July 14th, 2014
Teleconference 11:00 AM UTC
Executive Council Attendees:
Chairman: Adiel Akplogan (AA) AFRINIC
Secretary: Axel Pawlik (AP) RIPE NCC
Treasurer: Ernesto Majo (EM) LACNIC
Member: John Curran (JC) ARIN
Member: Paul Wilson (PW) APNIC
Neriah Sossou (NS) AFRINIC
Madhvi Gokool (MG) AFRINIC
Paul Andersen (PA) ARIN
Nate Davis (ND) ARIN
Pablo Hinojosa (PH) APNIC
Maemura Akinori (MA) APNIC
Hartmut Glaser (HG) LACNIC
Nick Hyrka (NH) RIPE NCC
Antony Gollan (AG) RIPE NCC
Paul Rendek (PR) RIPE NCC
German Valdez (GV) NRO
AP welcomed attendees and started the meeting at 11:20 AM UTC. AP mentioned that AA was currently in holidays so he would chair the meeting.
1) Agenda Review
AP suggested adding a point in the agenda regarding the NETmundial association as point 10 of the agenda.
PW asked to add the issue of the cost of the I* reception in the coming IGF and the ASO review status.
AP accepted PW suggestions as AOB points.
2) Review Open Actions.
Action Item 170614-01: PACG to work in a set of common questions to be used across the RIRs consultation process and bundle them with a commonly shared supporting background document for Number Resource Management.
PR reported that the PACG is working in the document. PR mentioned that there is set of first questions being analyzed by the PACG. PR expects to have the document finalized by August.
Action Item 170614-02: AA to finalize the RIR engagement timeline for IANA stewardship transition process document and organize his publication.
PW mentioned that the coming IANA transition CG meeting would discuss the timeline for the whole transition process and after that the RIR will have more information on how to synchronize the activities.
Action Item 170614-03: NRO EC to look for a clear view from ICANN about the deadline for the RIR contribution to the IANA stewardship transition process.
AA said that as PW mentioned previously this action item would be defined after the IANA transition CG meeting.
Action Item 180214-05: AA to work with the CFO to determine the indirect cost from each RIR in their support to NRO activities.
GV volunteered to be part of this action item. GV reported that he had a meeting after ICANN meeting with Jochem about this issue. GV said that he would work with the CFOs on this matter.
Action Item 040314-04: RE, PR, JC to work in a NRO framework to be used to improve the accountability and transparency of the RIR (4 weeks).
PR reported that the PACG have worked in the RIR corporate governance matrix document and a set of accountability questions that would be sent to the NRO EC by the end of today.
3) Approval of Pending Minutes
AP asked if there were any comments regarding June 14th 2014 minutes.
GV reminded that last June minutes were going to be used as a reference to the appointments of HG, AA and PW to the IANA Stewardship Transition CG so the minutes are already published in the website as draft.
AP asked if anybody moved to adopt the minutes.
There were no second to approve the minutes. AP suggested approving the minutes in the EC list.
4) CG Input/Consultation
GV reminded that he sent to the NRO EC list a CCG report of their face-to-face meeting in London.
AP thanked the report.
No further input or consultation from the CG.
5) IANA Stewardship Transition Updates
PW said that the IANA Stewardship Transition Coordination Group (ICG) has in principle accepted the agenda for the coming meeting. PW mentioned about a message from Jari Arkko overviewing the complete timeline for the planning process. PW said that the proposed timeline needs to feed into the other communities including the RIR. PW explained that the plan is to run the consultations in the different communities by December this year so the ICG can have two o three months next year to integrate and analyze the results. PW added that the proposed timeline is in line with AA proposal for the RIR consultations.
AA said that they would have more information and clarity about the timelines after the ICG meeting.
AP agreed and suggested to wait after the ICG meeting.
PR asked on behalf of the PACG and CCG to share the message from Jari Arkko so everybody is in line with the plan.
PW suggested to wait after the ICG so there is clear agreement on the plan.
