MINUTES
June 17th, 2014
Teleconference 11:00 AM UTC
Executive Council Attendees:
Chairman: Adiel Akplogan (AA) AFRINIC
Secretary: Axel Pawlik (AP) RIPE NCC
Member: John Curran (JC) ARIN
Member: Paul Wilson (PW) APNIC
Apologies
Treasurer: Raul Echeberria (RE) LACNIC
Observers:
Anne Rachel Inne (AR) AFRINIC
Pablo Hinojosa (PH) APNIC
Paul Andersen (PA) ARIN
Nate Davis (ND) ARIN
Ernesto Majo (EM) LACNIC
Hartmut Glaser (HG) LACNIC
Paul Rendek (PR) RIPE NCC
Antony Gollan (AG) RIPE NCC
Secretariat:
German Valdez (GV) NRO
0) Welcome
AA welcomed attendees and started the meeting at 11:10 AM UT.
1) Agenda Review
AA asked if there were any changes or additions to the agenda.
No changes were made. The draft agenda was adopted.
2) Review Open Actions.
Action Item 180214-05: RE as NRO treasurer to work with the CFO to determine the indirect cost from each RIR in their support to NRO activities.
AA volunteered to own this action. AA asked GV to update the action item.
Status Open.
Action Item 180214-07: GV to update the ASO AC procedures to appoint members to various bodies based on JC and PW feedback and comeback with a newer version for formal approval before sending the document back to the ASO AC list.
GV Reported the action closed.
Status Closed.
Action Item 040314-04: RE, PR, JC to work in a NRO framework to be used to improve the accountability and transparency of the RIR (4 weeks).
AA asked JC and PR for an update.
JC said that the information has not been consolidated in a single matrix yet.
PR reported that LACNIC was still pending to add his information. PR volunteered RIPE NCC to compile and format all RIR information into a single document. PR suggested that PACG should review the resulting document before being sent to the NRO EC.
EM said that LACNIC was working in the document and it should be ready by the end of the week.
AA asked to keep the action open until the actual document is delivered to the NRO EC.
3) Approval of Pending Minutes
AA reminded that as agreed in the last NRO EC Teleconference pending minutes were circulated for one week to receive comments. AA added that he requested GV to publish pending minutes as drafts in the NRO website to avoid further delay in their publication.
JC said he would review April and May minutes today. JC mentioned he sent a comment about a typo in March 4th minutes. JC stated that ARIN was ok with the content of February 18th, March 4th, March 5th, March 18th, March 25th and March 27th.
GV said that with the exception of the typo just mentioned by JC he made all the changes in the minutes previously pointed out by AP and JC. GV said he could follow from now on a new approach where he would publish in the NRO website a draft version of the minutes.
AA suggested that minutes should be posted in the NRO website after one week the minutes are sent for review into the NRO EC list.
AA suggested to the NRO EC to approve all the minutes with the provision that JC might provide comments to the NRO EC list about the April 16th and May 20th.
JC agreed.
4) CG Input/Consultation
ARI reported on behalf of the PACG on the work and outcome document of the WSIS +10 meeting. ARI said that this outcome document could have repercussion on other international event later in the year.
ARI mentioned that the NRO documentation for IGF is under review.
ARI said that there are efforts to include NRO material in the delegate bags for ICANN 50 meeting.
ARI reminded that the PACG is planning to meet on August 30th before the start of the IGF in Turkey. ARI added that the I* group might meet after the end of the IGF.
PW joined at 11:27 AM UTC.
AG reported on behalf of the CGG. AG mentioned that the CCG is preparing their face-to-face meeting during ICANN meeting in London. AG said the CCG is currently working in the redesign of the ASO website that would be presented to the ASO AC in London, updating the Continuing Cooperation Brochure and IPv6 Around the World document in advance for the IGF and updating the NRO website.
5) IANA Transition Stewardship Updates
a) ASO and NRO appointments to Coordination Group
AA reminded that ICANN has recently released the final process document with some changes from the first version that affects directly to the NRO. AA said that the number of appointments to the Coordination Group was reduced from 4 to 3, 2 for the NRO and 1 for the ASO.
