DRAFT Minutes
Teleconference: 15 April 2008, 11h00 UTC
Executive Council Attendees:
- Paul Wilson (PW, Chair)
- Adiel Akplogan (AA: Secretary )
- Ray Plzak (RP)
- Axel Pawlik (AP)
- Raul Echeberria (RE)
Other Attendees:
- Natt Devis ND
- German Valdez GV
- Kiran Cunniah, KC Recording Secretary
AGENDA
1. Welcome
2. Agenda review
3. Adoption of last meeting’s minutes
4. IANA Activities
5. ITU/NRO Activities
5.1. Proposal for a workshop with ITU.
5.2. ITU Telecom World 2009 .
6. Develop list of action items from the RIR boards workshop
6.1. Proposed MoU on treatment of legacy address space.
6.2. Discuss amendment to NRO MoU .
6.3. Other action items from the workshop?
7. Discuss the distribution of administrative tasks
8. Activities at IGF
8.1. NRO presence at IGF.
8.2. Update of NRO contribution to the IGF secretariat.
9. Next Face to face meeting
10. NRO Coordination groups (Formal and Informal groups)
10.1. ECG Activity
10.2. CFOs joint meeting in 2008 .
10.3. Registration Services Ad Hoc Group
11. AOB
12. Adjournment
1. Welcome
The Chair made a roll call and noted that RE has not yet joined. The Chair proposed to start the meeting. All agreed. The meeting was called to order at 11h05 UTC. The Chair welcomed all the participants.
2. Agenda review
The Chair reviewed the Agenda as presented to the EC by the secretary. It was noted that the item 3 was missing. AA said that he has sent a latest agenda that corrected the numbering of the agenda item. RP proposed to just amend the current agenda by making “Agenda Review” as item 2 and “Adoption of last meeting minutes” as item 3. All agreed and the agenda was updated accordingly.
3. Adoption of last meeting’s minutes
RP moved as follow:
“The EC adopts the minutes of March 18th 2008 meeting, as last presented to the EC list by the secretariat”
AA seconded the motion
The chair called for comments and objections. There were no comments or objections and the motion passed.
4. IANA Activities
4.1. IANA Administrative Procedures.
Action item 0712-06 Open
PW to send to David Conrad the proposed Administrative Procedures
Note from the secretariat: The chair has circulated the new document and comments have been received from the EC.
RE joined. The Chair gave him an update on the status of the meeting and asked him if he had any comments on the minutes. He had none.
Update 15.04.2008: The Chair mentioned that he has been in contact with Barbara on this issue RP mentioned that we received back the revised procedure from IANA and it was agreed to send it back to them after comments from the EC. The Chair agreed and proposed to send the amended document to IANA.
Action item #200804-01
The Chair to send the amended procedure document back to IANA.
4.2. ICANN Contract
Action item 0712-03: Status: Open
PW to draft an email to the Boards asking for guidelines about a future Contract with ICANN, and send to the EC for review.
Note from the secretariat: A discussion took place on this topic on the RIR Board list with no clear conclusion.
Update 15.04.2008: The Chair mentioned that the mail was sent to the RIR Board and that he heard not much discussion on it. The Chair suggested having an update on the status at each region. Update was as follows;
– ARIN: RP: The ARIN Board discussed the issue. In general, the Board is in favour of the incorporation but not for the moment. The topic will be re- emphasized later this year.
– AFRINIC: AA: There were no formal discussion by the Board on the issue and
there is nothing specific to report on for now.
– LACNIC: RE: There is no formal update from LACNIC
– RIPE NCC: The Board does not think that the contract is a priority at this time, and still does not think the NRO incorporation is needed. Although there will be election for board renewal soon and there is a possibility for that the position could change.
– APNIC-There is no formal update from APNIC
Comments: RE suggested sending a mail to the RIR Board to inform them that the topic is being bandoned temporarily for lack of response/interest on the matter. RP mentioned that he disagreed as the ARIN Board expressed interest in the topic but not for the moment. The Chair suggested waiting for any further RIR Board decision to report back (on a formal or informal position) and to leave the topic open until the next meeting. All agreed.
