Meeting of the NRO Executive Council – 151215

Minutes of the NRO EC Teleconference meeting held on Tuesday December 15th 2015 at 11:00 AM UTC

Executive Council:

Axel Pawlik (AP) RIPE NCC Chair
John Curran (JC) ARIN Treasurer
Paul Wilson (PW) APNIC
Alan Barrett (AB) AFRINIC


Alfredo Verderosa (AV) LACNIC
Andres Piazza (API) LACNIC
Carlos Martinez (CM) LACNIC
Ernesto Majo (EM) LACNIC
Maria Gayo (MG) LACNIC
Nick Hyrka (NH) RIPE NCC
Izumi Okutani IO ASO Liaison in CCWG
Filiz Yilmaz FY ASO Vice Chair
Jorge Villa JV ASO Liaison in CCWG
Fiona Asonga FA ASO Liaison in CCWG
Athina Fragkouli AF ASO Liaison in CCWG

German Valdez (GV) NRO

Oscar Robles (OR) LACNIC Secretary

DRAFT AGENDA NRO EC Tuesday December 15th 2015

0. Welcome
1. Agenda Review
2. Minutes Review
3. Review Open Actions
4. CG / Input Consultation
6. IANA Transition Status
7. Relationship with ICANN VP Technical Engagement
8. RPKI TA Structure
9. ASO Amendment of Operating Procedures
10. RIR Accountability Review Status
11. Next Meeting
a) Teleconference Tuesday January 19th 2016
12. AOB
13. Adjourn

0. Welcome

AP welcomed all participants at 11:05 AM UTC and suggested to start with agenda point 5 ICANN CCWG with the ASO liaisons in the CCWG and ASO chairs invited to the meeting.

Session with ASO Liaisons in the CCWG and ASO Chairs

IO summarized the last changes from the second to the third version of the CCWG proposal as follow:

– ICANN Board approved the change from sole member model to sole designated model.
– There is more details of the Community Process including thresholds to start the process and to exercise their powers
– Correction in the description of protocol parameters services in the ICANN mission.
– More details in the IPR including its legal enforceability
– Description of ICANN’s mission on Human Rights
– Separation of the budget rejection between ICANN and IANA Budget
– More clarity on the threshold of how ICANN Board considers GAC advice.
– More explanation on how to ensure accountability of the SO and AC

IO presented and explained the powers and the required community threshold for escalation processes. IO stressed that the ASO input is important in the required thresholds.
FY asked if the CCWG expressed any concern on how long would take from step one to step seven of the escalation process.

IO said that discussion focused on the numbers of days required to move between steps and what happened if any SO delays or is not able to exercise their power.

IO summarized the current contentious issues in the CCWG

– Possible controversial in areas like Inspection rights, mission, human rights and how they interpret being against “Global Public Interests” and the process itself.
– Based on the last CCWG call, the Co-Chairs are confirming with the Board what is the legal basis of CCWG proposal being against “the global public interest”
– Changes in the Mission Statement.
– GAC members concerns that the new proposal limits their ability to advise the Board. The proposal consider two third of ICANN Board while the bylaws require simple majority.

IO highlighted the areas concerning the numbers community

– New Mission is not making any reference of the ASO MoU
– On the matter of reconsideration, this should clearly state that number related issues are out of scope
– What is the position on the community process, specifically if the ASO would join the process.
– Removal of ICANN Board. ASO to adopt the process or not.
– IANA budget being influenced only by the operational communities

IO said that comments for the third version of the CCWG proposal would close on December 21st, each SO AC is expected to provide supportive comments so a final draft could be ready by mid January.

Regarding the areas concerning the numbers community, AP said that the ASO MoU reference should be part of the mission. AP considered that only the operational community should comment on the IANA budget. AP stated that he could live with the proposed community process. AP added that regarding the removal of ICANN Board he was ok in providing a rationale.

JC agreed with all AP comments. JC stressed that 21 December was a tight deadline. JC reminded that the numbers community was relying in contractual measures to ensure the accountability with ICANN/IANA.

AB and PW agreed with AP and JC.

EM on behalf of LACNIC supported AP and JC position.

FA suggested a strong support from the number community to the third version of the proposal to allow the process to move ahead.

AF volunteered to draft the ASO comments to the CCWG mailing list and requested expedite feedback so could be submitted on time.

