ASO AC Teleconference 13 January 2016
ASO AC teleconference
Wednesday, January 13th 2016 (12:00 UTC)
MINUTES
Attendees:
AFRINIC
Fiona Asonga, FA
Douglas Onyango, DO
APNIC
Ajay Kumar, AK
Tomohiro Fujisaki, TF
Aftab Siddiqui, AS
ARIN
Louie Lee, LL (Chair)
Jason Schiller, JS
John Sweeting, JSw
LACNIC
Ricardo Patara, RP
Jorge Villa, JV
RIPE NCC
Filiz Yilmaz, FY (Vice Chair)
Nurani Nimpuno, NN
Wilfried Woeber, WW
Secretariat:
German Valdez, GV – NRO Executive Secretary
Einar Bohlin, EB – ARIN (Scribe)
Apologies:
Hartmut Glaser, HG
Mark Elkins, ME
Observers:
APNIC: Adam Gosling
LACNIC: Gianina Pensky
ICANN: Carlos Reyes, CR
ICANN: Ron da Sliva
ICANN: Selina Harrington
RIPE: Dmitry Kohmanyuk
Draft Agenda
0. Welcome
1. Agenda Review
2. Review of Open Action Items
3. Approval of Minutes
a) December 2015
4. ICANN CCWG Report
5. 2016 Chair and Vice Chairs
6. ASO Work Plan 2016
7. ASO 2015 Work Plan Review
8. ICANN Board Election 2016 Update
9. Proposed New Logo for the ASO Update
10. Any Other Business
11. Adjournment
Draft Agenda
0. Welcome
The Chair called the meeting to order at 12:07 UTC. The presence of quorum was noted.
1. Agenda Review
The Chair reviewed the agenda and noted WW’s suggestion to talk about the upcoming meeting in Marrakesh. The Chair informed the ASO AC that he had to leave the call in one hour and asked FY to take over at that time. FY agree.
2. Review of Open Action Items
One item carried over from last year, about update ASO members in ICANN CCWG, GV to send a draft to The Chair.
3. Approval of Minutes
It was moved by TF and seconded by JSw, that:
“The ASO AC approves the Minutes of their 9 December 2015 meeting.”
The Chair called for any objections or abstentions. None were noted.
The motion carried with all in favor.
Chair asked that draft status be removed.
4. ICANN CCWG Report.
The Chair asked if there was an update.
FA reported that they had continued to consult with the CCWG. FA also consulted with the NRO EC as an ASO AC member on the third draft in late December. The EC asked about accountability the ability to implement those mechanisms. There have been many calls. They have been looking at each recommendation from the chartering organizations, as well as the board, and looking how to consolidate that feedback. That is still a work in progress. Working on sending the final report back to the chartering organizations for their final feedback. There is still a challenge with the timelines. They had expected to send the report to the chartering organizations by the 7th of January. As of yesterday still working on the mailing list on the issued of consumer trust in the mission statement. Regarding the removal of an individual board member, the member should have a meeting with the group that appointed them prior to being removed. That process is different from removal of the entire board. We are working on feedback that will go into the third draft that will then go to the board. We hope to still deliver the final proposal by the end of January. There are many calls that are scheduled.
The Chair asked if the step about the board member meeting with the ASO has to be formalized? If communication has broken down, it may be difficult for such a meeting to occur.
FA replied that it was necessary for that to be formal so that power is not abused; it needs to be documented for clarity.
NN asked if the removal of a board member would require the approval of the NRO EC?
JS pointed out that the ASO AC has a procedure for the removal of a board member, but it’s not official yet. Should we let that go or formally add it?
WW said he did not want to document an informal procedure.
FA said we don’t need to rush to document that procedure. Let us allow the CCWG to finalize their work and then decide what to do. JSw agreed, saying this is not time-sensitive for this call.
The Chair asked FA to keep a list of differences between their procedures and the ASO AC’s to later be able to look at alignment.
The Chair asked if FA could address NN’s question, will removal require feedback from the NRO EC? FA said the CCWG does not require that. They will require public discussion of removal. Our own procedure would require consultation with the board.
5. 2016 Chair and Vice Chairs
The Chair noted that The Chair election had ended and thanked everyone for voting. The Chair asked if an action was needed to accept the results of the vote?
GV reviewed the results of the election.
JSw moved to accept the results of The Chair election showing that LL had 9 votes and FY had 6. WW seconded the motion. The Chair called for discussion. JS doesn’t believe a motion is necessary, the election stands by itself. WW agreed with JS. JSw withdrew the motion. The Chair called the motion withdrawn.
The Chair asked FY to be Vice Chair. The Chair will select a second Vice Chair on the next call. FY accepted.
WW said no motion is necessary for the Vice Chair position, it is The Chair’s privilege. JS agreed pointing out the process that the “New Chair will select vice chair from different regions.”
The Chair asked GV to add appointing the other Vice Chair as an action item.
Action Item 160113-01 GV to add the selection of the second vice-chair in the agenda of February 2016 ASO AC Teleconference.
6. ASO Work Plan 2016
The Chair noted that some changes were made toward the end of last year.
FA said RP posted a revised work plan on the 30th of December.
The Chair noted changes about travel, the face to face meeting at the second ICANN meeting (a Type B meeting), and public meetings for outreach purposes.
WW spoke about the face to face meeting in regards to conducting interviews. Trying to avoid creating contradicting statements.