AA asked the NRO EC to agree now in the appointment procedures.
AA pointed out that the NRO EC has information on 3 candidates from the ASO AC. AA reminded that PR sent an email about the issue of proposing a timeline on the selection of the candidate for the ASO. AA said that the NRO EC agreed previously in asking to the ASO AC for a list of candidates to choose from. AA asked to the NRO EC their opinions on how to proceed, if go for the selection of one of the 3 candidates or ask the ASO AC to choose their own representative.
AA clarified that he and RE have already expressed their views on the list.
JC said that he didn’t have a preference but either way the NRO EC should act promptly.
AP said that the EC could choose from the candidate slate but he was not overly concern to do it in the other way.
PW said that the NRO EC should have the names selected really soon.
GV reported that in the last ASO AC teleconference they discussed about the candidate slate for the coordination group. GV said that the ASO AC agreed to nominate Tomohiro Fujisaki, Douglas Onyango and Hartmut Glaser. GV pointed out that Alan Barrett chaired the last teleconference and there was an action on him to send the names to the NRO EC however this has not been done so far.
PW said he was comfortable to proceed based on the names provided by the ASO AC.
JC suggested that the NRO EC should make the decision today. JC said that he was ok with either the NRO EC or the ASO AC make the selection nevertheless he pointed out that in the case the ASO AC run a selection process he’d like to know the timeline so their selection can be made in a timely manner.
PR agreed with JC. PR said the selection process should be documented and announced soon.
AP agreed with JC as well. AP supported Hartmut Glaser to be appointed as representative for the ASO to the IANA Transition Coordination Group.
AA said that based on the discussion his understanding was to stick to the process agreed before. AA agreed with PR to have a brief documentation of the selection process.
AA asked PR to draft the selection process.
PR said he’d send a draft to the EC
AA suggested to the NRO EC to have a roll call for the selection of the candidate from the ASO AC to the coordination group. AA reminded that the candidates were Tomohiro Fujisaki, Douglas Onyango and Hartmut Glaser.
AA said that AP already expressed his support for Hartmut Glaser
JC said that he had no preference from the list.
PW selected Hartmut Glaser.
EM said he was in support of any of the candidates.
AA selected Hartmut Glaser.
AA declared Hartmut Glaser as the selection from the ASO AC to the coordination group.
AA asked to move for the selection of the NRO representatives. AA reminded that PW and himself were the candidates.
AP supported AA and PW
JC also supported AA and PW
EM supported AA and PW
PW said he would like to see other volunteer coming forward
There was no expression of interest to participate among the NRO EC members.
AA confirmed Hartmut Glaser (ASO), Paul Wilson and Adiel Akplogan (NRO) as representatives to the Transition of NTIA’s Stewardship of the IANA Functions Coordination Group.
PR said he’d send the announcement with the description of the ASO and NRO selection process to the EC this week.
b) RIR Timeline for IANA oversight transition consultation
AA said that PR sent some comments about the timeline. AA suggested that the NRO EC should agreed in the RIR timeline document as this describes how the consultation process will be in the RIR communities. AA said that the plan would need to be shared with the PACG and CCG and the RIR communities.
AA asked GV to display the timeline document in the WebEx platform.
AA explained that one of the changes should be in point 4a of the document so the consultation process ends on November 2014. AA suggested adding a link with the details and description of each RIR consultation process. AA highlighted the importance to finish and publishing the accountability and corporate governance document. AA said that the document goes hand to hand with the whole process, as the document would prove that the RIRs have their own oversight mechanisms and strong accountability and corporate governance frameworks.
JC suggested that in point 5 the internal NRO coordination groups should be replaced by the RIR and in point 6 add a list of RIR meetings as it was described in point 4a. JC stated that it was a good document.
AA clarified that the information in brackets are for internal use only and that would be remove before publishing.
AA said that the timeline should reflect the mailing list discussions.
AA suggested that the publication and announcement of the accountability matrix document should have a new deadline for July 15th.
PW and JC agreed with the change.
AA said that deadlines for final two 2 points 7,8 are based on the information provided by ICANN. AA added that the second round of consultation could be made online.
