ASO AC Teleconference 11 October 2000

Present:

-Hyunje Park (HP)
-Hans Petter Holen (HH)
-Sabine Jaume (SJ)
-Raimundo Beca (RB)
-Takashi Arano (TA)
-German Valdez (GV)
-Wilfried Woeber (WW)
-Cathy Wittbrodt (CW)

-Axel Pawlik (AP)
-Mirjam Kuehne (MK)
-Richard Jimmerson (RJ)
-Ray Pzlak (RP)
-Paul Wilson (PW)
-Anne Lord (AL)
-Gerard Ross (minutes)
-Louis Touton (LT)
-Andrew McLaughlin(AM)

Apologies:

Ant Brooks (AB)

Agenda:

https://aso.icann.org/mailing-lists/aso-policy/0010/msg00000.html
- How to improve Openness and Transparency
- Publishing agenda in advance of our meetings
- Publishing meeting plan for 2001

- GAC presentations
- Open meeting
- Report to ICANN annual meeting

HPH opened meeting at 8.10, noting that there was a quorum of AC members
present.

WW wanted to clarify if we are dealing with newly elected AC members. HPH,
no reason not to invite them to join in. (Cathy Wittbrodt joined). No
changes to agenda.

Circulated and amended. HPH moved minutes, CW seconded. Minutes approved.

a. PW to publish August minutes on ASO web site.
- Done

b. LT to finalise initial draft on 24/8 and send to ARIN.
- Done

c. RIRs to finalise Emerging RIR draft and re-circulate.
- Done

d. RIRs to produce second draft of resource request procedures and
circulate.
- RJ reported that some more information is needed, but it will be done by
Brisbane meeting.

e. HH to finalise and send reply to Mike Roberts.
- Pending

f. PW to post IAB/IESG recommendation on IPv6 address delegation to ASO
policy list.
- Done

g. PW and TA to revise schedule to allow for public AC meeting session.
- Resolved (to be discussed later in this meeting)

h. HH to summarise draft agenda for Brisbane meeting and check the Mike
Roberts letter for other items.
- Work still pending

i. RB to prepare presentation for the Ad Hoc group for Brisbane
- Presentation to be provided at Brisbane

j. PW to publish AC procedures document on web site.
- Done

It was discussed that the previous version had only slight wording changes
to produce the current version. It was explained that the intention is to
make a further final public call for comments before considering the
document again at the December AC meeting.

Actions:
PW to publish emerging RIR draft on the website as final (version 1) and HPH
will call for comments on aso-policy mailing list (comments to be archived
on that list).

At the end of the comment period, the AC should decide whether to return to
RIRs for further work or pass it to ICANN.

This item arises is response to a mail from Mark McFadden. CW spoke to MM,
who thinks that the ASO should have several public meetings each year, and
that some should be at ICANN meetings. He felt there would be a lot of stake
holders at ICANN meetings and it would improve ASO visibility.

This raises the following issues:

- How to improve Openness and Transparency
- Publishing agenda in advance of our meetings
- Publishing meeting plan for 2001

HPH expressed the need to also open up the information flow. Suggestions
were made to publish agendas and get minutes out earlier. WW said that one
problem is that the AC could be criticised for voting in phone meetings on
agendas that have not been made public. He compared this to the RIPE policy
which does not allow decisions on unannounced issues.

On the subject of holding AC or ASO meetings at ICANN meetings, LT explained
that MoU expresses a general intention to co-locate ASO meetings with RIR
meetings rather than ICANN meetings.

LT explained that the process in the MoU is a bottom up one in which the RIR
forum is described as the right place for policy development. He suggested
that
the ICANN forum should review the development of policies developed in the
RIRs' processes, offering the opportunity to address any views or issues
that were not adequately handled in the RIR processes.

RB and SJ discussed the flow chart and suggested that as long as AC follows
that procedure there should be no problem.

In summary, the AC needs to find right way to publicise its intention to
make decisions on particular issues. This should be discussed in Brisbane.
HPH says we should publish Brisbane agenda in advance.

RB says this still doesn't respond to MM in terms of difference between
global and regional policy, so that's why he proposes that the ASO AC
should hold two open meetings a year, one at a RIR meeting as stated by the
MoU, and the other at an ICANN conference. WW still sees the request to host
meetings with ICANN
as a tendency to move towards a top down model. WW says the proposed model
does give people the chance to give input into ICANN.

MK: the flow chart is just a graphical representation of the MoU. PW, RJ,
and LT agree. HPH asks whether a meeting with an ICANN meeting would affect
the bottom up process. Maybe we should invite people with strong opinions to
make presentations and maybe have panel discussion. Go beyond a mere bottom
up & become a catalyst to drive things forward.

SJ: need to use ASO web site to invite people to come & participate. HPH
wants to do outreach to (for instance) people within the ad hoc committee &
discuss things with them - show them we have a clear intention to address
their concerns. WW says going into the process with that intention in mind
makes planning easier. HPH has heard criticism that there are some different
policies across the region & it makes it harder for multinationals to
operate. Discussion of the http 1.1 (name-based web hosting) case.

Summary: as long as we are aiming for an informal gathering, everyone is
fine with having a meeting at the November ICANN meeting.

