[Iana-ipr] Notes from 8 Feb 2016
jrobinson at afilias.info
Mon Feb 15 09:17:11 CET 2016
I have been through the document and made one minor edit and added one comment.
The edit is grammatical, the comment relates to the number of persons on the Council which I believe looks to be too large. This seems to me to be consistent with other commenters on the same subject.
Apart from that, I think it may be useful to discuss or comment briefly on how this proposed set-up retains or enhances security and stability. This point is associated with technical control of iana.org.
While I can see the logic of accepting the edits to a certain point in time, it does seem to me that this document could do with some visibility beyond this limited group so sharing it more broadly (if we have not already done so) seems to be timely now.
Will talk with you all on the call later today.
From: Alan Barrett [mailto:alan.barrett at afrinic.net]
Sent: 08 February 2016 08:54
To: iana-ipr at nro.net
Subject: [Iana-ipr] Notes from 8 Feb 2016
Notes from the IANA-IPR call of 8 february 2016
- Alan Barrett (NRO)
- Pul Wilson (NRO)
- Izumi Okutani (CRISP)
- Greg Shatan (CWG)
- Lise Fuhr (CWG)
- Jari Arkko (IETF)
- Andrew Sulliovan (IAB)
- German Valdez (Secretariat)
- Nurani Mimpuno (CRISP)
- Jonathan Robinson (CWG)
1. Confirmation of quorum requirements.
There was agreement that the quorum will be:
* Greg Shatan (CWG)
* One or both of Lise Fuhr or Jonathan Robinson (CWG)
* One or both of Alan Barrett or Paul Wilson (NRO)
* One or both of Izumi Okutani or Nurani Nimpuno (CRISP)
* One or both of Andrew Sullivan (IAB) or Jari Arkko (IETF)
2. Mailing list archive
We confirmed that the iana-ipr at nro.net mailing list is archived at <https://www.nro.net/pipermail/iana-ipr/> and the archives are open to the public.
3. Mailing list subscription for observers
There was discussion on allowing observers to subscribe to the mailing list. Observers are already able to read the archives, but some might find it more convenient to subscribe to the list. There was general agreement that the general public could be allowed read-only subscription to the iana-ipr mailing list, but posting would be restricted.
ACTION: German Valdez to investigate the technical feasibility of allowing open read-only subscription, and to implement it if it is easy.
4. Access policy for draft Example Principal Terms of Intellectual Property Agreements document on google docs
There was a discussion on allowing public read-only access to the draft Example Principal Terms of Intellectual Property Agreements which this group has been editing in google Docs.
There was general agreement that public read-only access was desirable.
ACTION: Greg Shatan to adjust the permissions and/or create new links as appropriate to allow this group to edit the document while allowing the public to read the document.
5. Confirm non-controversial edits.
Alan Barrett suggested that edits made on or before 31 January 2016, which have not received comments, should be marked as “accepted”. It was clarified that the “acceptance” of edits would not be binding on any participants, but was chiefly intended to allow discussion to focus on important points without distraction from redline markup relating to points that have general agreement. The edit history would be available in Google Docs, and each community would still need to review any future version fo the document.
Lise Fuhr indicated that she and Jonathan Robinson needed more time to review, before any edits were “accepted”.
There was a discussion about revision control, and general agreement that the facilities provided by Google Docs were probably sufficient. However, additional snapshots sent to the mailing list would also be useful.
ACTION: Greg Shatan to send snapshots of the document to the mailing list when he thinks it appropriate.
ACTION: All to mark any edits or points that need further discussion, by Friday 12 February 2016.
ACTION: Lise Fuhr to liaise with Jonathan Robinson to review the document as soon as possible.
ACTION: Greg Shatan to “accept” non-controversial edits, after waiting until at least Friday 12 February 2016.
6. Discussion of other edits.
The following three issues were discussed:
6.1. Licencing to ICANN or to PTI?
There was general agreement that licensing to ICANN would be appropriate, with ICANN sub-licensing to PTI.
6.2. Exclusive or non-exclusive licence?
Greg Shatan explained that an exclusive licence was appropriate, because ICANN or PTI would be the only provider of IANA services. He clarified that the licence would not be permanent or irrevocable, so it could be changed in the future.
Further discussion is needed on this issue.
6.3. Planning for future changes in IANA operators
Alan Barrett highlighted the need to plan for a potential future transition to one or more different IANA operators.
7. Next steps
We will continue to work on the document in Google Docs.
The next meeting will be next week, if possible.
ACTION: German Valdez to set up a Doodle poll for a possible time during the week of 8 to 12 February 2016.
Iana-ipr mailing list
Iana-ipr at nro.net
More information about the Iana-ipr