The Chair agreed that the plan does not align with what they need to do in 2016. The Chair tabled this discussion and asked that it be taken to the mailing list.
7. ASO 2015 Work Plan Review
The Chair said that GV sent a list of open action items to The Chair.
We need to draft a message about Rob Blokzil. Let’s draft that over email.
The Chair noted an open item about putting procedures into one document.
The Chair noted an item about getting information about each RIR’s travel policy for 2016. The Chair asked for this to be taken to the list.
The Chair noted times and dates for 2016 meetings.
The Chair noted an item about accepting the 2016 work plan. That will continue on the list.
The Chair noted the 2015 work plan review from TF. Didn’t we already accept that?
It was confirmed by EB that the plan was accepted by the ASO AC on their December call.
8. ICANN Board Election 2016 Update
GV said the comment period started last Friday after the QRC had decided to extend the nomination deadline for three weeks. There are five nominees, the nominees are public. The comment period is ninety days. The interview period starts one month after the opening of the comment period.
WW said the Marrakesh meeting is in the middle of the interview phase. We can do interviews face to face in Marrakesh, if we think that’s a good idea to do.
The Chair said the Interview Committee (IC) needs to determine if they can travel to Marrakesh.
TF asked for the members of the QRC and IC.
GV said the IC is AS, ME, JSw, RP and WW.
NN noted that there is a conflict of interest about being on the ASO AC and being on the ICANN Board. Candidates should not participate in the election procedures.
WW agreed, noting that all can participate in the procedures discussion, but not opinion discussions about the candidates.
The Chair noted that special lists and calls are set up for elections. Members have recused themselves appropriately.
[The Chair left the call at 8:03 am Eastern Time. FY takes over as Chair.]
FY asked if there were any other comments about the election process?
WW spoke about the special mailing lists, IC and QRC and address-council-member-only list (minus candidates).
FY noted that if FA and NN have questions about the process, please raise them. Asked if WW was clear. NN said it was clear, and this information should be communicated to all the candidates.
GV spoke of the need to make a quick decision if the IC is going to conduct interviews in Marrakesh. GV is prepared to have the logistics to conduct interviews there. Candidates participate at ICANN and are likely to be there. The timing is good. Hopefully the IC can travel there.
FY asked if there were any objections to say that if possible interviews will be conducted in Marrakesh? AS suggested taking this question to the to IC QRC list, and let them report back to ASO AC.
FY agreed, but a deadline is required since GV is already working on this. Deadline is one week from today. AS, JSw and WW agreed. FY told German to expect to hear from QRC IC by 20 January 2016. JSw asked GV to start that thread on the IC list.
WW noted that the QRC is discharged, it’s work is done. Work is now done by the IC. JSw said the QRC would be the IC. AS agreed that the QRC was the IC, but asked for confirmation from ASO AC.
It was moved by WW, and seconded by JS, that:
“The members of the QRC will continue as the members of the IC for 2016.”
FY called for discussion. There were no objections. Motion carried.
9. Proposed New Logo for the ASO Update
GV said ICANN sent a proposal for new logo for the ASO web site, which is maintained by the RIRs. We asked the EC about the new logo, EC asked the comms departments of the RIRs, which supported the logo. FY asked if there were any comments or objections. There were none. FY closed this item and asked for it to be removed from the agenda.
RDS spoke about the QRC IC discussion. Using the same folks for both is good. Offered Kuo or himself to provide information to the candidates about the time commitments of the position. JSw said that would be great information for the IC for the candidates during the interviews. WW agreed; usually there is advice about the required resources in the written interviews, but it might be even more useful to convey that information right now and not bury it in all the later material. Is that correct? RDS yes, either us to the IC, or we can talk personally with the candidates. Let us know.
NN said this is good idea, the time commitments need to be clearly documented for all the candidates. Also nice if candidates can meet the board members.
WW asked if besides election work, will we have other ASO AC business in Marrakesh? Can we discuss that on the mailing list?
FY yes, we skipped 8, will go back to that. The IC needs to reply about interviews in one week. FY asked for discussion about Marrakesh and ASO AC business.
CR said the ICANN 55 is Meeting A in the new structure.
FY asked CR to send the material again about the new structure of ICANN meetings.
CR said that the meeting now starts on Saturday. Meeting B will be shorter, and policy development focused. Have been working with GV about the session request for Marrakesh.
RDS said perhaps something to take to the EC, there should be a formal ASO or EC slot in the Plenary on Monday for the entire ICANN audience. FY asked GV to find out what the EC plans to do.
FY asked for motion. WW takes action item to start discussion on the list.
CR needs to submit a session request by Friday this week. He has already worked with GV to provide typical room logistics in Marrakesh. Adiel is working with GV and the EC for the plenary session.
10. Any Other Business
FY asked if there was AOB.
TF said he sent mail to the ASO AC list about there being two versions of the board selection procedures on the ASO’s website. GV said he already corrected the website.
WW asked if the new address-council-only mailing list was ready for 2016? GV will check the list and confirm by mail. This is an action item for GV.
Action Item 150113 GV to prepare AC mailing list for the 2016 election process of seat 10 in ICANN Board
AK asked if there was charter for the ccTLD auction proceeds? FY said The Chair posted mail today about the drafting team to the list. FY said this could be a topic for the next call.
11. Adjournment
FY entertained a motion to adjourn at 14:37 UTC. JSw moved to adjourn, seconded by TF. The meeting adjourned with no objections.
Last modified on 29/01/2020