest in this area. The program would include collection of country practices and policies, working with national authorities and ISOC chapters to change adverse practices, and use of multiple forums to develop awareness of the desirability of "pro- Internet" conditions in every country. This activity will become particularly important over the coming year with renewal of the GATT/WTO negotiations on telecom services and liberalization practices. *********************************************** RECOMMENDED STRATEGY: In cooperation with other interested parties, establish and maintain a programme to advocate change in regulatory, trade, public policy, and dominant carrier pricing policies worldwide; and to disseminate related national information. 5. Implementing Internet Infrastructure. Many of the poorest countries in the world do not presently possess the resources to initiate even small scale Internet infrastructure. There is a widely shared interest among a significant portion of the Internet community in rectifying this situation through focussed projects funded by major donor institutions that immediately provide some initial Internet infrastructure. Such activities are fully consonant with the Society's International Organization role in developing Internet infrastructure, and includes liaison with other international organizations and foundations who share a similar interest. RECOMMENDED STRATEGY: Establish and maintain a programme, in cooperation with other interested parties, to provide Internet access to the world's poorest countries. 6. Education and workshops The Society's international workshop activities have been one of the most effective means of propagating Internet skills and networks worldwide, and have generated cudos from every quarter. At the same time, the demand for such workshops and tutorials for developing countries, in different regions, and for specialized sectors like K-12, has risen significantly. All these activities are self funding throughout either participant fees or grants, and contibute potentially to the income of the Society and the expansion of its visibility and perceived value. The acquisition of training room space at the Society's headquarters, a full-time workshop coordinator/ publicist, and a combination of volunteer/contractor relationships with several parties will enable this activity to proceed rapidly in 1995. RECOMMENDED STRATEGY: Establish, foster, and maintain a programme of worldwide, regional, and national workshops and tutorials related to Internet. 7. Public information and representation One of the Society's most visible and useful services is meeting the needs of the public and press for information concerning the Internet. This includes everything from "what is it," to major issues, metrics, and lists of product and service providers. At another level, the Society is generally recognized as the representative organization of the Internet for purposes of receiving awards or appearing at diverse meetings and conferences. Although these activities consume considerable Society resources, they are partially self-funding. At present, however, information furnished by telephone, fax, and post involve unrecovered expenditures. It is possible to earn revenue from this activity by obtaining arrangements with product and service vendors to distribute limited amounts of their literature with the responses. This public information function also includes publication activity. Here the startup of a new publication aimed at the global Internet community with both secondary distribution and separate subscriptions, can provide for a much more widespread and effective reach. RECOMMENDED STRATEGY: Provide to the public, a global source of information about the Internet, it's metrics, access and use - instituting as necessary, cost recovery mechanisms including the distribution of advertising literature, and publication subscriptions. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- F. FUNDING Funding internet administrative infrastructure, including many of the Society's activities that are collaborative or educational in nature are becoming critical considerations. Proceeding on a cost-oriented self- funding basis for individual administrative activities is a widely accepted premise, and needs to be effected as soon as possible. In the near term, however, some of this funding - as well as various initiatives of the Society - is not capable of self-funding and organizational membership dues or major grants are the only means of obtaining the requisite revenue. Effectively soliciting organizational members, in turn, is very much linked to effecting changes in the Society's structure - especially assuming immediate responsibility for critical components like the IETF, the IETF Secretariat, the IANA and the NICs, and their funding. In addition, more effective means need to be employed in soliciting new members - organizational and individual. For organizational members, a particularly promising technique is to identify all major users through available network traffic tables, and major product vendors through trade show exhibitor lists, and methodically soliciting membership as an appeal to self-interest and equity. Appendix 1 Presentation at March 1991 Meeting on Creating an International Internet Organization Reston VA USA GENERAL OBJECTIVES Develop and support Internet community interests Provide a focal point for Internet community collaboration Make outside world aware of strategic importance of internetworking concepts, technologies, opportunities, visions Enlarge and bridge disparate communities of interest: public providers, integrators, private providers, users, computer industry, telecom industry GENERAL ATTRIBUTES The [International] Internet [Society] [Institute] [Organization] [Association] [Foundation] [Community] Spans public-private, telecom-computer domains and interests (seeks to foster a common interest). Visible national and international public advocate for internetworking interests Driver toward global public digital libraries and knowledge systems on internet platforms Development and Coordination of Internet Community Interests