Minutes
Teleconference: 19th August 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:
- Nate Davies (ND)
- Richard Jimmerson (RJ)
- Kiran Cunniah, (KC) Recording Secretary
AGENDA
1. Welcome and Agenda review
2. Adoption of last meeting’s minutes
3. IGF Hyderabad – Chair to lead
3.1 Workshops
3.2 IGF Village
4. NRO 3
4.1 Next NRO retreat Planning
4.2 Secretariat functions
4.3 NRO evolution
4.4 NRO travel Policy
5. NRO Coordination groups Activities
5.1 ECG activity plan
5.2 CCG
5.2.1 NRO communication Plan
5.2.2 ITU Telecom Asia
5.2.3 RAP group
6. Update to ASO-AC procedure manual
7. Communication with ICANN
8. AOB
8.1 Discussion about the ITU IPv6 Workshop in September – Ray to lead
8.2 Update from ARIN on CAIDA survey – Ray to lead
8.3 Installation procedures
9. Adjournment
1. Review of past minutes
The Chair made a roll call and the presence of the quorum was noted. The meeting was called to order at 11h05 UTC. The Chair welcomed all the participants.
The Chair thanked the Secretariat for sending the agenda to the list. He said that no requests for amendments were received. The Chair reviewed the agenda. He asked for comments and there were none.
2. Adoption of last meeting’s minutes
RP moved:
“The EC adopts the minutes of April 15th 2008 meeting, as last presented to the EC list by the secretariat”
AP seconded the motion. The Chair called for objections and there were none. The motion was carried unanimously.
RP moved:
“The EC adopts the minutes of May 20th 2008 meeting, as last presented to the EC list by the secretariat”
AP seconded the motion. The Chair called for objections and there were none. The motion was carried unanimously.
3. IGF Hyderabad – Chair to lead
3.1 Workshops:* Opportunity for merger and review of all workshop in which the RIRs are participating
The Chair mentioned the option of having mergers for workshops is in discussion and suggested that this topic be reviewed at the next meeting.
AA mentioned that about the mergers, there is one merger on IPv4 and IPv6 workshop merged by four organisations and mentioned that the Chair, RE, RP and himself are on this mailing list. He asked if other members would like to be added and proposed the EC discuss the issue further and address it at the next meeting. All agreed. AA mentioned that some names have been proposed to be on the workshop panel and that it will be good to have a representative from all RIRs so that all are aware of the updates and the direction being taken. The Chair thanked AA for the update.
3.2 IGF VillageStatus of NRO participation.
(RE mentioned that he had to attend a meeting and apologised for leaving the EC meeting.)
The Chair mentioned that he received a proposal from the CCG a few hours ago. He said that he has sent the proposal to the EC list and guess that others have not yet had the opportunity to review it so this topic can be discuss online and during the next meeting.
4. NRO 3
4.1 Next NRO retreat PlanningComments from extended Agenda: “There was a discussion online about fixing the location and date for
the next EC retreat. We need to fix this as soon as possible. Locations proposed are:
– Mauritius (MU)
– Reston (US)
– Brisbane (AU)
August or September were being proposed. Can we consolidate our agenda to find a date during these months. September sound to be more reasonable for me. As from the latest discussion online August
seems compromised.”
The EC discussed the most appropriate date to hold the meeting. After discussion, the followings were noted:
-Proposed venue:- Amsterdam
-Proposed dates: End Sep, same period as the Round Table being organised by RIPE NCC on the 29th. The 30th Sep was suggested.
-Coordination: Executive Assistants to coordinate the availability of the CEOs around that date.
– RE input is required to determine consensus on the 30th Sep
The Chair asked for comments and there were none.
4.2 Secretariat functionsComments from Extended Agenda:
“ We need to complete our action on the distribution of Secretariat Administrative Functions”
The Chair proposed that RP leads this item. RP mentioned that the redistribution of the Secretariat duties needs to be finalised before 1st Jan next year. He asked if all members were agreeable to stabilise the
functions of the Secretariat by the allocation tasks to each RIRs and all said they agreed. RP mentioned that he will re circulate the document to the list for a formal decision to be taken.
4.3 NRO evolutionComments from Extended Agenda:
“We need to discuss the future of the Amendment to NRO MoU
Questions: What are the amendments needed?
What is the process for amending the MoU?”
