Meeting of the NRO Executive Council – 110920


20 September 2011

Executive Council Attendees:

  • Chairman: Raúl Echeberría, CHAIR (LACNIC)
  • Secretary: John Curran, JC, (ARIN)
  • Members: Axel Pawlik, AP (RIPE NCC)


  • Therese Colosi, ARIN


  • Pablo Hinojosa – APNIC
  • Nate Davis – ARIN
  • Susan Hamlin – ARIN
  • Leslie Nobile – ARIN


  • Adiel Akplogan (AFRINIC)
  • Paul Wilson (APNIC)

1. Welcome, Apologies, Agenda Bashing

The Chair called the meeting to order at 7:00 a.m. EDT. It was acknowledged that Paul Wilson and Adiel Akplogan were unavailable. Paul Wilson provided advanced input for this meeting. Pablo Hinojosa was sitting in for Paul Wilson.

2. Approval of the Minutes

  • August 17, 2011. Approval postponed until the next NRO EC meeting.

3. Review Action Items

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

The Chair stated there were many comments at the last meeting, and the action item will remain open.

It was noted that Paul had provided some late input into the RPKI paper for the IGF meeting (via APNIC’s communications staff), which he understands has been accepted.

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

The Chair stated that the message is ready and will be published today on the NRO website. He asked if the EC considered it prudent to send an announcement to the NRO announcement list or just publish the message on the NRO website. It was the sense of the EC to publish the message in both ways.

The Chair stated that an announcement will be posted, and the message will be published on the NRO website today.

Action Item 110817-01: Secretariat to post June 2011, and July 2011 NRO EC Minutes as final to the NRO Website. OPEN

The Secretariat acknowledged that this has been requested, and will be posted today. The Chair stated this item to be closed.

4. Internet Governance

A) Next Steps with the ITU.

Update on Meeting during the IGF in Nairobi. The Chair stated he was planning on attending, but was awaiting his visa and may not be able to attend if it does not arrive in time. He spoke with the Chair of the ITU-D in Mar del Plata recently, and they agreed to exchange e-mails and meet in Nairobi to discuss working together in the future. If the EC agrees, he will invite him to meet in Nairobi. It was the sense of the EC to do so.

Pablo Hinojosa pointed out that Paul Wilson had suggested advance preparations for meeting with the ITU, with advice from PACG, be made.

The Chair NRO has spoken with the ITU-D for some time regarding IPv6, and now the two parties need to meet. The ITU-D wants to do something, and the NRO would be offering coordination for doing things together. The NRO can bring up other concerns, or ask them if they wish to continue talking about other issues. He stated that this meeting would on a simple scale.

John Curran agreed to the extent that the NRO needs to have the meeting, and to state its view on various issues such as: the roles of the IPv6 study group; and, the Internet number registry system and its relationship with the ITU. He was confident that Raul could meet with the Chair of the ITU-D and handle it the matters at hand.

Pablo also pointed out stated that Paul Wilson had suggested that the EC hold a face-to-face meeting (formally or informally) early in the IGF week in Nairobi. He stated that APNIC has identified 9:00 to 10:30 a.m. on Tues 27 Sept (IGF Day 1) as a time slot that may be suitable.

The Chair acknowledged that if all of the EC is present in Nairobi, they could meet. He called for any objections to the EC meeting in Nairobi. There were no objections.


Status at ARIN. John Curran raised the issue of RPKI funding at ARIN. There has been discussion in the ECG about ARIN funding of RPKI and whether it might be lessened in 2012. John explained that ARIN has been given distinct budgetary goals from its Board of Trustees, and this requires prioritization for all of ARIN’s projects. This may or may not lead to some lessening in funding and slowing down of work on RPKI in 2012. He assured the NRO EC that ARIN and the Board are committed to continue working on RPKI in 2012; the question is the budget priority for that work. He stated he would have more information in the next 30 to 60 days regarding 2012 budgetary funding for the ARIN RPKI project.

After discussing, the Chair proposed that work proceeds as is, and continues as a priority, until such time that ARIN has a different position; and, requested that John keep the NRO EC informed. John reiterated that ARIN would have a clearer idea in 30 to 60 days regarding funding, and would post to the EC’s list to compare information with the other RIRs. The Chair thanked him for his report.

Meeting with ICANN in Dakar. The Chair stated that there would be a meeting in Dakar, during ICANN 42, with representatives from ICANN. He stated the NRO needed to prepare for that meeting. He received a presentation from ICANN, which he considered a good basis for using to develop the NRO’s presentation.

The Chair proposed having a discussion on the EC’s list between now and the meeting in Dakar; and finalizing its positions on RPKI development, implementation, and funding. He proposed discussing any other concerns.

John Curran agreed, and suggested tasking the ECG with reviewing ICANN’s presentation to see what the differences are.

Pablo stated that Geoff, of APNIC, had sent an e-mail to Elise, at ICANN, with questions. He stated that Paul Wilson would be forwarding it the EC by tomorrow.

The Chair expressed concern that communications with Elise and ICANN take place through the formal channel – the whole NRO EC. He stated it was important for the whole Council to know the status. The EC agreed.

The Chair stated that the presentation was sent to Paul for advice. The Chair stated he would respond to Elise via e-mail with comments on the presentation. Axel stated that ICANN had recently made public presentations regarding the GTA, and that things were progressing too quickly. He requested that future ICANN presentations not be made public until they are reviewed by the NRO and both parties are in agreement.

