20 December 2016

Meeting of the NRO Executive Council – 161027

Minutes of the NRO EC Teleconference meeting held on Thursday October 27th 2016 at 11:00 AM UTC

Executive Council:

Oscar Robles (OR) LACNIC Chair
John Curran (JC) ARIN Secretary
Paul Wilson (PW) APNIC Treasurer
Alan Barrett (AB) AFRINIC
Axel Pawlik (AP) RIPE NCC

Observers:

Nate Davis (ND) ARIN
Hollis Kara (HK) ARIN
Kenny Huang (KH) APNIC
Pablo Hinojosa (PH) APNIC
Sanjaya APNIC
Carlos Martinez (CM) LACNIC
Athina Fragkouli (AF) RIPE NCC

Secretariat:
German Valdez (GV) NRO

Agenda NRO EC Teleconference October 27th 2016

0. Welcome
1. Agenda Review
2. Minutes Review
a) September 2016
3. CCWG Stream 2
4. ICANN
a) gTLD Auction Proceeds CCWG Charter
b) WHOIS Review Representatives
c) ICANN 57 NRO Activities
i) Message for Opening Ceremony
ii) Message for Public Forum
iii) Topics for Joint Meeting with ICANN Board
iv) Topics for Meeting with ICANN Regional Vice Presidents
5 Review Committee First Steps
6 ASO/NRO Representations in ICANN Bodies
7 ASO Procedures Changes
8. ASO Review
9 RPKI 0/0 Status
10 CG / Input Consultation
11 Review Open Actions
12 Next Meetings
a) Teleconference Scheduled on Tuesday October 18th
b) Next NRO EC f2f Meeting – Monday December 5th (Guadalajara Mexico)
13 AOB
14 Adjourn

0 Welcome

OR welcomed the teleconference participants and started the meeting at 11:08 AM UTC

1 Agenda Review

AP requested to the NRO EC that AF report be the first topic of the meeting.

PW requested to have a review of the ICANN 57 scheduled and reach an agreement about the NRO EC message to Larry Strickling.

OR agreed.

3 CCWG Work Stream 2

AF said that the CCWG WS2 was working in preparing the meeting in Hyderabad and in the questionnaire document for the ICANN Supporting Organizations. AF said that CCWG was expecting a presentation during ICANN 57 from the ASO representatives about the ASO accountability mechanisms.

OR asked AF about the deadline of December 1st to deliver the answers to the CCWG.

AF said that the WG was still working on the questions and the deadline was not tightly defined.

AF said that she was expecting questions about each of the powers, specially the new ones. AF considered that some coordination would be required with the ASO AC.

JC stressed in the importance that all answers provided to the CCWG WS2 consultation should be strictly related to the ASO ICANN duties. JC mentioned that any questions related to the RIR accountability with their own communities were out of the scope of the consultation, since each RIR has its own accountability mechanisms and it is the NRO, acting as ASO, which participates in ICANN.

PW said that the RIR should continue their work in improving accountability, within their own timeline and for the benefit of the RIR communities, and we should not be seen to be doing this only on request of external parties.

JC agreed

AF advised to the NRO EC that it was important to start documenting the ASO new powers, in particular how it will exercise the new “Community Powers”. AF said that there is no clarity who should handle them if the ASO AC or the NRO EC.

Based on the ASO MoU, JC considered that the NRO EC by default should be responsible for the execution of the ASO powers unless there is an appointment to an ICANN body where the ASO AC is responsible for setting the procedures.

JC said that he was open to discuss on assigning responsibilities to the ASO AC but it was a decision for the NRO EC to make.

PW recommended addressing the ASO issues through the ASO review. PW said that it was and open review process and a good opportunity for improvements which will better suit the new ICANN and IANA arrangements.

AP confirmed that according to the ASO MoU the ASO AC is responsible to define the procedures to appoint representatives to ICANN bodies but not making the appointment directly.

AF proposed to start working in a matrix document with the procedures to develop to match the new powers.

All agreed

NEW ACTION ITEM 161027-01 AF in coordination with RIR staff to create a matrix document with the accountability questions that should have a procedure to comply with ASO powers and duties in ICANN

NEW ACTION ITEM 161027-02 OR to inform the ASO AC that the NRO EC would handle ICANN appointments temporarily until the appropriate procedures are in place. Communication will include the matrix document mention on action 161027-01.

2 Minutes Review

a) September 2016

GV confirmed that all minutes are approved and published in the NRO website.

4. ICANN

a) gTLD Auction Proceeds CCWG Charter

AB said that the charter was working in establishing a new working group that would define the rules on how the auctions would be handled. AB said that the NRO EC should decide whether or not to join the new working group.

OR asked if the NRO should join as a chartering organisation.

PW agreed in joining in as a chartering organisation in the provision that this won’t avoid the RIRs to participate in decisions or have access to funds in the future.

AB agreed to join as a chartering organisation and formally inform ICANN on this decision.

PW said that the NRO EC members in Hyderabad could find out more about the details in joining the gTLD auctions proceeds CCGW charter.