4.3. Requirements from IANA for updating the ASN registry
As per Leo’s email to update IANA ASN file to reflect the information in RIRS’s DB.
Similar work initiated by ARIN:
http://www.arin.net/acsp/suggestions/2008-12.html
Do we have to move this under the NRO and task the ECG and/or the Registration service Adhoc Group?
RP requested to take the lead on the topic. The Chair agreed. RP made a suggestion for ARIN to take the lead and coordinate the topic with the other RIRs rather than tasking the different working groups to work on it especially as work has already started at ARIN on that. The EC members discussed the
suggestion. After discussion, it was agreed that the all are in favour of RP`s proposal but that ARIN should seek the approval and input of all RIRs before communicating with IANA on the topic.
RP mentioned that the EC shall be in a good position to have a report from his staff at the next meeting. There were some further discussion as to whether the report has to be submitted to the EC or the people involved in Resource and Database management in each RIR and it was agreed that the final report should come to the EC.
5. ITU/NRO Activities
The Chair reviewed the Agenda as presented to the EC by the secretary. It was noted that the item 3 was missing. AA said that he has sent a latest agenda that corrected the numbering of the agenda item. RP proposed to just amend the current agenda by making “Agenda Review” as item 2 and “Adoption of last meeting minutes” as item 3. All agreed and the agenda was updated accordingly.
5.1. Proposal for a workshop with ITU.
Update from Ray: “When Cathy was in Geneva a few weeks ago, she had a
discussion with Marco Obispo who proposed that the workshop be held in
Geneva the 4th and 5th September 2008.”
How do we go about this now? Need to identify participants and draft an
Agenda for the workshop.
The Chair asked for comments. The EC members looked into the possibility of having the meeting at the proposed dates. It was noted that this period is right after the APNIC meeting and clashes with ITU telecom Asia. Therefore it would be safer to have the meeting in the last quarter of September. AA mentioned that there is a MAG meeting scheduled in Sep 08 in Geneva and that we could schedule the meeting around those dates.
There were some further discussions as to whether we should define what work should be done first before scheduling the meeting. For the meeting agenda, RE mentioned that he recalled from previous meetings that the work should be more focused on experience to date and activities as opposed to IPv6. He said that we should have a common vision about the workshop and work on definitions of the content. AA proposed to contact the ITU so as to establish precisely what they want to achieve and get more details on the work to be done. RP proposed to do so informally via Cathy who has a good relation with Marco Obispo and all agreed. RE said that we could also contact Alexander NTOKO and asked AA to send him his contact details. RE mentioned that he had no objections to liaise with Marco via Cathy on the topic but it would be recommendable for the Chair to send an email to the director of ITU-D as a follow up of the meeting held March 08 to inform him that the staff is working on the issue. PW suggested that AP sends the email given that he is more in contact with him and has already liaised with him. RP mentioned that PW should send the mail in his capacity as Chair of the EC. RE mentioned that he also agrees and that this will allow the Chair also to establish a relationship with them. The Chair agreed. RP volunteered for the coordination of the workshop.
Action #200804-02:
Chair to send an email to ITU-T director and Alexander NTOKO to
inform him that the EC is favorable to the workshop
proposal and is working on the topic.
5.2. ITU Telecom World 2009.
Will the NRO be represented at the event? If yes, maybe we need to task
the CCG to start looking into this?
The Chair mentioned that the NRO will be present at the ITU World 2009 event and asked for any objections. RE mentioned that he is of opinion that the NRO participation to the ITU events should not be automatic. He said that it should be in line with the set plans and objectives of the EC. RP mentioned that the event takes place every two years and that it provides a good opportunity to reach the community. The Chair agreed. AA suggested tasking the CCG to advise whether or not the NRO should be present at such events. RP mentioned that it is the responsibility of the EC to set the strategic objectives and guide the CG. It was agree that the EC task the CCG to come up with a plan for NRO participation to ITU global events and or other event that may be a good opportunity for the NRO to communicate.
Action item 200804-03:
NRO EC to task the CCG to work on a plan for NRO participation to ITU global events or other events that represent a good opportunity for the
NRO to participate and communicate.