The Chair agreed stating he would include this in his e-mail to Elise. John Curran agreed and stated this could be discussed in Dakar during their meeting with ICANN. He stated that the EC needed Paul and Adiel to acknowledge this, as they were not available for this teleconference. He suggested sending a message to EC mailing list to get their input. The Chair stated he would send the message.

The Chair asked Axel if, after next RIPE meeting, it would be clear that RIPE NCC would move forward. Axel replied they might be asked to continue as is, or remove some capabilities until they are formally requested. He stated he would have more information after the RIPE meeting in Vienna.

NEW ACTION ITEM: 110920-01: CHAIR. Send an e-mail to Elise at ICANN regarding the cessation of ICANN GTA presentations. (Chair to check with Paul and Adiel beforehand to ensure they are in agreement.)

The Chair proposed holding discussion on the EC’s list immediately after this meeting regarding how the GTA should be implemented, and crafting the EC’s complete positions for the meeting in Dakar.

6. Discussion of IETF Formal Liaison

At their last meeting in August, the EC decided that the EC Chair would handle the liaison, while the ECG monitors technical matters within the IETF/IAB. John Curran said offering a liaison was fine, but was unsure the IETF would agree with the idea. The Chair stated he would be seeing someone from the IETF in Buenos Aires at the upcoming LACNIC meeting, and would ask at that time. John agreed and thanked the Chair.

7. Creation of Public Affairs Coordination Group (PACG)

The Chair stated that there was an e-mail to the EC’s list from Paul to attend the PACG’s meeting if Pablo could not. He considered this to be an item for the PACG to decide, stating that the group should meet whenever they decide they can do so. The EC can ask the PACG members to be flexible to accommodate it, but there is no action required from the EC.

He called for any comments on the PACG activities or the meeting. John stated that he preferred that it be agreed upon that the EC can substitute attendees in this fashion. He stated that whenever they need to meet they should, and that he might attend if it works out with his schedule, but agreed that it is their meeting, not the EC’s.

8. RIR Extended Statistics File Update

John stated that he needed to double check ARIN’s timeline, and would get back to the EC. Arturo Servin stated that his group reviewed a document from APNIC’s website and information from RIPE. He noted there were differences between what the documents indicated, and what has been done in practice. He stated that an official document is needed, or there will be implementation questions. The first step is a description of how to do it, per APNIC and RIPE. John asked if this was a job for the RSMs or for the ECG to do? Arturo considered it was the ECG’s responsibility with input from the RSMs.

The Chair asked Leslie Nobile if she was comfortable with this, and she replied that she was as long as the RSM’s remain involved.

NEW ACTION ITEM: 110920-02: ECG. Produce Final Extended Stats Documentation. Arturo Servin to coordinate with RSMs.

The Chair asked Arturo when the document would be ready. Arturo replied a draft could be ready by the EC’s meeting in October.

9. CCG Report

Ernesto had technical difficulties and was not available to provide the report. Susan Hamlin provided an overview of recent developments. She stated the CCG had a successful face-to-face meeting earlier this month. They have reviewed the documents for the IGF meeting, and would be finalizing them today. There is a press release in progress for release next week. They reviewed key messages and sent them to the EC for final review and approval. They have a tentative work plan for next year, and they are talking to the PACG after their meeting. Susan noted that Louise from APNIC provided an excellent presentation regarding APNIC’s last /8, and the CCG took away good ideas to think about, as the other RIRs prepare for that scenario.

10. ECG Report

Arturo stated that he had sent the EC a brief report on activities. He stated the group has begun crafting the document that the EC requested on transfers and RPKI. They also started the GTA description with comments from Paul and Geoff. He stated it was a good starting point and would be coordinating with Geoff. He stated the signing process has proven complicated, and he will also work to coordinate the effort. They received a document from Terry Manderson with GTA requirements, and Arturo would reply to him this week. He stated he would have discussions with other engineers and get their feedback on the document.

John Curran stated that at a high-level, the EC is not the right group to be dictating what the number of, or content of, the documents should be. He considered the EC needed to define the goal for the ECG, stating it is important that the NRO have sufficient documentation to the extent that a third party can understand what is in the RPKI digital documents. We’d like the ECG to produce documents we can make public, so we are safe from claims that we are not open on how we implemented RPKI.

Arturo suggested high-level documents to be published on each RIR’s websites. The Chair asked him if it could be done. Arturo stated that there are no documents presently in existence, but he would check on what information is out there, and the ECG can give the EC an idea of what needs to be done.

NEW ACTION ITEM: 110920-03: ARTURO. Check on existing documents to use to craft high-level RPKI documentation.

11. RSM Report

Leslie Nobile reported that the RSMs are currently discussing applying for additional space with Leo Vegoda at the IANA. She stated that ARIN is issuing larger allocations and using sparse, and needs to get a new /12 from the IANA. Leo wants to make it easy, but the interpretation of ‘reservations’ in the global policy vs. our allocations scheme is confusing. The RSMs will meet with Leo at the next RIR meeting, as they have documentation on it, but they have not had a final discussion. Leo also developed a template for the RSMs to use to apply for the next v6 allocation from the IANA. The RSM’s do not know if they can make sparse allocations fit into the global policy. Leslie stated she would report again, after the RSM meeting with Leo. The Chair thanked her for the report.

12. Any Other Business

The Chair called for any other business. There were no comments.

13. Adjournment

The Chair adjourned the meeting at 8:14 a.m. EDT with no objections.

Last modified on 08/12/2011