OR agreed and requested PW to take the opportunity to formalize the joining of the NRO as part of the chartering organisations and find out more details on the number of representatives to the Auction Proceed CCWG.

NEW ACTION ITEM 161027-03 PW to find out the details on how the NRO can join the gTLD Auction Proceeds CCWG including the number of representative to appoint.

JC stressed on the importance to differentiate any ASO appointment to ICANN bodies where requires to speak on behalf of the number community

OR agreed.

JC said that the NRO should to try to address the ASO role in ICANN more strategically and have a workshop retreat for that matter.

PW said this could also be done as a response of the ASO review results.

JC agreed that the ASO review could help to highlight the issues and define the problem statement.

OR asked what to do next regarding the pending appointments to ICANN bodies.

JC suggested that for the moment for any appointments to ICANN bodies the NRO EC chair proposes to the NRO EC an interim mechanism, could be an appointment or procedure and then inform to the ASO AC the final NRO EC decision.

JC said that regarding the execution of community powers the NRO EC should wait for AF work in the matrix document and decide what powers are executed by the NRO.

OR agreed to proceed with the idea.

AB supported JC suggestion. AB added that the ASO MoU should be reviewed to clarify what we are going to do for new ICANN bodies.

b) WHOIS Review Representatives

OR asked confirmation if the NRO wants to be part of the WHOS Review.

JC agreed.

OR accepted this as an NRO agreement.

c) ICANN 57 NRO Activities

OR asked to the NRO EC to work in the messages and topics to be presented in the ICANN opening ceremony, the public forum, the meeting with ICANN Board and the meeting with the regional VP and global engagement team.

i) Message for Opening Ceremony

PW confirmed that the RIRs are the only community invited to deliver a message during the opening ceremony together with local and ICANN authorities. PW reminded that the NRO has asked for this time slot before.

JC suggested highlighting the engagement of the GAC Public Safety WG and the RIR communities. JC added that the messages should mention the NRO cooperation with ICANN in appointing representatives to the different ICANN committees.

OR agreed.

OR suggested thanking ICANN Global Engagement Staff for inviting the NRO to the opening ceremony.

JC suggested inviting people interested in number policy to attend RIR meetings.

AB suggested using the opportunity to put in public record that the RIRs are happy on how the IANA transition worked out.

JC suggested mentioning during the opening session the importance to support IETF endowment.

ii) Message for Public Forum

All agreed to prepare operational messages for public forum and mention the highlights verbally during the opening ceremony. PW and AB to work in the messages.

iii) Topics for Joint Meeting with ICANN Board

PW suggested bringing the topics to be presented during the Public Forum.

AP said that some ICANN Board members want to know about the status of the ASO review and how the NRO EC sees the boundaries in the ASO Accountability discussion.

OR asked if the ASO review and the collaboration with the GAC PSWG are topics for the meeting with the Board.

All agreed.

PW asked about the plans to send a letter of thanks to Larry Strickling

OR said that the letter was ready. OR suggested to sign the letter as NRO EC chair and add the names of the CEO at the bottom.

All agreed.

PW volunteered to deliver the letter during ICANN meeting in Hyderabad

OR suggested to publish the content of the letter in the IANA-XFER mailing list and the NRO website.

All agreed

NEW ACTION ITEM 161027-04 OR to share the content of the letter to Larry Stickling in the IANA XFER Mailing list.

NEW ACTION ITEM 161027-05 GV to organize the publication of the letter to Larry Strickling in the NRO website.

NEW ACTION ITEM 161027-06 PW to present the letter to Larry Stricking during ICANN 57 meeting in Hyderabad.

9. RPKI 0/0 Status

OR asked to discuss about RPKI 0/0 status as CM had to leave the call soon.

CM said that the situation in the IETF was the same since the last report, with no further repercussion about the applicability statement for the 0/0 in the mailing list. CM considered that the progress of the new validation rules is going fine and it could be ready for publication right after IETF Seoul meeting.

CM suggested to work in a new document describing the next stage for the TA, which not only describes 0/0 but also proposes how the TA structure will look after the new validation algorithm is widely deploy.

JC welcomed the idea.

PW suggested not to make any further announcement about 0/0 until discussion on the validation algorithms is complete.

JC agreed.

CM said that he would include the topics for the ECG meeting in Seoul and report back to the NRO EC.

a) Coordinated RPKI Activity reporting

PW suggested that the RSCG start working to establish a set of consistent RPKI adoption matrix for regular reporting.

JC agreed.

CM volunteered the ECG to coordinate with the RSCG on what they could need to prepare such report.

NEW ACTION ITEM 161027-07 CM (or ECG Chair) to collaborate with the RSCG in the establishment of a set of RPKI adoption matrix for the use of regular reporting.

5 IANA Numbering Services Review Committee First Steps

OR reminded that the announcement of the Review Committee (RC) has been made and the mailing list has been created

OR asked what would be the next first steps for this group and if the NRO Executive Secretary would support the group.

GV said that he was expecting to provide the secretariat support to the RC.

JC said that in order for the RC to advise the NRO EC they need the reports from IANA but those will be created later on.

