25 January 2018

Meeting of the NRO Executive Council – 170919


Tuesday, 19 September 2017
11:00 AM UTC


Executive Council:

  • John Curran (JC), ARIN: Chair
  • Paul Wilson (PW), APNIC: Secretary & Vice Chair
  • Alan Barrett (AB) AFRINIC Treasurer
  • Axel Pawlik (AP) RIPE NCC


  • Pablo Hinojosa (PH), APNIC
  • Nate Davis (ND), ARIN
  • Hollis Kara (HK), ARIN
  • John Sweeting (JS), ARIN
  • Paul Andersen (PA), ARIN
  • Athina Fragkouli (AF), RIPE NCC
  • Paul Rendek (PR), RIPE NCC


Oscar Robles (OR), LACNIC


  • German Valdez (GV), NRO
  • Susannah Gray (SG), NRO (Scribe)


  1. Welcome
  2. Agenda Review
  3. Minutes Review
    1. August 15
  4. CCWG S2 update
    1. ASO AC Empowered Communities Working Group (WG)
  5. PTI Service Level Reporting Requirements
  6. ICANN 60 planning
    1. Abu Dhabi ICANN Board/NRO discussion questions
  7. CG Input / Consultation
  8. Review Open Actions
  9. Next Meetings
    1. Face-to-face meeting 27 October, Dubai
    2. 21 November 2017
    3. 19 December 2017
  10. AOB
  11. Adjourn

 0. Welcome

JC welcomed the participants to the meeting.

GV noted that OR has sent his apologies.

1. Agenda Review

There were no additions or changes to the agenda. 

2. Minutes Review

GV noted the minutes from the 15 August Teleconference have been approved by all in the NRO EC mailing list.

3. CCWG S2 Update

a) ASO AC Empowered Communities Working Group (WG) 

JC explained that a subgroup of the ASO AC has been formed to work on the procedures that the ASO AC will need to have in place to provide the NRO EC with advice or recommendations if an empowered community petition is underway. He noted that Kevin Blumberg is leading this group.

JC noted that he has been attending the subgroup calls and progress is being made.

GV added that the Secretariat is providing support to the subgroup as requested, including setting up a dedicated mailing list and scribing the twice-monthly meetings.

HK asked if it was necessary to publish information about the subgroup on the NRO/ASO websites.

JC said that he believed that formal recognition was not necessary but would bring this question up on the next subgroup call.

New Action Item: 170919-01: JC to ask the ASO AC Subgroup on ICANN Empowered Community whether information about the group should be added to the ASO/NRO websites.  

4. PTI Service Level Reporting Requirements

JC explained that there is a set of reporting requirements regarding PTI, its performance and the information that should be given to the NRO. He noted that a group of people from the RIRs worked on this and the document has now been returned to PTI for consideration.

ND explained that the reporting requirements address a gap in the SLA that was signed with PTI relating to when transfers occur and when /8s need to be broken as well as the amount of operational coordination with IANA that needs to occur.

ND added that the RIR team wants to initiate a dialogue about this with IANA (PTI) and to begin working with them to have these requirements met. He asked the EC for approval to move ahead with this.

JC noted that there was no objection from ARIN and asked the EC if there were any objections. There were no objections from the RIPE NCC and APNIC. AB said that he was not sure he understood what the requirements entailed but noted there was no objection from AFRINIC.

JC asked GV to follow up with LACNIC for consensus.

New Action Item: 170919-02: GV to follow up with LACNIC regarding approval for the RIR team to initiate dialog with PTI regarding the PTI Service Level Reporting Requirements.

5.  ICANN 60 planning 

a) Abu Dhabi ICANN Board/NRO discussion questions

  • Joint Session with ICANN Board

JC noted that the NRO EC had received some questions from the ICANN Board for discussion during the upcoming joint session at ICANN60. He noted that the EC would discuss these questions during the upcoming NRO EC face-to-face session at RIPE 75 in Dubai.

