MINUTES
October 18th, 2014
Face-to-Face meeting, Los Angeles, USA
Executive Council:
Adiel Akplogan (AA) AFRINIC Chair
Axel Pawlik (AP) RIPE NCC Secretary
Ernesto Majo (EM) LACNIC Treasurer
Paul Wilson (PW) APNIC
John Curran (JC) ARIN
Observers:
Gaelle Fall (GF) AFRINIC
Nate Davis (ND) ARIN
Paul Andersen (PA) ARIN (remotely)
Craig Ng (CN) APNIC
Akinori Maemura (AM) APNIC
Secretariat:
German Valdez (GV) NRO
Draft Agenda
0) Welcome
1) Agenda Review
2) ICG Update
3) IANA Transition RIR Consultation and CRISP Proposal
4) RIR Accountability Next Steps
5) ICANN Accountability Process
6) Plenipot Preparations
7) NRO EC Next Meeting
8) AOB
9) Adjourn
0) Welcome
AA welcomed attendees and started the meeting at 9:05 AM Los Angeles.
1) Agenda Review
AA said that he had to leave by 4:00 PM Los Angeles Time and asked AP to chair the meeting in case the meeting was not finished by then.
2) ICG Update
AA reported that the ICG finalized the definition of the process to consolidate their ICG final proposal to NTIA.
AA said the Accountability Cross Community WG (CCGWG) drafted a proposal where one stream will review the ICANN accountability process from the NTIA and IANA contract perspective. AA said that this stream would be linked to the ICG work.
PW said that the ICG agreed that ICANN Board would review the ICG proposal before being submitted to the NTIA
AP said that he was asked about AA position in ICG now that he was leaving AFRINIC.
JC said he received questions as well. JC said that AA appointment was as individual.
AA mentioned that he was willing to continue in the ICG but if that represent a problem he was ready to step down.
JC considered that was no reason to change AA appointment
AP agreed with JC.
The EC agreed to supports AA to continue in the ICG
3) IANA Transition RIR Consultation and CRISP Proposal
JC suggested clarifying in the current CRISP proposal that each RIR would determine their own way to appoint their member to the CRISP team. JC added that the EC should make a decision if the appointed RIR staff is voting members or not.
AA suggested that the proposal should also include a timeline for the creation of CRISP Team and their work.
The EC agreed that the CRISP charter should be finalized by the end of October.
The EC agreed that each RIR would determine its own appointment mechanisms to the CRISP Team.
The EC agreed that all appointments to CRISP team should be confirmed by November 15th 2014 as the latest.
PW suggested that the agreements on the CRISP proposal be updated in the published version in the NRO website.
AA advised on being careful on how to present the NRO in the consultation process. AA reminded that while there is a MoU signed between NRO-ICANN the single proposal should be presented by the Number Community. AA said that the NRO should remain as the coordination body for the global consultation process and avoid in that way the accountability issue of the NRO.
PW said that APNIC have discussed internally the issue of the NRO accountability. PW asked CN to present APNIC views on the matter.
CN said that from a legal perspective the NRO is not self-incorporated and it’s been used as mechanism of unity, collaboration and coordination of the RIR only. CN said that more emphasis should be done in explaining the nature and characteristics of the NRO.
AA agreed with CN. AA said that the NRO is not decision-making body per se. AA said the accountability lies at the RIR level.
AP suggested that in the context of the IANA transition consultation avoid the use of the NRO term laxly.
CN added that the new IANA services contracts would be signed with the 5 RIR and no the NRO. CN mentioned that NRO bylaws are clear on what the NRO can commit.
JC advised to avoid the use of terms like the “NRO represents” or imply that the NRO has a level of authority.
PW said that it shouldn’t be a problem to explain that in the IANA transition discussion, the NRO means the 5 RIR acting collectively and any new contract would be signed by the 5 RIR. PW advised to add at the end to the CRISP proposal an about NRO section.
All agreed.
AA stressed on the idea of putting efforts in clarifying that the NRO is just a coordination body and the accountability is at the RIR level.
AA reminded that in the context of IANA transition and in consistency with ICANN request for proposal the right term is “Number Community”. AA asked to consider this in coming communications.
EM asked how the regional consultation would be summarized.
AA said that in the case of AFRINIC, the staff would summarize the consultation.
JC said that appointees to the CRISP team would be part of team to work in the summary of the ARIN consultation.
JC suggested to discuss the definition of the consensus in the CRISP Team and if the appointed staff are voting members of the Team.
The EC agreed that appointed RIR staff to the CRISP Team should not be voting members
The EC agreed that the CRISP Team should work in rough consensus otherwise decision would be made by supermajority being this established by the approval of 8 out of 10 members.
New Action Item 181014-01: GV to update the CRISP proposal as agreed by the NRO EC in their f2f meeting in Los Angeles
New Action Item 181014-02: NRO EC to finalize CRISP charter by the end of October.
PW asked about drafting the future agreement with ICANN/IANA as part of the transition proposal.
AP advised on avoiding contractual language in the proposal to be sent to the ICG. AP said that explicit principles could be added with the expectation of signing agreements.
AA said that the proposal should state the principles about the expected SLA and AoC/MoU/Contract.