AP said that the RC could meet to define their leadership roles.

AB said that according to the RC charter they should meet at least twice per year.

OR said that the NRO EC should discuss about what are the procedural aspects the RC should agree in their first meeting and when to expect the first review.

JC said that another aspect to agree was about was definition of the IANA reports format.

HK mentioned that according to the RC charter they needs to proceed with transparency and they would need support.

JC considered that similarly to the work with the CRISP Team, the NRO Secretariat should do the support.

JC suggested that the first RC meeting should be between now and March for the purpose of establishing the chair and vice chair and set expectations of the review call around mid year 2017.

GV said that the majority of the RC members are also members of the ASO AC and they are planning to meet face-to-face during ICANN meeting in Copenhagen in March 2017.

AB said that according to the RC chart their meetings should be by teleconference but if it happens that most of the members are in the same table it was reasonable to meet around Copenhagen meeting and provide remote access.

OR asked the NRO EC to agree to have the first RC meeting during ICANN meeting in Copenhagen and meanwhile the NRO EC advances in the discussions with IANA in the report process and formatting.

All agreed.

NEW ACTION ITEM 161027-08 OR to inform the RC to prepare to have their first meeting around ICANN meeting in Copenhagen so they can define their leadership roles and expect to have their first around mid year 2017.

6 ASO/NRO Representations in ICANN Bodies

Discussed previously in point 3 of the agenda.

7 ASO Procedures Changes

GV reported about the changes made in the ASO procedures. GV said that the changes were made in two steps. The first step were formatting changes to the ASO procedures document. The second step were changes to the ICANN Board election procedures. GV mentioned that the new version of the ASO procedures is available online in Google Docs which include a track changes version. GV reminded that the NRO EC must ratify the changes in order to be adopted by the ASO AC.

OR asked GV to resend the email with the ASO procedures changes information.

8. ASO Review

OR reminded that the last version of the RFP document included JC comments.

JC suggested proceeding with publication.

OR asked GV to finalise the review of the RFP document so the announcement could be made during ICANN meeting in Hyderabad.

NEW ACTION ITEM 161027-09 GV to prepare final version of the ASO Review RFP document and prepare the public announcement during the ICANN Meeting in Hyderabad.

10. CG / Input Consultation

CCG

OR reminded about the CCG proposal to have joint f2f CGs and ECG meeting next year.

HK said that the proposal was open about the timing of the meeting.

PW said that it could be a useful meeting but the idea requires an important investment and full time preparations. PW mentioned that such meeting could have a retreat style.

OR said that the first step would be to decide if the proposal of the joint meeting is relevant and practical.

JC said that he supports the idea of better coordination between CGs but not necessarily believes in a joint all CG face-to-face meeting. JC added that in order to have strategic plans the NRO EC should wait for the results of the ASO review, JC expected that a strategic meeting could happen until 2018.

JC said he was open for joint meeting between any two CG if there are clear areas of collaboration.

HK said that the CCG could bring back an updated set of collaboration projects between CCG and the others CGs.

11. Review Open Actions

Given the time OR suggested to review the open actions in the EC mailing list.

Action Item 160920-01 CCG to coordinate with Carlos Reyes to provide to ICANN CEO with IPv6 Talking points.

Action Item 160920-02 AF to send a list of outstanding documents to complete the RIR Governance Matrix.

Action Item 160816-02 GV to follow up with each RIR the confirmation of their last version of the public accountability report and coordinate the joint report publication.

Action Item 160816-03 JC to provide comments to the ASO Review RFP document so this is aligned with ASO specific relationship with ICANN

Action Item 160816-04 OR once the ASO review RFP is published to send an email to ICANN board informing them about the NRO plan for the ASO review.

Action Item 160719-01 after August 12th, GV to follow up and coordinate with all RIR the publication and announcement of the RC members in the NRO website and RIR websites.

Action Item 141018-03: AF and RIR Legal Team to include Governing Board Structure, Budget and Activity Approval, Fee Approval and Bylaw/Operational Document Control information to the RIR Governance Matrix.

Action Item 141018-04: AF and RIR Legal team based on the RIR Governance Matrix propose to the NRO EC those areas where could be consolidation or harmonization among the RIR.

Action Item 160316-01 OR to ask Elise Gerich regarding the IANA communications to any technical coordination list about special allocations to the IETF that could be used by the RIR to inform their communities.

12. Next Meetings

a) Teleconference Scheduled on Tuesday November 15th (During IETF)

PW suggested to keep the scheduled November 15th teleconference in order to make preparations for the IGF, NRO EC f2f and I* meetings.

All agreed

b) Next NRO EC f2f Meeting – Monday December 5th (Guadalajara Mexico)

GV volunteered to start drafting an agenda for the NRO EC face-to-face meeting

NEW ACTION ITEM 161027-09 GV to prepare a first agenda draft for the NRO EC face-to-face meeting in IGF

c) Possible I* Meeting during IGF México

13. AOB

No other items were discussed.

14. Adjourn

OR thanked the participants and adjourned the meeting at 1:38 PM UTC

Comments are closed.