UserPreferences

MeetingMinutes20060606

2006/06/06 XDI.Org Board of Trustees Meeting Minutes

  1. Attending
    1. Board
    2. Guests
  2. Call to Order
  3. Report and Recommendation Regarding I-Services Compliance Period
  4. Report and Recommendation from @Name Pricing Task Force
  5. Adjournment

1. Attending

1.1. Board

1.2. Guests

2. Call to Order

Mr. Washburn called the meeting to order at 5:00PM PT.

3. Report and Recommendation Regarding I-Services Compliance Period

Mr. Reed reported that Cordance and NeuStar held a meeting with all the i-brokers save one yesterday. He reported their recommendation that all i-brokers have a compliance period that applies to all mandated i-services (SAML 2.0 Authentication, OpenID 2.0 Authentication, Contact, and Forwarding) that lasts until September 11, 2006, as that would give them adequate time to complete implementation and testing.

Mr. Davis relayed another request from the i-brokers that the GSS make it very clear which requirements are required for launch and which apply to the compliance period. Mr. Strongin asked if Mr. Reed as XDI.org Secretary could make this explicit in the GSS specification document, and Mr. Reed agreed that should be straightforward.

The trustees gave Mr. Reed the following instruction:

ACTION: Mr. Reed as XDI.org Secretary to add language with this directive into the GSS V1.0.

4. Report and Recommendation from @Name Pricing Task Force

Mr. Aizenman asked that this agenda item include two specific topics:

  1. Increasing price for @names

  2. Reserving and increasing prices for =names

Mr. Sakimura summarized the findings of the task force with regard to @name withholding. First, with regard to the legal questions, Mr. Blackmer provided an explanation of the slight increase in legal and public relations risks associated with withholding names and later disposing of them by auction or with fixed prices. He recommended using neutral methodologies such as withholding one- to three-character strings or the 500 most frequently searched terms as rated by Alexa and purchasing insurance to cover the increase in risk.

Second, with regard to @name pricing, Mr. Sakimura noted the following conclusions of the discussions of the task force:

Mr. Davis clarified his concern that any changes this late in the game are "unwise" in the absence of a compelling argument to make such a change that would have the unanimous or near-unanimous support of all trustees.

Mr. Sakimura summarize the three motivations for @name pricing changes discussed by the task force:

  1. Reduce cybersquatting.

  2. Produce higher trust in the space.

  3. Generate additional fundraising, such as for open source.

On #1, many members of the task force felt that a wholesale price point in the $40 to $50 price point would be effective in addressing this concern.

On #2, it was argued that there could be and should be other mechanisms besides pricing to establish trust in the namespace (such as credentialing or reputation services).

On #3, it was argued that: a) this was out-of-scope for XDI.org, and b) a successful GRS registry would still provide sufficient budget. NOTE: Point a) is invalid, as raising funds for specific causes is explicitly in the charter of XDI.org.

Mr. Aizenman said that this issue was particularly important because choosing a lower price is an irreversible decision. Mr. Aizenman feels that XDI.org has a community mission and that additional revenue would help fulfill it.

Mr. Washburn asked for other views on this topic. Mr. Caluori shared the following points:

Mr. Aizenman offered the opinion that XDI.org should charge a higher price in order to: a) better fulfill its mission, b) increasing trust in the registry, c) creating a new “TLD trust market”.

Mr. Chasen voiced the opinion that he is worred about profiteering and the public perception of high pricing, and recommended that the XDI.org trustees continue with the currently published price schedule.

Mr. Sakimura said that if we release all @names into the market now, we will lose the opportunity to experiment and understand the forces at work. Mr. Washburn asked if this would apply if the withheld names were “randomly generated”, i.e., what would be a fair way to create the withheld names? Mr. Sakimura felt that a significant portion of the namespace would need to be withheld to achieve this objective – on the order of 10% of the usable namespace.