6. Develop list of action items from the RIR boards workshop
The Chair reviewed the Agenda as presented to the EC by the secretary. It was noted that the item 3 was missing. AA said that he has sent a latest agenda that corrected the numbering of the agenda item. RP proposed to just amend the current agenda by making “Agenda Review” as item 2 and “Adoption of last meeting minutes” as item 3. All agreed and the agenda was updated accordingly.
6.1. Proposed MoU on treatment of legacy address space.
Discussion about Paul’s proposal to the RIR Board following the meeting
in Denver.
The Chair asked RP if he received a copy and RP confirmed. With regards to the ARIN region, RP mentioned that John expressed some concern during the Board meeting about the special treatment of legacy space in ARIN region but his board is open for further discussion on the matter. However, ARIN cannot agree to any MoU until the local issues relative to the legacy space is resolved. He said that incorporating the MoU presupposes for instance that ARIN will have an active recovery system and so far the ARIN community is not in favour of something like that.
AA mentioned that the AFRINIC board thinks the MoU approach is a good way to work toward a common action in this matter especially in relation to IPv4 exhaustion and the different policies coming in. He said that it is something that is positively taken by his board.
RE mentioned that we have to take some action on the issue whilst recognising that RIRs do not have authority on the legacy space. He mentioned that if there is no consensus on the legitimacy of a policy related to legacy in a specific region then it should not be made a policy. He said that it is not only the process that needs to be followed but other components should also be considered.
The Chair noted that the next agenda item, 6.2, will have some impacts on the present discussion. He suggested moving to item 6.2 unless the members have a specific action or conclusion on this item. There were none.
6.2. Proposed MoU on treatment of legacy address space.
Action Item #200803-02
RE and RP will work together on a proposal and send to the NRO EC for
review.
Status 15.04.2008:RP mentioned that he will send the proposal to the NRO EC.
6.3. Proposed MoU on treatment of legacy address space.
To review the outcome of the workshop and identify any other possible
action items.
The Chair mentioned that it was agreed by all RIRs to make a venue available for the next RIR Board meeting. The proposed venues were the upcoming AFRINIC and LACNIC meetings. Both, AA and RE mentioned that they will be able to host the Board meeting. RP suggested to finalise the dates of the meeting on the EC mailing list and all agreed.
The Chair asked if there were any other topics to be discussed. AA mentioned that during the last meeting, there was a proposal by John to set up a few working group to take up some topics resulting from the discussions and make suggestions to the Boards. AA asked if the EC needs to act on this. There were some discussions on the topic. After discussion, it was agreed that the Board expects the EC to take the next step on it and report back on the action to be taken. The Chair asked if there were any urgency in the matter and it was noted that there were none. It was agreed that the matter can be discussed on the mailing list and to come up with a proposal.
Action #200804-04
Chair and Secretariat work on an action plan following the workshop.
7. Discuss the distribution of administrative tasks
RP proposed that the EC distribute the work necessary to support the
Administrative activities of the NRO.
Feedback and decision of the EC on the document circulated by RP on 19/03/2008
The Chair noted that it was RP who proposed the document and not PR (Paul Rendek – as it appeared in the Agenda). RP mentioned that he received feedback from PW and AP and thathe did not get a feedback from RE and AA and he has not done anything yet. He mentioned that he will continue to explore this and move forward.
AA informed that based on an informal discussion, AFRINIC is in favour of the proposal and looks forward to that.
RE asked for some clarifications on the proposed implementation date of the proposal and RP mentioned that it is January 2009.
At this point, 12h27 UTC, RP suggested resetting the meeting to the next day as he has another appointment to attend. The Chair agreed and suggested to continue the meeting at the same time on Wednesday 16th of April 2008. AA mentioned that he will be having an appointment tomorrow at 11h00 UTC and proposed 12h00. All agreed. Meeting was reset at 12h00 UTC, 16th April 2008.
NRO EC Meeting (continue next day))
Date: 16th April 2008, 12 UTC
Executive Council Attendees:
Paul Wilson (PW, Chair)
Adiel Akplogan (AA: Secretary )
Ray Plzak (RP)
Axel Pawlik (AP)
Raul Echeberria (RE)
Other Attendees:
Natt Devis ND
German Valdez
Kiran Cunniah, KC Recording Secretary
Welcome
The Chair noted that RE did not join yet and proposed to start the meeting. All
agreed.
