21 June 2011

Meeting of the NRO Executive Council – 110621

Minutes

Teleconference, 21 June 2011

Executive Council Attendees:

  • Chairman: Raúl Echeberría, CHAIR (LACNIC)
  • Treasurer: Paul Wilson, PW, (APNIC)
  • Members: Alain Aina, AA (AFRINIC), Axel Pawlik, AP (RIPE NCC)

Observers:

  • Maemura Akinori – APNIC
  • Pablo Hinojosa – APNIC
  • Scott Bradner  – ARIN
  • Nate Davis – ARIN
  • Susan Hamlin – ARIN
  • Hartmut Glaser – LACNIC
  • Ernesto Majo – LACNIC
  • Arturo Servin – LACNIC

Apologies

John Curran – ARIN

1. Welcome Apologies, Agenda Bashing

The Chair called the meeting to order at 11:16 UTC. The presence of quorum was noted.

The Chair called for any comments on the agenda. Paul Wilson had circulated a report on CSTD, and requested it be discussed. The Chair stated this would be addressed under Item 5. C.

Paul also noted that the ASO AC Chair, Louie Lee, had received an invitation to attend ICANN’s strategic plan consultations, and Paul wanted to discuss the matter. The Chair added this item to Any Other Business.

2. Approval of the Minutes

The Chair called for approval of the following:

  • March 10, 2011.  The Minutes were approved with no objections.
  • May 11, 2011. Paul Wilson requested an edit to the last paragraph of Action Item 110204-01 suggesting the term ‘public policy’ be replaced with ‘public affairs’ as the term ‘policy’ means something different. The Chair agreed. The Secretariat will edit the minutes to reflect this change.

The May Minutes were approved, as amended, with no objections.

New Action Item 110621-01: Secretariat to post March 2011, and May 2011 (with edits made) NRO EC Minutes as final to the NRO Website. OPEN

3. Review Action Items

Action item 100922-03: The CCG will work on an NRO RPKI factsheet and presentation, and an NRO RPKI Paper. OPEN.

The Chair stated there was no update at this time.

Action item 101026-02: RE to prepare a message for the public regarding distribution of various registries address blocks among the RIRs. OPEN.

The Chair stated he had not yet sent this message. Paul Wilson stated the need to discuss, with the whole ASO AC, the issue of returning recovered space to the IANA. APNIC has one-third of one /8 of unused space pending return to IANA. He suggested the message address this at the same time, if there will be a message about registry space being returned to IANA. He noted that it was not necessary to send both messages at the same time however; and, suggested that if the Chair circulates the message to the EC’s list, he would raise the matter at that time. The Chair agreed.

Action item 110204-04: ASO Review. Adiel Akplogan to distribute work plan and responses. PW and JC to review for compliance.

The Chair stated this item was overtaken by events (OTE) and closed the item. CLOSED.

Action Item 110310-02: EC to send comments to list regarding AP’s post on Contingency Plans within the next 2 weeks (by 5/25).

The Chair stated this item was overtaken by events (OTE) and closed the item. CLOSED.

The Chair asked Axel Pawlik to resend the plan text to the EC’s list to be clear it is the final text. Axel agreed.

Action Item 110310-03: CFOs to work together for next meeting to communicate information about financial stability. OPEN

The Chair noted that at the last EC meeting, Paul Wilson stated that APNIC would organize the CFO meeting. Paul stated there was no update at this time, and that he would foster discussion on the CFO’s list. He stated the meeting could be held either in Brisbane, Australia or in Busan, North Korea. The Chair requested that Paul task the CFOs to start planning. Paul agreed to do so.

Action Item 110310-04: NRO Incorporation.

The Chair stated this item was in regard to the progress of the NRO being incorporated, and if it should be brought to fruition. He noted that some of the RIR Boards, ARIN and RIPE, needed to have good cause to support this effort. He stated that there have been discussions in meetings and on the EC’s list on the matter. He noted that there was enough information for EC members to report to their respective Boards at this point in time. He stated the LACNIC Board is well informed and needs no further information.

The Chair stated this item is for the role of each EC member, not the role of the EC collectively. He stated the item would be closed. All agreed.   CLOSED.

Action Item 110310-05: NRO EC Retreat Dates. OPEN.