The following confirmed that they will go to the LA meeting: HPH, TA, CW
(will try), and GV. Discussion of the ICANN agenda followed. PW will check
if it's possible to move GAC session to later in the day. HPH suggests move
it till after lunch.

HPH: we should publish draft agenda (not so ambitious as one set out on
list). WW: better to call for presentation proposals & have a draft agenda
as a fallback option - useful to gauge real interest in these matters.

Discussion of need to put a request on mailing lists for interested parties
to give proposals. WW - yes, phrase it as an answer to the MM comments.

Action:  HPH to do post this on public list (aso-policy).

Review of activities planned or discussed:

-- GAC presentations
-- Open ASO meeting
-- Report to ICANN annual meeting

HPH called for volunteers for report to ICANN annual meeting. Meeting
supposed to happen in LA on the 15th. LT - should be brief reports from each
supporting organisation.

HPH asked for volunteers to prepare report. RB will provide slides used at
recent ARIN meeting.

HPH asked for anyone at GAC meeting to help out.  AP: we offered to present
workings of RIRs and AC. AC to present work so far & joint presentation of
RIRs. Discussion of need to have as many people there as possible. LT:
suggests that questions are likely to be wide ranging and require a lot of
different knowledge to answer them.

Action: set aside time in Brisbane for preparing the presentation.

PW notes that materials for prior circulation due by 18th (to allow
translation). Agreed that whatever material can be gathered in advance will
be sent.

WW: suggested MoU, emerging RIR draft, AC internal procedures - would make a
good briefing kit. Agreed.

MK: also suggested a doc describing registry structure.

LT suggests that if Emerging RIRs doc is to be sent, to include disclaimer
that it's not a final document.

Overview of the draft agenda circulated by HPH.

CW wants to add a discussion of what ASO can & can't do. Probably falls
under the topic of what is global policy. HPH will make an introduction on
that. CW suggests that even if something is global policy we can't discuss
it if no one brings it to us. RP volunteers to prepare something on that.

Regarding MoU, question raised as to whether the AC thinks it's still
appropriate. Noted ICANN board resolution that MoU to be reviewed after a
year.

PW confirms that there is no fixed review date but the MoU does mention that
it should be reviewed as needed. CW says it has a clause in removing people
from AC if not participating - this needs to be filled in with a policy or
process. HPH - this is a pretty concrete discussion to have. WW may be able
to prepare a presentation on it to help lead the discussion. SJ, CW, WW
volunteer to prepare (although CW may not be there).

Ad hoc committee. RB has volunteered to prepare something.

Issue on emerging RIRs. What should AC involvement be? Any volunteers to
prepare? WW would expect next face-to-face meeting to not be another 4-5
months. So question is whether either AfriNIC or LACNIC are likely to
formally apply for recognition within the next half year. GV gave overview
of LACNIC position.

LT suggests that it is appropriate that this be discussed in Brisbane. LT to
prepare a presentation of his view of how the procedure stands. GV to
present LACNIC position of their view of how to proceed.

HPH notes that all major items are now covered. Question now on how much to
be in break out groups and how much should be done all together. LT notes
that ICANN presence can cover three breakouts.

WW suggests revising MoU & addressing ad hoc could go in parallel & not put
too much strain on ICANN. WW has preference for any global policy issue to
be in plenary style. HPH explains that his idea was to have a general
presentation in plenary, breakout, then come back & report. LT suggest that
on the global/local issue, perhaps breakouts not the best way to go.
Discussion that breakout makes sense for some things but maybe not all.
HPH - asks all to write down their ideas on this & send to him or ac-coord.
HPH to summarise & reformulate a suggestion. Send items for smaller groups,
how to break up policy discussion into smaller pieces. HPH to then redraft
agenda.

CW suggests to invite Barbara Roseman (newly elected AC member in ARIN
region) to the meeting as an observer.

PW notes that new AC member in APNIC region will be appointed on the Friday
before the AC meeting.

Agreed that new members should be invited as observers.

Brisbane, followed by 1st Wednesday in November. Proposal from WW to discuss
timing of meeting when in Brisbane. WW suggest minor item for Brisbane
agenda to do meeting planning for next year.

None.

Meeting closed 23.50 UTC

===

Actions:

a. RIRs to produce second draft of resource request procedures and
circulate.

b. HH to finalise and send reply to Mike Roberts.

c. HH to refine draft agenda for Brisbane meeting and check the Mike Roberts
letter for other items.

d. RB to prepare presentation for the Ad Hoc group for Brisbane

e. PW to publish emerging RIR draft on the website as final (version 1)

f. HPH to call for comments on aso-policy mailing list (comments to be
archived on that list).

g. HPH to do post call for proposals for LA meeting presentations on public
list (aso-policy).

h. HPH to include GAC presentation preparation in Brisbane meeting agenda.

i. PW to assemble background ASO material for GAC, including MoU, Emerging
RIRs criteria document, AC procedures diagram.

Brisbane meeting items:

j. HP to introduce issue of what AS can and can't do.

k. SJ, CW and WW to prepare material on MoU review.

l. RB to prepare report on ad hoc committee.

m. LT to prepare presentation on how request for recognition by emerging RIR
will be handled by ICANN.

n. All: to send ideas about structure of meeting to HPH.

o. HPH to formulate suggested structure, and updated agenda.

p. LT to prepare draft document regarding the 24/8 address block

Last modified on 29/01/2020