JC suggested that the NRO EC should follow up current IETF work on the proposal to the ICG and produce something along the lines, watching and comparing terminology.
PW suggested using MoU and SLA terms instead of AoC.
JC asked to review this matter after ICANN accountability discussion.
4) RIR Accountability Next Steps.
JC asked to the EC to direct the PACG to include more information in the RIR accountability matrix as described below.
• Governing Board Structure – Number, nomination process, election process, term length, term limits
• Budget and Activity Approval – Under control of Governing Board, Members, or Staff
• Fee Approval – Under control of Governing Board, Members, or Staff
• Bylaw/Operational Document Control – Under control of Governing Board or Members
The NRO EC resolved to include the above information in the RIR accountability matrix
New Action Item 181014-03: PACG to include the above information to the accountability and governability matrix
JC considered that before engaging in analysis and peer reviews looking for improvements the document requires more information and details.
PW suggested running the analysis for improvement next year after a new round of incorporating new and more detailed information to the matrix.
PW suggested that the PACG should work to find areas where could be consolidation or harmonization of accountability practices among the RIR.
New Action Item 181014-04: PACG based on the accountability and governability matrix propose to the NRO EC those areas where could be consolidation or harmonization among the RIR.
5) ICANN Accountability Process
PA joined the meeting remotely at 11:10 AM Los Angeles time
JC asked how will be the engagement of the NRO EC in the ICANN Accountability process in order to prevent negative impacts in the RIR. JC asked if the NRO EC should have concerns of the process.
AA said that the EC should follow up the process to avoid problems with the development of global policies.
CN advised that the NRO EC should contribute to the overall ICANN accountability process on matters that are unique to the RIR. CN added that an important aspect of ICANN accountability is their jurisdiction that currently is under California laws.
PW reminded of the report of incorporating ICANN as international organization in Switzerland.
JC considered that in the context of IANA stewardship transition process there is no interest to discuss a possible change of ICANN incorporation.
JC added that it was important to review how the ICANN Accountability process may affect the global policy ratification, the ICP-2 and other aspects related to the RIR.
CN said that based on the current discussion ICANN might have two choices for the transition process, one is to sign an AoC with all community members, or incorporate the AoC into bylaws in order to lock it down.
AP said he was in favor of the idea of ICANN becoming a membership-based organization.
EM suggested that the NRO should focus on the establishment of formal relationship with ICANN and bring certainty that the global policy process and the ICP2 are not affected.
The EC agreed to participate of ICANN Accountability process.
The EC agreed to appoint AP to follow up ICANN Accountability process.
New Action Item 181014-05: GV to liaise with ICANN staff to ensure AP participation in the ICANN Accountability review.
6) Plenipot Preparations
GF reported on the coordination efforts between I* and PACG in preparations for the PP meeting in South Korea. GF mentioned that the PACG is preparing to talk with different delegations in PP meeting regarding the Russian proposal.
GV reminded about the Arab group proposal recently sent to the EC list.
AA said that he was not attending the PP meeting. AA confirmed GF would be representing AFRINIC in PP meeting.
AA asked GF to share the calendar and activity document managed by ISOC for the coordination of I* staff during PP meeting.
7) NRO EC Next Meeting
PW suggested that for the coming meeting in Mauritius include the RIR staff appointed to the CRISP Team.
PW advised that future next face-to-face meeting be organized in align to the IANA Stewardship Transition timeline.
JC acknowledged the value and the need of EC face-to-face meetings but suggested keeping frequency of the meetings low.
The EC agreed to meet in Mauritius on December 1st and 2nd 2014
The EC agreed to include staff appointed in CRISP Team in their meeting in Mauritius.
The EC agreed to meet in ICANN Meeting in Marrakech on February 13th and 14th 2015.
8) AOB
AA agreed to add ASO Review, ECG f2f meeting and NRO EC October teleconference to AOB.
8.a ASO Review
GV mentioned that he sent a last update of the report and the letter to the EC and Ray Plzak. GV said that he talked to Ray before the meeting with Fadi in ICANN meeting, GV reported that Ray Plzak took the July version of the report and letter and close the loop in the committee in charge of oversee the improvements review of ICANN Supporting Organization.
GV said all recommendations are addressed and completed at this stage.
AA advised to include this information in the ASO presentation
New Action Item 181014-06: GV to include in ASO presentations information on the implementation of the recommendations made in the independent ASO Review.
8.b ECG face-to-face meeting
The NRO EC reviewed the meeting request from the ECG and there were no objections to it.
The NRO EC approved the ECG f2f meeting to be held in Montevideo Uruguay on the 4th and 5th of December 2014.
GV advised that the EC would meet before the ECG so they should submit their 2015 work plan in advance of their f2f meeting
New Action Item 181014-07: AA to request ECG Chair that the work plan 2015 and report on 2014 work plan be developed on time for the EC f2f meeting in Mauritius
8.c NRO EC October Teleconference
NRO EC agreed to defer their October Teleconference one week to be held now in Tuesday October 28th 2014
9) Adjourn
AA adjourned the meeting at 1:30 PM Los Angeles time.
Last modified on 21/01/2015