The Chair stated the outcome of the recent doodle poll sent to the EC list indicated the best dates are August 16 and 17 in Uruguay. He stated LACNIC would proceed on the planning of the meeting. All agreed.

Action item 110511-01: Review Public Affairs Coordination Group (PCG) Charter.  The Chair tasked the Policy Officers to review the PCG Charter, and make a proposal for this meeting.  Pablo Hinojosa to take the lead on this effort.  OPEN.

Pablo reported that there needed to be a revision to the Council reference. It is important to coordinate between different people within the different RIRs. He stated he spoke with a LACNIC staff member and suggested comparative organization charts, and how public affairs are being dealt with within each RIR. He suggested giving more time for coordination to happen, a solution to be proposed, and specific people and tasks to be assigned at different levels within the RIRs.

Paul Wilson stated it is a fair bit of work to do to analyze the issues but was happy to support it.

The Chair asked Pablo if the Charter was acceptable. Pablo replied it was not the right approach and could be solved with collaboration between specific people in the different RIRs and stated a team needed to be created. He noted that the different interactions have not succeeded in producing a specific proposal; and, they are creating mechanisms for collaboration not yet in place, but are working on it.

The Chair proposed that Pablo and the Policy Officers come to Uruguay during the NRO Retreat and meet separately on the morning of first day of the retreat. Pablo stated he had hoped to deal with it prior to the retreat in August and that he cannot be in Uruguay on those dates. He stated he could come up with a proposal before then however. The Chair agreed stating he would keep the item open, and wait for a further report from Pablo.

Pablo suggested closing the item, and that new language be proposed for a new item. The Chair agreed and closed the current item. CLOSED.

New Action Item 110621-02: To propose mechanisms of collaboration between different RIRs on public affairs matters. Pablo Hinojosa tasked. OPEN

4. RPKI

A) Transfers. Arturo Servin he was confident that after the upcoming IETF meeting in Quebec, a more mature document would be produced. He estimated the final document would be ready in October or November, but that it depended on the IETF.  There will be a draft ready in time for the Quebec meeting, but they need to discuss it with whole engineering team before presenting to the IETF.

The Chair asked if there were any new additional meetings for the engineering team, to be held in Quebec. Arturo stated he had no date set at this time.  At the IETF meeting in Prague, they agreed to meet again in Quebec. He stated that in Quebec, they will check on ICANN’s progress and any problems, and will provide advice. He stated that ICANN wants to work with engineering team.

The Chair requested that the ECG produce a document and inform the EC in July. It will be reviewed at the NRO EC’s retreat in August.

B) RIR Board Views. Axel Pawlik stated that a RIPE NCC Board member has made a statement that the RIPE NCC Board does not support single trust anchor at ICANN, at the IANA. The Board member is aware that the NRO had a sent letter to the IETF that the NRO did not see implementation in future. The Board member was also aware that the NRO had sent a letter to ICANN to invite them to discuss the matter. The invitation to discuss the matter with ICANN is consistent with the previous letter sent to them.

He stated the Board member has a number of concerns on certification as a whole. The RIPE community is very strongly discussing the benefits and has strong concerns regarding certification and RPKI deployed by operators. It is of great importance to the RIPE NCC Board. Recently, the RIPE NCC Board met and discussed RPKI and has resolved to instruct the staff to continue development of system. The RIPE NCC Board is supporting development of system as before, but important concerns need to be worked out before deploying. Axel stated he has no issue with it reiterating that the NRO invited ICANN to discuss matters. He stated that RIPE will be discussing this at their members meeting in Vienna. Paul stated it would be useful to clarify responsibilities with regard to autonomy in the regions.

C) NRO Position. The Chair stated that while the NRO did not make a final decision regarding IANA or ICANN, with regard to the global trust anchor, it is the NRO’s intention and it was stated clearly in the letter to ICANN. The Chair requested that the EC members at the ICANN meeting in Singapore reinforce the NROs position with ICANN during the planned luncheon.

D) Up/Down Protocol. Arturo Servin stated that by the end of September, RIPE and APNIC will be working with functionality of the up/down protocol and a couple of months after that, LACNIC and APNIC. The final date is estimated around the end of October to have functionality of RPKI.  He stated he has a timeline and will send a report to the EC’s list. The final release for the 5 RIRs up/down RPKI, and transfers between them, was not in original plan; and that at the end of October or beginning of November it is estimated to be complete. He noted that they needed to check with ARIN and APNIC for a more exact date.

