Minutes of the NRO EC Teleconference meeting held on Tuesday September 20th 2016 at 11:00 AM UTC
Oscar Robles (OR) LACNIC Chair
John Curran (JC) ARIN Secretary
Paul Wilson (PW) APNIC Treasurer
Alan Barrett (AB) AFRINIC
Axel Pawlik (AP) RIPE NCC
Nate Davis (ND) ARIN
Pablo Hinojosa (PH) APNIC
Carlos Martinez (CM) LACNIC
Ernesto Majo (EM) LACNIC
Kevon Swift (KS) LACNIC
Paul Rendek (PR) RIPE NCC
Athina Fragkouli (AF) RIPE NCC
German Valdez (GV) NRO
Agenda NRO EC Teleconference September 20th 2016
1. Agenda Review
2. Minutes Review
a) July 2016
b) August 2016
3. CCWG Stream 2
4. IANA Stewardship Transition Status
5. IPv6 Talking Points for ICANN
6. RIR Accountability Review Status
7 ASO Review
8. RPKI 0/0 Status
9. CG / Input Consultation
10. Review Open Actions
11. Next Meetings
a) Teleconference Scheduled on Tuesday October 18th
b) Next NRO EC f2f Meeting – Monday December 5th (Guadalajara Mexico)
OR welcomed and opened the teleconference at 11:05 AM UTC
1 Agenda Review
JC advised that he had to leave the meeting after point 4.a of the agenda. He said that ND would represent ARIN for the rest of the meeting.
OR suggested to move the point 4.a as first point of the agenda.
4 IANA Stewardship Transition Status
JC reported about the possibility that the IANA transition could be blocked or delayed by the US congress or by court action. JC said that some of the Republican leadership were opposed to the transition going ahead as scheduled.
PW asked about alternative plans in case the IANA transition doesn’t happen.
JC said that he would need to review any alternative plans with the ARIN Board.
AB added that he would need community and board approval for any alternative plans.
AB reminded about the pending task to appoint three members from the numbers operational community to the IPR Community Coordination Group (CCG). AB suggested appointing the Chair, Secretary and Treasurer of the NRO each year.
AF reported on last IPR meeting. AF confirmed that there were no controversial comments during the open comments period. AF commented that current discussions were about the effective date of the agreement. AF said that the only open question was if ICANN was able the sign the agreement if the transition didn’t happened. AF said that ICANN should clarify if they can sign the agreement in such case.
AF asked to the NRO EC if they would be willing to sign the IPR agreement regardless the IANA transition.
The NRO EC agreed to move ahead with the IPR agreement for a specific date without any precedent conditions regardless the result of the IANA transition.
2 Minutes Review
GV thanked comments received for the July and August minutes.
GV said that he’d follow AB advised to consult minutes approval in separate emails.
3 CCWG Stream 2
AF reported that the accountability group has been active with regular calls where the main issue of discussion is the scope of the group. AF mentioned that there are some discussions regarding the scope of the independent review panels and if this would affect the ASO, AF suggested keeping an eye on these discussions. AF said that the stream 2 working group in enhancing accountability is discussing his scope. AF confirmed that the ASO representatives stated that any accountability for the ASO should be limited to his role inside ICANN. AF said that there is good perception of the ASO accountability internally in the group. AF added that jurisdiction; diversity and transparency groups are starting their discussion and working on definitions. Finally, AF mentioned that the group would like to have a presentation on the ASO AC accountability mechanisms.
OR asked when the presentation could happen.
AF said that ICANN Hyderabad meeting could be a good opportunity.
AP advised that the RIRs should focus their reports about accountability mechanisms to their members, community and boards.
ND, OR, AB and PW agreed with AP.
OR said that he had concerns that the working group was using resources and time in discussions outside their scope.
AP said that the RIRs should be ready to make general presentations about the RIR system accountability but he was clear that the RIRs are accountable to their own communities and stakeholders and reports should be delivered to them.
GV received comments new version to be send in individual emails for each minutes.
5 Pv6 Talking Points for ICANN
OR reminded about Carlos Reyes’s request to prepare some IPv6 talking points for ICANN CEO. OR said that the request comes since ICANN meeting in Marrakesh. OR mentioned that it was now a formal request from ICANN.
AP confirmed that he had received the same request. AP said the NRO should provide the IPv6 messages.
ND proposed that the CCG could coordinate with Carlos Reyes in this task.
New Action Item 160920-01 CCG to coordinate with Carlos Reyes to provide to ICANN CEO with IPv6 Talking points.
