[IANA-RC] Doodle Poll IANA RC First Teleconference - DEADLINE Thursday February 2nd

Filiz Yilmaz koalafil at gmail.com
Thu Feb 2 16:22:39 CET 2017


Jason, not sure if your voting member count is correct:
With Thursday I see 3 voting member missing.
Wednesday only 2.

Just for your information.

Filiz

On Thu, Feb 2, 2017 at 4:19 PM, German Valdez <german at apnic.net> wrote:
> Hi
>
> Yes, difficult situation, on Thursday we would miss 3 voting members against 2 on Wednesday.
>
> Unless I hear from you,  I’ll publicise the suggested date and time of the teleconference on Monday February 6th
>
> Regards
>
> German
>
>
>> On 3 Feb 2017, at 1:11 AM, Jason Schiller <jschiller at google.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Wednesday we have the LACNIC staff member, but loose an AFRINIC voting member.
>>
>> (I am not trying to suggest one is more important that the other wrt quorum and getting stuff done.
>>   Certainly having an AFRINIC  voting member is important to voting,
>>   but either way we have less than 8 voting members and thus I don't believe we can "take any actions")
>>
>> I am ok with either day.
>>
>> __Jason
>>
>> On Thu, Feb 2, 2017 at 10:03 AM, German Valdez <german at apnic.net> wrote:
>> Hi
>>
>> Wednesday 15/2 @ 12:00 PM UTC  and Thursday 16/2 @ 11:00 AM UTC have the same results 12 yes and 3 no
>>
>> I would suggest to go for the earliest option where more community representatives are available.
>>
>> Are you ok with the approach?
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> German
>>
>>
>>
>> > On 3 Feb 2017, at 12:54 AM, Jason Schiller <jschiller at google.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > Looks like early Thurs 2/16 has the best attendance.
>> > 12 yes, and 3 no.
>> > Voting members:
>> > AFRINIC: 1v
>> > APNIC: 1v
>> > ARIN: 2v
>> > LACNIC: 2v
>> > RIPE: 1v
>> >
>> > I think we need to discuss quorum and voting rules.
>> >
>> > If we conclude that 10 members are eligible to make decisions at this meeting, then we do not have enough people available to make any decisions.  I think it would be hard (and improper) to claim people not attending the call are not eligible.
>> >
>> > We can try and advance the procedures on list, but I'm not sure how best to do that.  So far there seems to be two outstanding discussion items in the text that currently exists:
>> >
>> > 1. use of PTI Review Committee vs IANA Review Committee.
>> >    Note: Oct 4 announcement calls it "IANA Numbering Services Review Committee"
>> >    Note: It also lists Fiona Asonga and Dr. Ajay Kumar as members.
>> >    https://www.nro.net/iana-numbering-services-review-committee-composition/
>> >
>> >    Note: Our charter calls it "IANA Numbering Services Review Committee"
>> >    https://www.nro.net/final-version-iana-numbering-services-review-committee-charter/
>> >
>> >    Can we close the loop on this with an email vote?
>> >      A. PTI Review Committee:
>> >
>> >      B. IANA Numbering Services Review Committee:
>> >
>> >      C. IANA Review Committee:
>> >
>> >      D. I don't care what we call it:
>> >          Jason Schiller - ARIN
>> >
>> >      E. I abstain
>> >
>> > 2. There is an open question about if "all meetings will be conducted by teleconference" as stated in the charter.
>> >     There is no text under "meetings" at all at this point.
>> >     Nicolas thinks a face to face meeting might be needed to sum up reports prior to community presentation.
>> >     Nicolas questions if we can change this, and if it requires a charter change.
>> >     Jason suggests we should make good procedures (with the charter in mind) and if we need to change the
>> >      charter to have good procedures then we look into that.
>> >    Jason suggested possible middle ground:
>> >       "all meetings will be available by teleconference for public oversight, and participation by RC members,
>> >        observers, and invited guests."
>> >    Jason also asked if there is a possible need for private meetings like when censuring a member.
>> >
>> >   Thoughts on meeting procedures?
>> >
>> >  3. Any objections on the text written so far?  If not, can we consider that part done (for now) and work on filling our the rest of the document?  (I can't tell is silence is acceptance) We will of course have a second look once complete and we ratify the document.
>> >
>> > 4. EMPTY SECTIONS:
>> >
>> > 3. Composition
>> >       3.1 selection
>> >       3.2  term
>> >       3.3 removal
>> > 4. Meetings
>> > 5. Amendments
>> >
>> > ___Jason
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On Wed, Feb 1, 2017 at 11:28 PM, German Valdez <german at apnic.net> wrote:
>> > Hi
>> >
>> > Thank you for the input received so far.
>> >
>> > We are still missing 4 members to submit their preference. Please do it at your earliest convenience.
>> >
>> > Bear in mind that IANA RC teleconferences are open for the public so advance notice is always welcome.
>> >
>> > Thanks!
>> >
>> > German
>> >
>> >
>> > > On 31 Jan 2017, at 12:30 AM, German Valdez <german at apnic.net> wrote:
>> > >
>> > > Dear Colleagues
>> > >
>> > > Here is my proposal to organise the first teleconference for the IANA Review Committee.
>> > >
>> > > Given that we have representatives from all RIR regions I’d like to propose the options of 11:00 AM or 12:00 PM UTC. This is based on experience in dealing with such diverse groups. This would allow IANA RC members in California currently in -8 UTC and representatives in Australia currently in +10 UTC be able to join the call in a not so terrible time of the day.
>> > >
>> > > I’m including two weeks in the poll, 6 - 10 and 13 - 17 of February
>> > >
>> > > In order to have enough time to advise the time and date of the teleconference please complete this poll by Thursday February 2nd. I’d announce and send the details of the call based on the most suitable time for the majority of the IANA RC members.
>> > >
>> > > http://doodle.com/poll/hhzep4qz57vdrgc7
>> > >
>> > > Regards
>> > >
>> > > German Valdez_______________________________________________
>> > > Rc mailing list
>> > > Rc at nro.net
>> > > https://nro.net/mailman/listinfo/rc
>> >
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Rc mailing list
>> > Rc at nro.net
>> > https://nro.net/mailman/listinfo/rc
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > _______________________________________________________
>> > Jason Schiller|NetOps|jschiller at google.com|571-266-0006
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> _______________________________________________________
>> Jason Schiller|NetOps|jschiller at google.com|571-266-0006
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Rc mailing list
> Rc at nro.net
> https://nro.net/mailman/listinfo/rc
>



More information about the Rc mailing list