Alain Aina stated that AFRINIC’s RPKI is based on APNIC’s code, and that AFRINIC is working with them, and supportive of the up/down protocol.

5. Internet Governance

A) Relationship with ITU.

  • NRO letter on NRO-ITU Interaction. Paul Wilson reported that Nick Thorne was currently at the ICANN meeting in Singapore, as was Paul, but that he had little contact with Nick. He stated that Nick is strongly encouraging the NRO to be communicative with the ITU and to be forward moving on practical collaborations. Paul stated that APNIC is looking into working with the ITU-D in their regional office in Bangkok and are meeting about it this week. He stated it would be a straightforward training and outreach activity, and that Nick supported it and recommends the NRO keep doors open with the ITU. 

The Chair noted the need to have a more formal meeting in the second half of the year where most of the EC can be present. He was in favor of sending a letter to schedule a more formal meeting. Paul agreed with this idea. He stated it was important to keep up fluid communications in the meantime, and participate in regional activities to create awareness. He stated he would report back to the EC after the meeting this week with the ITU-D in Bangkok, regarding APNIC’s IPv6-centered outreach effort.

The Chair stated that if Paul wanted to work with him on the letter he would be happy to have him do so, and then they would send it to the EC for review. Paul agreed.  

  • Next Steps with the ITU. Discussed above.

B) ITU IPv6 Working Group (WG). Paul Wilson had circulated a report from Sam Dickenson on the CSTD, stating this item and the report were somewhat related. He suggested the EC exchange thoughts on who will be at the WG meeting on October 6th. The Chair stated he would let him know and it would be a good action for the EC to say they can attend, to prepare the team for the meeting in Geneva.

C) IGF – CSTD.  Paul stated he had no additional information. The factual report from Sam Dickenson details the discussion and conclusions.

Pablo stated that in addition to the CSTD, this WG is working on improvements of the IGF processes. There were many discussions on how to move forward with regard to multi-stakeholder part of the group. He stated he would be happy to provide a proposal on the strategy of the IGF meeting.

Paul Wilson stated there was a request from the IGF regarding assistance with their meeting in Nairobi in September. Kenyan hosts are in need of financial and other assistance. He was asked if the technical community could look after the Internet services and connectivity/webcasting or suggest someone who can provide the services. He stated it would be a challenge as the IGF is a larger event than previous events where assistance was provided. He suggested the EC consider a financial contribution to the event.  He offered to coordinate a proposal if there is interest, and that it would be a large project.

After discussing, it was the sense of the EC that this project would be too large for the NRO, and responsibility should be deferred to another organization better equipped to handle it, possibly ISOC. The Chair stated that it would be possible for the NRO to provide financial support to cover partial costs. AP agreed with Chair’s thoughts. The Chair suggested it could be done together with other Internet organizations.

The Chair stated that before the EC can have a position on it, they need more information on the organizer’s expectations.  Paul stated that he would obtain more information and a more formal request. The Chair requested that Paul let ISOC know about the request and that the NRO would be supportive providing some amount of financial assistance. Paul agreed to do so.

6. NRO

A) Incorporation. No further update.

B) EC Retreat. The Chair stated that the dates are set, as previously discussed, and he would begin working on planning, as LACNIC will host this event.

7. OECD

Paul Wilson stated that he will be senior RIR representative at the upcoming OECD meeting in Paris, and will give a presentation. Alain stated that Adiel Akplogan would be there, and at the ICT meeting.

8. IANA Notice of Inquiry (NoI)

The Chair stated the EC is aware of this and will provide comments on it. He stated that there has been no change in the EC positions. Paul Wilson stated to keep in mind that the NoI has specific questions and IANA is interested in answers to those questions. He stated there was a regional IGF in Singapore last week with a session on the IANA and the NoI. He stated he would look for the archive of the meeting and send the details to the EC list. He noted that the US Government has no intention of changing agreements with IANA.

The Chair noted the deadline for comments is July 29, 2011. He called for volunteers to craft answers. Paul stated he could craft a first draft. The Chair asked when Paul thought he would have the draft ready. Paul answered within a week and also volunteered Pablo to assist him. The Chair thanked both of them.

9. Discussion of IETF Formal Liaison

No update at this time.