6 RIR Accountability Review.
GV said that he received all the information and he was preparing the last draft of the RIR Accountability Review to be published in the NRO website.
7 ASO Review Status
OR reminded that there were some pending feedback from the NRO EC members
OR suggested to wait for further input from NRO EC members before advancing in the project.
8. RPKI 0/0 Implementation Status
CM reported about some questioning in the IETF mailing list about the role of the RIR in the GTA role. CM stressed that the arguments presented were not technical related.
PW said that at this stage he’d assumed that the RIR are not going ahead with the 0/0 plan given the opposition shown in the rpki list. PW considered that the RIR should respond firmly and clearly to the objections made in the RPKI mailing list before reviewing the plan. PW reminded about the suggested RIR response sent to the EC list for comments.
AB agreed with PW.
OR asked who should call for an agreement in the IETF community in order to continue with the 0/0 implementation plan.
PW said that it would depend of the expectations in the IETF.
CM clarified that currently there were no technical objections to the proposal.
PW stressed on the amount of objections received in the rpki list and the need to address them.
OR said that maybe there is no much understanding in the political side of the plan. OR suggested to clarify the RIR proposition using the message drafted by PW.
AB suggested to have a more detailed description on what is wrong with the current situation and explained why the RIR are proposing the implementation plan.
CM said the current text describe the high level problem.
OR asked if it would be ok to send the communication suggested by PW and then provide additional description of the problems we want to address.
OR suggested to move to the mailing list the discussion.
9 CG / Input Consultations
GV reminded about the message sent by the CCG regarding the plan and approach to the coming the IGF.
OR said he was ok on not having this time a barista in the booth as long as the objectives of the plan are taken care of effectively. OR asked to review the plan and send comments to the list.
GV said that the RSCG were working in the preparations of the second meeting of the year. GV mentioned that they would extend their participation in AFRINIC meeting to stay two more days. GV added that the RSCG would send the agenda meeting soon.
OR reminded about the NRO EC decision to allow CG meetings if their members are already taken part of an Internet meeting. OR said that the RSCG would be working on the Internet health indicators requested by ICANN.
10 Review Open Actions
Action Item 160816-01 PW to send an email to the I* list asking for possible coordinated communication activities in preparation for the IANA transition date.
PW suggested to review a possible meeting with I* group during IGF in México once the IANA transition process is finished.
Action Item 160816-02 GV to follow up with each RIR the confirmation of their last version of the public accountability report and coordinate the joint report publication.
Action Item 160816-03 JC to provide comments to the ASO Review RFP document so this is aligned with ASO specific relationship with ICANN
Action Item 160816-04 OR once the ASO review RFP is published to send an email to ICANN board informing them about the NRO plan for the ASO review.
Action Item 160719-01 after August 12th, GV to follow up and coordinate with all RIR the publication and announcement of the RC members in the NRO website and RIR websites.
Action Item 160719-02 OR to draft a message to the ASO representatives in the CCWG stream 2 asking them to designate a point of contact for the NRO EC.
OR reminded that Athina Fragkouli was added to the ASO representatives.
Action Item 160719-03 OR to prepare the call for proposal for the ASO review
OR asked to keep this topic in the agenda.
Action Item 160621-03 OR to request to the ECG to work in a implementation plan for the RPKI 0/0 project considering each RIR approach and timelines
Action Item 141018-03: PW and RIR Legal Team to include Governing Board Structure, Budget and Activity Approval, Fee Approval and Bylaw/Operational Document Control information to the RIR Governance Matrix.
Action Item 141018-04: PW and RIR Legal team based on the RIR Governance Matrix propose to the NRO EC those areas where could be consolidation or harmonization among the RIR.
For both actions, AF reported that there are some pending documents to be submitted to complete the new version of the matrix.
AF suggested prioritizing the submission of documents at RIR level.
OR asked if it was ok for AF to send the list of outstanding documents to the EC list.
New Action Item 160920-02 AF to send a list of outstanding documents to complete the RIR Governance Matrix.
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.
OR said that he would address this pending issue after the conclusion of the IANA transition.
11. Next Meetings
a) Teleconference Scheduled on Tuesday October 18th.
OR suggested to keep the date as planned.
b) Next NRO EC f2f Meeting – Monday December 5th (Guadalajara Mexico)
OR reminded about the possibility to have a meeting with the I* group on Sunday December 4th.
No other business were included or discussed.
OR thanked all participants and adjourned the meeting at 1:00 PM UTC
Last modified on 31/07/2018