JC added that the EC must submit any questions it has for the ICANN Board by 26 September and asked the EC for input.

PW said that he would like to understand the ICANN Board’s position on auction proceeds. He explained that there appears to be a fairly strong Board position on the availability of the auction proceeds to ICANN for its operations or to bolster its capital reserve.

PW added that he had been made aware of this via the New gTLD Auction Proceeds Working Group that Sylvia Cadena has been participating in. He continued that the subject is worth discussing due to the issue of conflict of interest and noted that he would think about how to phrase this question.

New Action item: 170919-03: NRO EC members to submit any questions or topics to be discussed with ICANN Board to the NRO EC list by September 26th

New Action Item: 170919-04: PW to come up with phrasing for the question regarding auction proceeds to be addressed to the ICANN Board during the joint session at ICANN60.

JC said that he thought this was a question worth raising even if it’s just to note that the NRO EC is paying close attention to the auction proceeds process.

  • Engagement with ICANN

JC noted that the EC should discuss its relationship with ICANN. He said that he believed the ICANN Board does not realize the level of overhead represented by the NRO’s current engagement with ICANN.

JC explained that, as an SO, the NRO/ASO is invited to participate in all cross-community activities, some of which have nothing to do with the RIRs’ mission with regard to the numbers registry. He would like to pose a question to raise Board awareness about the ICANN – NRO relationship.

PW noted that he had posed a question on the mailing list a while ago about the number of groups and lists the NRO/ASO participates in.

PW continued that he would like to see a compilation of all the budgets, committees, initiatives and groups that the NRO/ASO participates in, and the people involved in each one so that the EC can be very clear about the current level of engagement and the NRO/ASO’s current obligations and opportunities.

AB said that the ICANN Board has been informed in the past that the NRO has concerns about the amount of ICANN-related work the NRO/ASO is asked to do. He noted that the ASO Review Final Report is a good opportunity to remind the Board of those concerns.

AB also noted that the EC should formulate its own response to ASO Review Final Report.

JC noted this and said that the EC would be discussing the ASO Review Final Report and engagement with ICANN in the upcoming face-to-face meeting.

JC posed the draft question:

  • Is the Board aware of the ASO Review Final Report, and does it have thoughts about it and what it might entail regarding ICANN’s relationship with the NRO/ASO.

AB, AP and PW supported this.

New Action Item: 170919-05: JC to come up with phrasing for the question regarding the ASO Review Final Report to be addressed to the ICANN Board during the joint session at ICANN60.

PW noted that the earlier drafts of the report had highlighted that the RIRs, through their involvement in the ASO, were being required to take part in a lot of activities. He added that this language had been toned down in the final version.

He noted, however, that a distinction should be made between what the NRO/ASO is actually required/obligated to do versus what it is invited to do. He reiterated that an overview of all these activities would help the EC decide which ones it could opt out of or opportunities it could turn down and that this overview should be created before approaching the ICANN Board.

JC agreed but noted that this doesn’t need to be a question directed specifically to the Board: asking the Board if it had read the ASO Review Final Report should be sufficient.

JC noted that the NRO/ASO is being given repeated opportunities to participate by ICANN and, due to this, is becoming extensively committed. He added that this is not ICANN’s fault but down to the NRO’s management of its engagement with ICANN.

JC noted that OR had created an initial document listing the NRO/ASO’s appointments and liaisons to groups and had sent it to the NRO EC mailing list. He asked GV to make updates to the document and circulate it to help inform the EC’s discussions

New Action Item: 170919-06: GV to update OR’s initial document listing the NRO/ASO’s current appointments/liaisons to the various ICANN groups and committees.

  • Identifier Technical Health Indicators (ITHI) Update

JC noted that an ITHI update will be given during ICANN60 and that global consultation is underway. He asked if there were any objections to asking JS’s team to prepare a brief presentation on this. There were none.