8. Activities at IGF
RP proposed that the EC distribute the work necessary to support the
Administrative activities of the NRO.
8.1. NRO presence at IGF
Workshop? Booth?
Discussion about workshop organised by Milton & co?
The Chair proposed to have a booth similar to the previous IGF meeting and all agreed. The Chair mentioned that he will task the CCG to work on this
Action #200804-05
Chair to task the CCG to work on the NRO Booth at the upcoming IGF meeting.
The Chair also mentioned that it will be better to have a joint workshop. RP suggested to propose a workshop on the similar topic that are proposed by other and related to the Resource management and that as it happened last year, the IGF secretariat will request the merger of them. Doing the NRO will
ensure its participation to all related workshop.
The Chair called for volunteers work on a write up on this for submission to the IGF and proposed RE or AA. It was agreed that AA will take the lead on this. RP volunteered to assist AA on this item.
Action #200804-06
AA and RP to submit a proposal for the joint workshop at the next IGF meeting in India before the end of this month.
The Chair asked for any other comments on this item and there were none.
8.2. Update of NRO contribution to the IGF secretariat
“The NRO EC decided to contribute USD30K towards the IGF secretariat
forthe year 2008”.
The Chair mentioned that the EC decided at the last meeting to make a contribution of USD30K to the IGF secretariat and tasked the EC treasurer to send a correspondence to the IGF (Markus Kummer) to inform them about this contribution.
Action #200804-07
Treasurer to send a correspondence to Markus Kummer , IGF, to inform him
of the NRO contribution of USD30K to the IGF secretariat for 2008.
The Chair called for comments on this agenda item. AA proposed to make a point of information and the Chair agreed. AA informed that:
– The Names of the 5 RIR CEOs were submitted as NRO nominee at the IF MAG.
– He sent an email to Markus Kummer to ask him for some clarifications about the nomination process and the latter informed that there is no formal process and that we just send the names and the UN will make the final selection based on a “black box” process.
RP mentioned that he looks forward to AA and RE being reappointed.
9. Activities at IGF
Action Item 200803-01:
Secretariat to work on a conference package for the next NRO EC face to
face meeting, at the ICANN meeting in Paris, June 2008
Update 15.04.2008: A suite is booked at the venue of ICANN meeting and
plan is made to host a meeting in the same room for EC members (5
pax). Internet connection and a direct phone will be available. Do we
plan for lunch and Breakfast in the room?
The Chair informed that a suite booked by the Secretariat at the hotel venue and asked AA to give a further update. AA mentioned that the suite will have all the meeting facilities. He asked if the EC would like to have lunch to be arranged and it was noted that it might be better to have lunch arranged at a different
place. RP suggested discussing this item on the mailing list and all agreed.
(RE joined)
10. NRO Coordination groups (Formal and Informal groups)
Action Item 200803-01:
Secretariat to work on a conference package for the next NRO EC face to
face meeting, at the ICANN meeting in Paris, June 2008
10.1. ECG Activity
Update from the ECG on their activity plan.
The Chair mentioned that he sent a proposed response to the ECG on their questions related to the previous feedback of the EC on their activity plan. RP said that he agrees with the proposal. AA mentioned that he is ok with the proposal but expressed concern to the fact there could be some confusion on the way the action item on IPv6 support for reverse DNS is worded. For him when they say “full support of IPv6” it generally include the transport part for the reverse delegation. The Chair agreed and mentioned that they should put it as IPv6 reverse delegation only. RP mentioned that he agrees with PW that the transport part of this point is each RIR decision.
The Chair called for objections. There were none and the Chair mentioned that he will send the comments to the CCG.
10.2. ECG Activity
Plan and proposed topic to discuss?
RP mentioned that there has been some talk to have the next CFO meeting at the ICANN meeting in Paris, June 2008 (rather than during a RIR meeting) in conjunction with the CEO meeting. He also mentioned that every year the CFOs meet once and the proposed meeting is in line with this.