The Chair asked for comments. RP mentioned that the amendment is connected to the legacy issue and in this regards, the ARIN Board is opposed to follow through the amendment and prefers to see progress on some other discussion before commenting the MoU. He suggested taking the issue off the table at this point. AA asked for some clarifications as to how to determine the time to reconsider the amendments to the MoU. RP said that it can be considered after the Board has discussed the issue locally through the regional policy process and after the formal face to face inter RIR Board discussion.
RP to send an email to RE about that as he was in charge of proposing an amendment to the MoU.
4.4 NRO travel PolicyAction item 200805-004
The EC to discuss its travel policy related to ASO-AC/NRO-NC articipation to meeting relevant to their activities.
Comments from extended Agenda:
“ ** Secretariat’s comment:
Following the discussion related to ICANN contribution to ASO travel. It was agreed that we should discuss a proposal made by Ray related to ASO-AC members travel. Below is the mail sent by Ray on 11/05/2008.
—— At 06:16 p.m. 11/05/2008, Ray Plzak wrote:
I am opposed to accepting any funding support from ICANN whatsoever. As some of you may recall, several years ago, I proposed the following travel scheme for the ASO AC.
1. The Chair attends all meetings.
2. The three ASO AC members from the region in which the ICANN meeting is occurring attend that meeting.
3. One member from each of the other regions attend the ICANN meeting.
I suggested that this be a shared expense and funded according to our formula. Several opposed this saying that each region should be responsible for the travel of their own and that the only shared cost should be for the AC chair.
I am still willing to do this.
BTW – ARIN funds the travel for its ASO AC members as described in items 2 and 3, and of course shares in the cost of travel for the chair.
Ray
—–”
The Chair proposed that RP leads the item.
RP moved as follows:
Proposed Motion:
“The NRO EC adopts the travel policy as presented to the list”
AP seconded the motion.
RP provided a brief based on the email he sent to the list. The Chair called for a vote and all voted for and
the motion passed unanimously.
5. NRO Coordination groups Activities
5.1 ECG activity plan:Comments from the extended agenda;
“The ECG chair has sent an updated version of their activity plan to the EC for its final approval
Proposed Motion:
The EC Approved ECG revised activity plan as submitted on 11/08/2008.”
The Chair proposed that AA leads the item. AA mentioned that the ECG revised activity plan has been submitted to the EC for approval. The Chair mentioned that there were a few comments from RP and that he is of opinion that the EC is not ready to adopt it for the moment. RP proposed to review the activity plan point by point to determine what should remain and what should not. All agreed.
The members discussed the Activity plan and it was reviewed as follows:
• Implementation of revised Various Registries distribution
The conclusion is that the item remains on the ECG activity plan. NRO EC members will instruct their individual members regarding individual RIR processes. This is actually not an action item for the NRO EC – but just for them as members of the ECG.
• Signing of Reverse Zones
It is a good exercise but only some precise aspects of this need global coordination such as signing of distributed zones.
• VOIP RIR Interconnect
This item was dropped
• Resource Certification
The ECG will be asked to work on the configuration aspect instead of the whole architecture. RP will send a write up on this
• ip6.arpa delegation methodology
Stays in the plan and it need to be addressed as soon as possible
The Chair asked for comments and there were none.
5.2 CCG ——————————————–
5.2.1 NRO communication Plan
Comments from extended Agenda:
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 communicate.
Discussion: Is this still something we want? I’m not sure if we have formally tasked the CCG for this.
The Chair mentioned that he received only the communication plan for the IGF in Hyderabad. RP said that we should have a standard template for the reporting the analysis on the participation to such events.
AA mentioned that it may be good for the CCG to look into those activities and advise the EC on the value to participate and at which level so that it makes our perspective clear on our participation. It was noted that since RE was the proposer of this agenda item, it would be better to postpone the discussion on this until the next meeting. All agreed.
5.2.2 ITU Telecom Asia
We have been trying to coordinate our offers of support with APNIC but are not receiving any response.
RP mentioned that ARIN has been having some difficulties in coordinating their offers for support and they are having no response from APNIC. He mentioned that they finally got the information needed and that the issue can be removed from table and considered closed. The Chair, on behalf of APNIC, apologised for the delay and mentioned that this may be due to the fact that they also have their regular meeting just before the ITU event.
5.2.3 RAP group
Action Item 200805-05:
The Chair to communicate with the RAR chair about the decision of the EC to collect comment from all
RIR on the recommendation presented.
** Secretariat’s Comment: It was agreed that we will have the consolidation of the comments and discuss this topic during our August eeting.
It was noted that RE is the proposer of this item and proposed to postpone it to the next meeting. All agreed.
6. Update to ASO-AC procedure manual
Comments from extended agenda
“The NRO EC approve the letters proposed as ANNEX to the ASO-AC procedure Manual.