PR suggested developing a set of common question to be used across the RIR in order to facilitate the input compilation. PR said that PACG could work on this. PR clarified that each RIR could develop its own regional questions.
PR said that RIPE NCC would work on material to facilitate the consultation by their fall meeting; he suggested that the NRO EC should discuss something similar. PR advised that given the deadline set by ICANN the RIR should be ready to communicate to their communities that the last part of the consultation could be online only, he said that this could be clarified with ICANN next week in London.
JC agreed with PR. JC said that there would be a lot of pressure to try to make the August deadline therefore the September turnover. JC mentioned that his concern was about the ICANN accountability process that is running in parallel with the IANA stewardship transition process and that those might not converge in a reasonable time.
PR asked who would be responsible from the NRO EC or RIR to follow closely the ICANN accountability process.
AA said that before decide the level of engagement and energy the NRO EC should look for more clarity about the ICANN accountability process during the meeting with Fadi and the ICANN board next week in London.
AA asked PR if the common set of questions to be used by all RIR would be bundled with a common shared supporting/background document of the current arrangements with ICANN/IANA and the RIR.
PR said that the PACG would work on that.
AA said that the NRO EC should be prepared to review and refine the questions along the process.
AA concluded and suggested the following actions.
New Action Item 170614-01: PACG to work in a set of common questions to be used across the RIRs consultation process and bundle them with a commonly shared supporting background document for Number Resource Management.
New Action Item 170614-02: AA to finalize the RIR engagement timeline for IANA stewardship transition process document and organize his publication.
New Action Item 170614-03: NRO EC to look for a clear view from ICANN about the deadline for the RIR contribution to the IANA stewardship transition process.
AA said that these new actions items join the finalization of the accountability and corporate governance matrix document that are required to move forward in the IANA functions transition process.
AP and PW agreed on the approach.
6) ICANN 50 Meeting
a) Agenda Meeting with ICANN CEO
AA said that unfortunately he wouldn’t be able to attend to ICANN meeting in London.
AA requested GV to liaise with ICANN staff to have access to remote participation if available during NRO EC meetings in ICANN week.
PR suggested that the NRO EC appoints one of his members to take over AA role during the week.
JC nominated PW.
PW accepted.
GV asked who would be attending the meeting with Fadi he said it was not clear if this was open to RIR boards members as well.
JC said that normally a meeting with Fadi would include CEO only and the meeting with ICANN board is open to RIR staff and board members.
EM and AP agreed to have CEO only in the meeting with Fadi.
b) Agenda Meeting with ICANN Board
AA suggested that the meeting with ICANN Board the NRO EC should discuss about the timeline and deadline of the IANA oversight process and look clarity on the ICANN accountability process.
AA said that further discussion on topics for the agenda with ICANN board could be brought to the NRO EC mailing list.
7) Global IGF Update
AA said that the upcoming global IGF is 2 months from now. AA said that it was a good time to have a quick update on the IGF preparations.
AA asked PR or PW for an update
PW reported that the workshop selection process is completed but no program has been published yet. PW said that last MAG meeting focused primarily on the workshop selection process. PW considered that there is a good range of proposals selected. PW said that the NRO presence in panels wouldn’t be prominent this time as no many NRO or RIR names were included in the selected panels. PW stated that maybe is a good thing not having a prominent role in the critical resources discussion.
PR reported that NRO submissions were rejected. PR considered that the IGF is evolving and topics like critical Internet resources are not dominating the discussions. PR added that topics like human rights, freedom of speech, access are the topics people want to discuss. PR said that the whole lists of proposals haven’t been published yet he mentioned that the NRO could monitor where RIR staff or community members could contribute to relevant workshops.
PR said that maybe the NRO EC could start a similar discussion about the evolution of the IGF and how to move forward in IG discussion
AA agreed with PR and said that could be a topic for the next NRO EC f2f meeting.
8) AOB
AA asked for AOB
No additions were made.
9) Adjourn
AA adjourned the NRO EC meeting 12:40 PM UTC
Last modified on 20/08/2014