New Action Item: 170919-07: JS to prepare a short presentation to update the ICANN60 community on the RIRs’ work on ITHI.

  • General Planning for ICANN60

PW noted that there would not be a dedicated session for the ASO Review and asked if there would be an opportunity to report on the next steps regarding the Review.

GV noted that there should be a designated slot but he is unsure yet whether it is during the Opening Ceremony or Plenary. He will confirm with Carlos Reyes.

JC asked the EC if it thinks that an update should be given.

PW said yes: it’s a valuable opportunity to update the ICANN community, even if it’s only done once a year.

JC asked GV to prepare 2-3 slides that include:

  • That that the review is now complete.
  • It is now being reviewed within in each of the RIRs.
  • The RIRs will come up with ways to address the report’s recommendations.

New Action Item: 170919-08: GV to prepare a 2-3-page presentation on the ASO Review for the Numbers Community to give during ICANN60.

JC asked if there were any public ASO sessions on the agenda.

GV confirmed that there were no public ASO sessions scheduled. He noted that the ASO AC EC subgroup would have a closed face-to-face meeting and that there might also be a closed joint NRO EC/ASO AC meeting.

6. CG Input / Consultation

  • RSM

JS reported that that the global ITHI consultation is underway. JS said that the consultation was presented during APNIC meeting. JS thanked GV and HK for their support in the preparation of the consultation.

  • CCG

HK noted that work to update/redesign the NRO website is ongoing and the team is on track to complete this by the end of the year.  She added that the CCG is gearing up for the IGF later in the year.

  • Legal Team

JC asked AF to confirm that the legal team is working on reviewing the NRO EC Interim Procedures for Using the Empowered Community Powers. AF confirmed that work was underway and that the EC would hear from the team next week.

7. Review Open Actions

  •  Action Item 170815-01 JC to send an email to Filiz Yilmaz and Kevin Blumberg informing them that any legal support request for the ASO AC subgroup on ICANN EC should be addressed to the NRO EC.

COMPLETEDemail sent to the ASO AC Coord list on 6 September.

  • Action Item 170815-02 GV to create the list icann-empcom@nro.net for the communication of the ASO empowered community procedures.


  • Action Item 150817-03 PW draft a response to the question if ICP-2 applies to the existing RIR.

COMPLETEDPW responded in August.

  • Action Item 170718-01 AF and RIR legal team to give a legal review to the interim procedures for use of ASO empowered community powers document and proposed changes, if any.


  • Action Item 170718-04 JC to respond to ICANN that the NRO EC would be taken into consideration the inquiry on ICP-2.


  • Action Item 170718-05 JC to draft a response to the ASO AC regarding editorial changes to global number policies.

COMPLETED: JC sent response to ASO AC Coord list.

  • Action Item 170620-04 JC to draft a message for the approval of the NRO EC informing IANA about the RSCG proposal to reduce the level of detailed in the AS registry.

IN PROGRESSJC already has a draft and will send to the EC.

  • Action Item 170418-07 AB in coordination with the CCG draft new content for the RPKI section in the NRO website.

AB noted that he had sent a mail about this to the EC noting that there are a few announcements about RPKI but no RPKI section on the website. He suggested closing this action item.

JC asked HK if the revamped website would have a section on RPKI.

HK said that a page could be created. She noted that the current project is intended to clean up the existing content and that the team is waiting for additional input from the EC and ECG on whether more content should be created about RPKI.

JC noted the action item should be tabled and revisited once the website has been redesigned: the NRO EC and ECG should suggest appropriate text. There were no objections.

TABLED: Revisit when new website is live.  

  • Action Item 170316-02: JC to draft a message to CCWG S2 representatives clarifying the engagement with this group (observers by default, no position unless instructed by the NRO EC)

JC noted that he had sent a message to the NRO EC about this. He said he would like to defer on sending the message until after the EC’s face-to-face meeting where the NRO’s engagement with ICANN would be discussed. He asked if there were any objections. There were none.