PR suggested having someone from the NRO ICG members working closer with the PACG and CCG in order to produce the required work.
AA pointed out that everything is informational yet and decisions will be made during the ICG London Meeting.
PW said that ICG decisions information will be shared in the required NRO lists.
6) RIR / ICANN Accountability Review
PW said that he just realized that the letter to the RIRs boards on the RIR accountability review was approved by the 5 CEOs. PW suggested that AA as NRO Chair send the letter to the RIR Board mailing list.
AA agreed, AA committed to send the letter the same day.
New Action Item 140714-01 AA to send to the RIRs board mailing list the information about the efforts to conduct an accountability review of all RIRs.
7) ICANN whois vs RIR whois policies statement
AP proposed to send a public communication to the ICANN board reminding them that the RIR whois db polices are developed by RIR community and are not subject to the policies developed by ICANN names community.
EM said it’s important clarify the differences between IP whois db and names db.
AP agreed with the comments and volunteered to draft a communication to the ICANN Board.
PR suggested to document and integrates this issue onto the work on RIR corporate governance and accountability.
AA suggested developing an informational and educational material on RIR whois db that could be integrated in the RIR accountability efforts.
JC agreed with AA. JC said that as AA suggested the documents and communication should be informative stating what is an Internet Number Resources whois db, how is administered, why is different to a names whois db, etc.
New Action Item 140714-02 AP to draft a public communication to the ICANN board regarding the RIR whois db policies are not subject to ICANN whois policies.
New Action Item 140714-03 AP and PR to draft an informative and educational document on RIR whois db. to be incorporated to the accountability review process
8) ICANN Contribution
AP suggested not altering the current contribution as no changes on services has happened.
JC mentioned that he believes the contribution is appropriate as it is.
AA asked EM if LACNIC would take care of the payment.
EM confirmed that LACNIC would process the annual contribution to ICANN.
9) RPKI GTA testbed status
PW reminded about his proposal sent by email to the NRO EC mailing regarding the continuation of the RPKI GTA testbed. PW considered that without the five RIR they couldn’t continue on the RPKI GTA testbed with ICANN.
AP agreed with PW. AP volunteered to explain the situation to IANA/ICANN in the coming IETF in Toronto.
JC said that in theory he supported the decision. JC suggested being careful about messages on suspending these activities with IANA/ICANN. JC asked clarification about the scope of the decision and if those affect the RIR work in the SIDR WG.
AA said that the suspension of activities is only in the RPKI GTA testbed with IANA/ICANN. AA clarified that the work in the standards level including the work in the IETF SIDR WG should continue.
AP agreed with the points. AP confirmed that the RPKI GTA testbed is the only activity that the RIR are suspending for the time being.
10) NETmundial Association
AP mentioned that based on the feedback received by his Board, RIPE NCC is not ready to support the idea.
PW said that in APNIC case they are prepared to be involved. PW added that based on last feedback from Fadi the alliance would be launched by August or later.
EM said that LACNIC Board discussed this in their last meeting and it’s waiting for further input before making a decision.
JC asked for the last version of the proposal before consult with ARIN Board of Trustees.
PW said he’d send the last circulated version (version 14).
a) IGF I* Reception.
AP said that according to last discussions in the mailing list he understands that is a NRO contribution not an individual RIR contribution.
JC Agreed. JC said that the NRO should cover one third of the total cost of the reception and internally among the RIR should allocate this per formula.
PW said there was precedent on the NRO sharing costs with ICANN and ISOC. PW volunteered to communicate this to ISOC.
b) ASO Review.
PW asked about the last status of the ASO Review.
GV said that he talked with Ray Plzak during last ICANN London Meeting. GV reported that all recommendations were addressed by the NRO and submitted a report of this to Ray. GV added that a last step requested by Ray was to add a letter to the report, which he would do by the end of the week.
AP Thanked all participants and adjourned the NRO EC meeting 12:20 PM UTC
Last modified on 30/09/2014