Mr. Strongin shared his historical perspective about the origin of the current pricing schedule in the XDI.org/Cordance contract and the concern shared by the trustees at that time that this pricing may be too high. He also echoed Mr. Davis’s point that if the board was unanimous about a single overriding concern that would justify higher pricing, that might be a compelling enough reason to change it, but that in the absence of that unanimity, taking any action to change the pricing would be much more problematic. In addition Mr. Strongin felt that it could be very controversial for the trustees to decide on the mechanism for allocating any additional revenue, and that process could further slow adoption.

Mr. Davis agreed with Mr. Strongin that in the absence of a unanimous or near unanimous opinion of the board both about the price and about the disbursement of funds raised by a price increase, the board should “stay the course” to avoid further disruption of the launch.

Mr. Reed made the argument that XRI infrastructure provides the ability to bind persistent identifiers with trust services from an open market of service providers that can compete dynamically in the marketplace – services such as verification, certification, and reputation. For this reason a strong argument can be made that XDI.org should seek the lowest price possible for registration of global XRIs, to create the most viable opportunity for a market for trust services to emerge and flourish.

Mr. Washburn asked to briefly step down from his role as facilitator to make the following point: the first and foremost goal of the trustees should be to ensure that XDI.org and its GRS services become viable, whereas they are not today. For that reason, Mr. Washburn feels that the board has no choice but to "stay the course" to see that the infrastructure is successfully launched and made viable.

Mr. Sakimura asked how a lower price point may affect projections. Mr. Washburn shared the experience of RealNames where pricing was actually very sensitive. When RealNames raised their prices, they ultimately destroyed their business.

Mr. Sequeira seconded that experience, as he was also involved from another perspective with the RealNames history. He confirmed his belief based on the domain name industry that price is indeed a very important factor.

Mr. Davis shared the perspective, as a retail i-broker, that the ultimate sale to an end-customer is just not the i-name itself, but the bundle of services that comes with it, and that too high a price on the name makes it difficult to confer adequate value to those services.

Mr. Reed added that simply applying the law of supply-and-demand would dictate finding the optimum balance between price and return, and that this pricing is reflected in Cordance’s current contract with XDI.org.

To Mr. Sakimura’s question of projections, Mr. Caluori said that Cordance and NeuStar are working together with Mr. Ozburn to develop the most effective marketing program that will help incent the highest volumes possible.

Mr. Strongin asked, to focus the matter, do we have a majority in favor of reopening the negotiations with Cordance regarding pricing?

Mr. Sakimura asked that the board deal with the issue of withholding @names first. Mr. Washburn asked if a board member would like to make a motion regarding withholding of @names.

The board discussed the issue of whether any trustees have conflicts with regard to voting on this issue. Mr. Blackmer explained his opinion that while Mr. Davis would be conflicted with regard to the 50-year name issue, he would not be conflicted with regard to @name pricing. Mr. Strongin agreed that he does not believe Mr. Davis is conflicted.

Mr. Sakimura asked whether withholding a portion of the @name space would be specified in the GSS, and there was consensus that if withholding was the final decision, specifying it in the GSS was the best mechanism.

Mr. Sakimura made the following motion, and Mr. Strongin seconded:

BE IT RESOLVED: That XDI.org direct the editors of the GSS specifications to withhold for the @name space: a) all three-character or shorter ASCII names, and b) the 500-most searched single-string names on Alexa as of a specified date.

Mr. Aizenman asked: a) why the number of search terms is not greater, and b) why not use a dictionary approach? Mr. Sakimura answered that: 1) the Alexa list would cross languages, and 2) a dictionary approach would require manually selecting terms and that is more difficult and involved.

The time limit of the meeting was reached at 6pm Pacific. Mr. Strongin moved and Mr. Davis seconded:

BE IT RESOLVED: To table the motion until it can be continued when the trustees reconvene.

The motion passed unanimously.

The trustees agreed to reconvene the meeting at 4PM Pacific tomorrow, Wednesday, June 7th.

5. Adjournment

Mr. Washburn adjourned the meeting by consensus at 6:05PM.

Respectfully submitted,