DEFERRED: October 

  • Action Item 170316-16 GV to investigate an NRO EC wiki for document management with RIPE NCC

GV noted that he was working on the structure of the wiki and the CCG has confirmed that it will have this implemented soon. He added that he hopes to make a short presentation about it during the face-to-face meeting. SG will be helping with the wiki implementation and updating documentation.


8. Next Meetings     

a) Face-to-Face Meeting: 27 October, Dubai

JC noted that this is high priority and asked the EC for input into the draft agenda:

  • ASO Review and next steps (JC)
  • Regional discussions on the ASO Review (PW)
  • ICANN Engagement Strategy (JC)
  • Europe’s new privacy regulations: GDPR (JC)
  • ITHI (AB)
  • RPKI, 0/0 implementation status and updates from each RIR (AB)

JC asked GV to circulate a draft agenda ASAP.

New Action Item: 170919-09: GV to circulate a draft agenda ASAP for the NRO EC face-to-face on 27 October.

GV asked the EC to let him know the following information ASAP:

  • Who will be attending the face-to-face ASAP so he can organize the room.
  • Who will be leaving for Abu Dhabi on Friday 27 Oct and who will leave on Sat 28 Oct so he can arrange transport.
  • Who will be attending the dinner on Thursday 26 October. 

b) Teleconference: 21 November 2017

There were no comments.

c) Teleconference: 19 December 2017

JC noted that the 19 December call falls during the IGF and wondered if it should be moved.

AP noted that it would depend on the agenda.

JC noted that the EC could decide to move the call when the IGF agenda becomes clear.

9. AoB

  • ASO Review and Regional Engagement

PW gave a report of the ASO Review discussions that took place at the recent APNIC 44 meeting. He explained that the APNIC EC had reviewed the report earlier in the week and noted that the APNIC EC believes the first 17 recommendations are practical things that can be implemented by APNIC.

PW continued that recommendation 18 states that the NRO should conduct a global consultation and noted that the APNIC EC, without waiting for an NRO decision on this, decided to consider the already-scheduled ASO reporting session at APNIC 44 as a consultation session. This will contribute to the global consultation assuming the NRO EC agrees with recommendation 18.

PW added that the APNIC EC had made inputs during the consultation session, including that the presence of the numbering community at ICANN is important but there are ambiguities about the ASO, the NRO, the ASO AC, NRO EC etc.

PW continued that the APNIC EC suggested that that the community consider the non status quo options for reform that are outlined report. He noted that the APNIC EC also noted some issues of fragmentation or divergence and suggested the community take into account other aspects of the RIR-ICANN relationship, including the Empowered Community and the PTI Contract Review Committee.

PW explained that there was a 1.5-hour session: he gave a report and then the APNIC Policy SIG Chair chaired the consultation. He noted that the community decided to establish a working group to discuss the future structure of the ASO.

JC asked why the APNIC EC thinks that the NC’s presence at ICANN important? Is it important for ICANN to get its job done or important for the NC to get its job done?

PW responded that he had been asked to give a summary of the contributions that the RIRs have made during ICANN meetings. He added that when the ICANN community had raised questions, the RIRs had been there to answer them. He added that he’d just written a blog on this subject, which would be published shortly.

  • Travel Between Dubai and Abu Dhabi

 PR noted that there is a 1 hour 40 minute transfer time between the Abu Dhabi Airport and Dubai airport and advised people to adjust their travel schedules accordingly if transiting between the two.

  • Assistance for the Executive Secretary

PW noted that he had been working with the Executive Secretary, GV, to hire support for the Secretariat. He added that SG is now on contract with APNIC to support the Secretariat and welcomed her to the team.

SG thanked PW.

The EC also welcomed SG. JC noted that there is a lot of on-going work for the NRO/ASO and the extra support for the Secretariat is necessary.

10. Adjourn

JC proposed a motion to adjourn. There were no objections. The meeting ended at 12:00 PM UTC.

Comments are closed.