RE expressed concern about the high travel cost that Paris will imply although, in general, he supports the idea of having a CFO meeting. AA mentioned that he shares his point of view about travel cost for such
meetings but in principle he also supports having a CFO meeting.
There were some discussions about the objectives of the CFO meeting and the need to for them to meet with the CEOs (eg the CFO could transmit a report to the CEO rather than meeting with them). After discussion, it was resolved that:
– The EC treasurer will confer with the CFO to determine the objectives of the CFO meeting.
– The meeting will be held at Treasurer Office and with the participation of the Treasurer to represent the EC.The Chair called for agreement on the above. All agreed.
10.3. ECG Activity
Action item 0712-01: Status: Open
Raul to work with the Ad Hoc working group in Registration Services’
practices, to finalise the work of that group.”
Update 18.03.2008: RE mentioned that he had a conference call with
Leslie, the Chair of the Ad Hoc group (of that time), and
she said that she has already produced a report which was sent to the EC
for approval. RE said that he will look for the report and send it again
to the EC. He mentioned that he has now scheduled another teleconference
with all the group next week that he expects to have the final report on
this to send to the AC in two weeks.
The Chair asked RE to give an update.
RE gave the following updates:
– He had two teleconferences call with Leslie, Chair of the group.
– She has sent the report again with some comments.
– The report includes two sections namely: Actions that will impact on our
activities and those that will not.
– They are working on making the recommendation more complete and this was
expected to be done before the ARIN meeting.
– The completed report is expected to be ready in the next one or two weeks.
RP asked about the next step on the above and RE mentioned that we have to wait for the final report from Leslie. RP asked if it will be possible to have an update at the next meeting and RE said it will.
The Chair called for comments.
AA mentioned that his Registration Service Manager informed him that the RIR Registration services are working on an inter RIR Resource Transfer process and he is not sure if the EC has previously tasked the Registration Service Managers to work on something like that. He mentioned that this issue was raised in the context of Resource Transfers that needs to be done from RIPE NCC to AFRINIC to complete the transition process and that the RIPE NCC Registration Services informed that nothing can be done for the moment until the Inter RIR Resource Transfer policy is implemented.
RE mentioned that this is not the same working group that he was referring to and that the Resource Transfer topics were discussed among the Registration Service Managers outside the working group. He mentioned that he discussed the topic with Ricardo Patara whereby it was noted that though the Registration Service Managers can discuss the matter freely among themselves, nothing can be done without the formal approval of the EC.
RP mentioned that is common practice for Registration Service Managers to discuss among themselves without consultation with the EC and this dates back before the NRO days, but they cannot engage themselves into a process that is not agreed by the EC.He mentioned that this activity needs to be stopped and the EC should discuss what this practice should be. For the remaining AFRINIC resource transfers, he said that this has to be completed irrespective of the inter RIR Resource Transfer policy as this is due from the formation of AFRINIC.
AA mentioned that he had the same understanding regarding the Resource Transfers for AFRINIC and that they need to take that out of any Inter-RIR source transfer discussion. He mentioned that he asked the Registration Service to work in that line and but he has seen no active reaction on this.
RP moved as follows:
“AFRINIC to review all resource transfer remaining in the other RIRs and to make a request to the other RIR to complete the process”
AA seconded the motion.
The Chair called for objections . There were none and the motion passed unanimously.
11. AOB
The Chair asked for comments. RE asked for an update on items 8 and 9 as he was not on the call when they were discussed. The Chair gave the following updates:
– AA and RP will work together for a proposal before the end of month for the joint workshop at the IGF.
– The Treasurer will contact IGF secretariat for the NRO contribution.
– For participation to the ICANN meeting, this needs to be firmly discussed as we do not know what allocations we may have.
RE mentioned that we need to allocate a time for the CEO`s meeting at the ICANN meeting, eg, 4 hours per day.
12. Adjournment
The Chair called for a motion to adjourn the meeting. RP moved as follows:
“The NRO EC moves to adjourn the meeting at 12h30 UTC.”
RE seconded the motion.
The Chair called for objections and there were none. The Chair thanked the participants for their presence.
Last modified on 15/04/2008