JC suggested that the ASO comments should be brief and non-contentious so the CCWG process doesn’t be delayed.

IO asked if the ASO is ready to participate in the community process.

AP said that the number community should leave the possibility to participate in all the seven powers identified for the community process.

JC agreed to reserve the right to participate in the community process.

AP thanked IO, FA, JV, FA and FY to participate of the NRO EC meeting. At this point they left the call.

AP noted that OR was not present in the call but the meeting had quorum.

1. Agenda Review

AP asked for any additions.

No changes were made to the agenda.

2. Minutes Review

GV said there were some people pending to provide input to November meetings.

3. Review Open Actions

Action Item 151113-01 AP to draft an email informing the CRISP Team they would be in stand by until request of the NRO EC.

Closed. Taken by events.

New Action Item 151113-02 AP once the CCWG proposal is received to send a note to the ASO AC informing them that the NRO EC would take the approval process.


Action Item 141018-03: PACG to include Governing Board Structure, Budget and Activity Approval, Fee Approval and Bylaw/Operational Document Control information to the RIR Governance Matrix.

Status: Pending

Action Item 141018-04: PACG based on the RIR Governance Matrix propose to the NRO EC those areas where could be consolidation or harmonization among the RIR.

Status: Pending

New Action Item: 150821-01: GV to compile a list of URL pointing to RIR strategic plans and publish them in the NRO website.
Status: Done

4. CG / Input Consultation


NH said they were working in the secretariat transition and working plan for 2016. NH

EM introduced Carlos Martinez, Mario Gayo, Alfredo Verderosa and Andres Piazza as chairs of the ECG, CCG, RSCG and PACG respectively for 2016.

GV said he would update the NRO EC list with the 2016 CG chairs.

GV reported on the election process for seat 10 to the ICANN Board. GV said that the ASO Qualifying Review Committee in charge to evaluate candidates to the ICANN Board decided to extend the nomination period.


AP asked if there were any other aspect to discuss after the session with the ASO liaisons in the CCWG and ASO chairs.

No new topics were discussed.

6. IANA Transition Status

No topics were discussed as the issues were covered in the previous agenda point

7. Relationship with ICANN VP Technical Engagement

JC pointed out that the NRO EC should be clear on what, why and how would be the engagement with ICANN and also ICANN should be clear on the same aspects. JC reminded that the ASO engagement with ICANN is based on the MoU. JC advised to clearly identify those engagement activities not described in the contractual relationship.

AB agreed.

AP suggested documenting a list of the two sides of the relationship with ICANN.

8. RPKI TA Structure

AB said that AFRINIC prefers the pure model. AB added that if there is no sufficient support for the pure model they could start with the simple model and eventually move to the pure model.

AP agreed with AB that the pure model was the best option in the long run but that the single model was quicker in his implementation. AP suggested having clear communications on why the RIR are choosing a transition from single to pure model.

CM said that in an ideal situation the pure model would be the best option but agreed that in the short term the simple model would help with a sooner implementation. CM added that we should not lost sight that the goal is to evolve to the pure model.

PW agreed.

JC said that ARIN could go with either approach. JC stressed in the importance of having appropriate communication materials explaining why we are doing the simple model.

AP agreed to communicate to the ECG to work in the simple model.

9. ASO Amendment of Operating Procedures.

GV reminded the NRO EC on the ASO AC request to review changes in the ASO procedures. GV said the procedure to remove ASO appointee to various bodies was sent to the NRO EC list for their review after the approval of more of fourth-fifth of the ASO AC.

AP asked to the NRO EC to review the text and send comments to the list.

10. RIR Accountability Review Status

JC said that Caplin and Drysdale firm are ready to receive the RIR public summary of their internal accountability reviews.

AP asked to the rest of NRO EC to send their reports as soon as they are ready.

11. Next Meeting

a) Teleconference Tuesday January 19th 2016

AP asked about keeping the date for the next scheduled teleconference.

All agreed to meet on January 19th 2016.

12. AOB

NH thanked all RIR colleagues for their collaboration during 2015.

AP thanked all for their cooperation and support during his role as NRO EC chair in 2015

JC thanked AP for his excellent chairing.

Call attendees joined in a round of applauses supporting JC comment.

13. Adjourn

JC moved to adjourn the meeting, PW seconded.

AP adjourned the meeting at 12:25 pm UTC

Last modified on 19/04/2016