—– Documents attached —-
a. Letter of Transmittal – GPP for ICANNratification.txt
b. Letter – GPP Notification to SO Chairs.txt
——————————
** Secretariat’s comment: The Chair of the ASO-AC has sent the draft letters to the chair and the AC on June 12th 2008.”
AA moved as follows:
The NRO EC approve the template of letters proposed by the ASO-AC as ANNEX to their procedure Manual.
RP seconded the motion.
The chair called for comments. RP suggested having the document reviewed by one of the RIR editor
for grammar checks and proposed that ARIN assists on this. It was agreed to have the motion approved,
the copies edited and sent back to the EC list for the EC Chair to send it to the ASO AC Chair .
The Chair called for a vote and all voted for. It was noted that RE vote will be also required.
7. Communication with ICANN
Comments from extended agenda:
We need to complete and send to Paul Twomey the letter regarding our concerns about the ICANN TLD Extensions policy. Below is the draft as circulated by Paul:
—- Draft — Draft — Draft ———
Dear Dr Twomey
We are writing regarding the expansion of gTLDs announced by ICANN on 26 June 2008 during its meeting in Paris, France.
This announcement has implications in terms of Attachment 11 to the TLD Sponsorship Agreement, which is available on the ICANN website at:
http://www.icann.org/tlds/agreements/unsponsored/registry-agmt- appk-26apr01.htm
While this document appears to prohibit the use of reserved labels in existing gTLDs, we note that it does not appear to have been strongly observed or enforced. With the expansion of the gTLD space, we call on ICANN to ensure that the provisions of Attachent 11 are well publicised and fully observed within all
new (as well as existing) TLDs.
Regards,
—————————————-
RP moved as follows:
“The EC directs the Chair to send to the President of ICANN the letter about concerns regarding the
ICANN TLD Extensions policy.”
The Chair seconded the motion. The Chair called for comments. RP expressed concerned about “ARIN” being a reserved name and that ARIN has hard time making re delegating arin.com from a former registrant and that ICANN has not been active in helping that to be solved. He said that we should take measures to
protect our names. He further said that this should be addressed at the next ICANN meeting as part of our report the ICANN meeting.
8. Feedback to ICANN on travel policy
8.1 Discussion about the ITU IPv6 Workshop in September – Ray to leadThe Chair asked RP to lead this item. RP said that we need to adopt a careful approach to our articipation to this ITU events and they are becoming very aggressive. He said that the ITU has redoubled its efforts and they are inserting themselves in our business. The Chair asked for comments. AA mentioned that there are no specific comments except from what was said on the mailing list. He said that he declined the offer to give a key note but is of opinion that the NRO should still be present specially in regards to the ITU-D member who are clearly and honestly seeking clarifications on few issues related to IP addresses (especially from AFRINIC region). He mentioned that it is in our interest to have one to one talks with these people and take the opportunity to pass on our key message. RP agreed mentioning however that we have to be careful especially because study group 2 tends to step into ITU-D activities.
It was suggested that the EC works on an answer to the questions and all agreed. It was noted that as most
EC members (with the exception of AA –who did not get his visa) would be at the next APNIC meeting in Christchurch, it would be a good opportunity to discuss the issue. All agreed. The Chair asked for any other comments and there were none.
8.2 Update from ARIN on CAIDA survey _ Ray to leadComments from extended agenda:
“CAIDA is conducting another survey for ARIN as a follow up to the one reported on at our Denver meeting. We would like to inquire as to extending that survey into other regions.”
RP gave a brief on this item. He said that during the last meeting in Denver, there was a survey on IP penetration in the ARIN region for analysis. He mentioned that ARIN will replicate the exercise and said that it would be useful to have similar surveys in other regions. He proposed that Nate Davis assists for the coordination of surveys. All members agreed. The Chair proposed that German and AP proposed Paul be the representatives of their region respectively. AA said he will email RP the name of AFRINIC`s representative. It was also agreed to contact RE for this.
8.3 Installation proceduresThe Chair asked for comments. RP reminded the Chair of the item pertaining to installation procedures. RP mentioned that he sent an email earlier today on this issue and the Chair said that he did not have the chance to go through it. It was proposed that the issue be discussed further after the members have gone through the report sent by RP. All agreed.
The Chair asked for any other comments and there were none.
9. Adjournment
The Chair moved to adjourn the meeting at 12h28 UTC. AP seconded the motion. He called for objections and there were none.
Last modified on 02/09/2020