Meeting of the NRO Executive Council – 160316

Minutes of the NRO EC Teleconference meeting held on Wednesday March 16th 2016 at 11:00 AM UTC

Executive Council:

Oscar Robles (OR) LACNIC Chair
John Curran (JC) ARIN Secretary
Paul Wilson (PW) APNIC Treasurer
Axel Pawlik (AP) RIPE NCC


Pablo Hinojosa (PH) APNIC
Carlos Martinez (CM) LACNIC
Ernesto Majo (EM) LACNIC
Maria Gayo (MG) LACNIC
Ingrid Wijte (IW) RIPE NCC
Paul Rendek (PR) RIPE NCC

German Valdez (GV) NRO

Alan Barrett (AB) AFRINIC

Draft Agenda NRO EC Meeting Wednesday March 16th 2016

0. Welcome
1. Agenda Review
2. Minutes Review
3. Review Open Actions
4. CG Input / Consultation
a) CCG
b) ECG
5. Update in SLA Discussions
6. IANA IPR Discussions Status
7. ICANN Bylaws Drafting Status
8. ASO AC ICANN Director Selection Process
9. Proposed Return of 7×24 to IANA
10. IANA Allocation to IETF
11. RPKI TA Outcome – Next Steps
12. RIR Accountability Review Status
14. Next Meeting
a) Tuesday April 19th 2016
b) Next f2f Meeting
13. AOB
14. Adjourn

0. Welcome

OR welcomed and opened the meeting at 11:05 UTC AM noting the absence of AB. OR asked GV to follow up any pending decision with AB in the NRO EC list.

1. Agenda Review

OR asked for any addition to the agenda.

No additions were made.

JC advised that he had to leave the meeting at 12:00 PM UTC.

2. Minutes

OR asked for the approval of December and January minutes.

JC said he would review the minutes and provide feedback in the EC list.

OR said that February minutes are still pending to be circulated.

GV would send February minutes asap.

3. Open Actions

GV said that rom the face-to-face meeting in Auckland he has an action to document the absences of ASO AC members to ASO teleconferences and meetings. GV reported that the information has been collected for the past three years and it’s ready for publication. GV said that the ASO AC was notified about this during their last teleconference.

4 CG Input / Consultation

a) CCG

OR reminded that the CCG work plan includes only one meeting during the ICANN Meeting in June.

OR asked if the NRO EC should approve CG meeting during RIR meetings, OR considered that in such cases they should not require NRO EC explicit approval.

JC said he was ok with CCG work plan. JC considered that if the members of the CG coincide in a RIR meeting they should able to meet.

AP and PW approved the CCG work plan.

CCG work plan is pending approval from AB.

b) ECG

OR asked CM if the document series is only for decisions and actions in the ECG or it’s attempting to document something else outside the CG.

CM said that the document series is intended only for the ECG but could be replicated to other CG to help them keep accurate reference to past decisions and actions.

PW, JC AP approved the ECG work plan.

ECG work plan is pending approval from AB.


OR asked if the RSCG is still planning to meet right after LACNIC meeting in Cuba.

IW confirmed that the RSCG is preparing to meet in Cuba.

JC approved the RSCG work plan. JC advised about some logistics issues to send ARIN staff to LACNIC meeting; he said that they are currently trying to resolve the problems.

OR asked to the RSCG to have an alternative place to meet in case LACNIC meeting is not feasible.

PW and AP approved the RSCG work plan.

RSCG work plan is pending approval from AB

5. Update in SLA Discussions

OR reminded about the decision to release the 5th version of the SLA for public comments.

JC agreed and recommended to publish the 5th version of the SLA, the comments and the track changes document so the community knows the agreed document with IANA staff as the result of the meetings in Marrakech. JC added that he’d like to have the community and NTIA feedback as soon as possible.

AP and PW agreed

OR asked if AB approval is required

GV said that previous releases had full approval from the NRO EC

GV asked about the expectations for next steps once this version is released in the NRO-IANAXFER global list.

OR mentioned that the IANA and the RIRs agreed to have this version of the SLA open for public review. OR reminded that the community input would remain open until April 15th.

OR asked JC if he wanted to discuss any topic of the agenda before he depart from the meeting

JC asked to discuss the IANA Allocation to the IETF

6. IANA Allocation to the IETF

JC suggested to keep supporting the special allocation of IPv4 space to the IETF when is needed however better communication should be on place when this happens.

PW considered that IANA should make such communications. PW agreed that the RIRs should have no say in the special allocation to the IETF.

JC asked if there was a communication from IANA to any of the technical coordination list on the special allocations to the IETF that could be used for the RIR community.

PW agreed that such communication would be a useful.

OR volunteered to ask Elise Gerich if there was any communication that could be used publicly on the special allocations to the IETF by the RIRs.

NEW ACTION ITEM 160316-01 OR to ask Elise Gerich regarding the IANA communications to any technical coordination list about special allocations to the IETF that could be used by the RIR to inform their communities.

PW agreed that this was a straightforward operational question.

JC and AP agreed

JC suggested to talk to the IETF about the possibility that in the future direct IPv4 allocations could be made from the RIR to the IETF once the IANA pool is fully exhausted.

OR asked JC to do the approach with IETF, as JC understands the issue in details

JC gladly accepted the task.

NEW ACTION ITEM 160316-02 JC draft a message to the IETF about future direct IPv4 special allocation from the RIRs to the IETF.

8 ASO AC ICANN Director Selection Process

JC said that in the process of working in the ICANN Bylaws drafting team, he found out that the bylaws clearly prohibits the participation, discussion and voting of members of supporting organization councils that are candidates to the ICANN Board in their respective election process. JC added that the ASO procedures should reflect this restriction and inform the ASO AC as soon as possible.

At this point and as advised at the start of the meeting, JC left the call at 11:58 UTC

OR asked GV to communicate the ASO AC about the inconsistency between ICANN Bylaws and ASO Procedures.

NEW ACTION ITEM 20160316-03 GV to communicate to the ASO AC the inconsistency between ICANN Bylaws and ASO Procedures regarding the participation in the election process of ASO AC members running for ICANN Board.

At this point there were technical problems with PW connection and the meeting missed quorum

OR asked GV how the NRO EC meetings proceeds under the lack of quorum.

GV said that in the past the NRO EC meeting stops if there is no quorum.

AP agreed, he suggested continuing with any pending topics in the NRO EC list


OR thanked all participants and adjourned the meeting at 12:04 pm

Last modified on 30/06/2016