10. ICANN Meeting Singapore

The Chair stated he would appreciate the EC attendees sharing their impressions as the week progresses, noting ICANN’s part in positions of Internet governance.

The EC discussed the presentations the EC attending members are presenting during the week on IPv6 depletion.

Paul Wilson stated that Louie Lee, ASO AC Chair, had circulated an email regarding the ICANN strategic planning consultations in Singapore and was unaware of any invitation to the NRO. The Chair stated Louie sent an email that he would ask an ICANN representative to be in touch with Paul. Paul stated he could attend with Axel and John to obtain input to form an NRO position on the matter. The Chair agreed and stated he would e-mail the appropriate people at ICANN for confirmation.

11. ASO Review

The Chair requested the EC members inform ICANN of the status of the ASO review during the luncheon they are having.  All agreed.  Paul stated that the relationship with the consulting firm is underway. He received last minute legal advice that the contract had some sections that needed revision, and he did not sign it.  He will be making minor revisions to the liability portion, stating it is a standard matter.

He spoke with the consultants yesterday regarding the review, and they have already started work. He agreed with the consultants that the ASO website was sparse, but it may be difficult to get the status and history of global proposals. It has been the only substantial issue he has discussed as far as improvements to the ASO’s functions. The Chair stated the consultants should formally report to the NRO EC, and that he would be in contact with the consultants with regard to information on the tasks they are performing and the work plan. He stated he did not receive confirmation that they would be working in Singapore. He stated it was fine that they were there, but they need to provide a formal communication to the NRO.

The Chair asked the EC if this should be announced. Paul suggested the consultants be invited to the ASO AC/ICANN Board luncheon and the ASO public session. He felt this was appropriate as it is an open review process. He agreed with an announcement as well.  The Chair stated he would work with Ernesto Majo on the announcement, as an action for CCG.

12. CCG Report

Ernesto reported on the following:

  • IGF Workshops. The IGF workshops on IPv6 and RPKI were not rejected, but they were not approved either. The Chair stated it was not critical if they were not approved; however, to note that there are no other workshops that are dealing with the same topics.
  • NRO Website. The CCG is working on updating the NRO website – specifically the meeting agenda page and policies. With regard to the upcoming OECD meeting in Paris, RIPE and ARIN are involved and there will be materials to send.
  • IPv6 Survey. There are no plans for running the IPv6 survey. The CCG asked RIPE for NRO sponsorship, and it has been accepted for 2012 and 2013. The CCG would like a discussion, to propose to the ASO AC, of regular participation of the NRO in IPv6 survey.
  • CCG Meeting. There would be a face-to-face meeting of the CCG in September after the RIPE regional meeting; and, stated he would send the agenda to the EC list for approval.

13. ECG Report

Arturo Servin reported on the following:

  • DNS SCC Coordination Plan. AFRINIC and LACNIC needed to finish their activities. By the end of the year, he was confident the ECG should have what they need.
  • IPv6 Reverse DNS Signing Issue. He stated that they are discussing the problem they ran into with it, how to deal with it, and that it would be discussed at the IETF meeting in Quebec. He suggested it could be discussed at the next EC meeting. He noted the discussions with regard to the issue have been informal and friendly with ICANN. The Chair agreed to revisit this matter at the next EC meeting.

14. RSM Report

Nate Davis reported on behalf of Leslie Nobile, stating that the RS Managers had a very successful meeting in Tanzania. It ran one full day, and covered the agenda items previously shared with the EC.  The notes of the meeting are currently under review, and would be forwarded to the EC within the next week.

15. Any Other Business

The Chair called for any other business items.

  • Alain Aina stated that it had been reported back to AFRINIC, from the on-going ICANN meeting in Singapore, rumors that AFRINIC is dying and Adiel Akplogan will not be returning to AFRINIC.  It was also rumored that the recent AFRINIC meeting in Tanzania did not go well. He stated that the community agreed it was a successful meeting. He assured the EC that Adiel would be returning to AFRINIC soon, and confirmed that AFRINIC is doing well. He requested the EC members attending the meeting in Singapore counter the issue, if they have the opportunity, to stop the rumors and inform people of what AFRINIC is doing.  The attending EC members agreed to do so.

16. Adjournment

The Chair called for adjournment at 13:37 UTC. The meeting was adjourned with no objections.

Comments are closed.