ASO AC Teleconference 2 June 2011

ASO AC Attendees:


Alan Barrett, AB, Vice Chair



Naresh Ajwani, NA, Vice Chair
Tomohiro Fujisaki, TF
Andy Linton, AL


Jason Schiller, JS
Louie Lee, LL, Chair


Sebastián Bellagamba, SB
Hartmut Glaser, HG
Francisco Obispo, FO


Dave Wilson – DW


Therese Colosi (ARIN)



Einar Bohlin, EB
Nate Davis, ND
Susan Hamlin, SH
Leslie Nobile, LN


Elise Gerich, EG
Olof Nordling, ND
Ray Plzak, RP


Fiona Asonga, Ron da Silva


Jean Robert Hountomey, Hans Petter Holen, Wilfried Woeber

1. Welcome

The Chair called the meeting to order at 12:10 p.m. EDT (16:10 UTC). The presence of quorum was noted.

2. Agenda Review

The Chair reviewed the agenda. The Chair asked for comments. There were no comments.

3. Approval of the Minutes

It was moved by SB, and seconded by TF, that:

“The ASO AC approves the Minutes of May 12, 2011, as written.”

The motion carried with no objections.

NEW ACTION 0602-01: SECRETARIAT: Remove ‘Draft” from May 12, 2011 ASO AC Minutes.

4. Open Action Item Review.

0622-02: ASO AC WiKi.  WW to work with PR and the RIPE NCC on the Wiki. If WW needs more help, he can turn to the Communications Committee. At the last meeting, the Chair asked WW to post an update to the list. OPEN.

No update at this time. The Chair noted he would request an update via email to the ASO AC List.

0512-01: SECRETARIAT: Remove “Draft” from April Minutes. OPEN.

This item has been completed. The Chair requested this item be closed.

0407-02:  SECRETARIAT: Updates to Global Proposals Table on the ASO AC Website. The Chair requested any comments to be sent via e-mail to the Secretariat so that updates to the table on the website can be implemented. The Chair noted that this was mostly complete, but decided to keep this open at this time in case there were additional comments. OPEN.

The Chair noted in April there were suggestions, but there were none in May. He requested this item be closed.  He noted that if there are any new suggestions for improvement, they should be sent to the ASO AC’s list.

5. Status of GPP-IPv4-2010: Global Policy For IPv4 Allocations by the IANA Post Exhaustion.


The Chair stated he had not seen any recent activity and asked for the PPFT’s to confirm. FO stated this policy proposal was not on the agenda at the LACNIC Public Policy Meeting. DW stated it was not on RIPE’s agenda either. AL stated the policy was ‘dead’ in the APNIC region.

JS stated that it was pending ratification from the ICANN Board in the ARIN region. The ARIN Board approved moving it forward. However, not all 5 regions have agreed on the text, so the ICANN Board cannot ratify it.

RP stated that, at this point, the Number Resource Organization (NRO) needed to take the action to send it to the ICANN Board. EG pointed out that there is no procedure in the Policy Development Process (PDP) for this kind of situation.

The Chair agreed with these comments and stated it should be a topic for discussion on the next ASO AC meeting agenda. RP stated a note should be crafted to the affect that the policy proposal is awaiting NRO action; and that the ASO AC cannot act on it.  He suggested changing the public facing document with regard to the status of the policy proposal and ICANN’s role in it.

The Chair agreed. AL stated it was pointless to forward any policy to the ICANN Board that they cannot consider due to lack of consensus in all five regions – it is not a ‘global policy’ at all.

DW stated that the description of the status of the policy proposal in the ARIN region is technically accurate. The only action left that can possibly move it to adoption is ratification by the ICANN board – although it is clear that this will not happen. He suggested crafting some clarifying wording that would not pin this outcome on the ICANN Board. RP again suggested that there be a note posted with the policy proposal text explaining the true status of the policy.

The Chair stated that on the ICANN website, it is noted as abandoned.

EG reiterated that a consistent message on status of this policy proposal is required.  JS stated that it is clear that the status of this policy proposal is that it is not going to gain global status. It has been abandoned in APNIC, and we should note it. He asked what the official PDP was with regard to how policy proposal clean up occurs, or how policy proposals get abandoned.

RP suggested that the ASO AC could send a message to all of the RIRs stating that from a global perspective it is not going forward, and each region could then remove it from their respective policy proposal queues.  In the ARIN region, this would trigger the ARIN Board to abandon the proposal.

The Chair pondered that if one region changes their mind, or all of them change their minds, and they wanted to forward it – the one region that the policy proposal passed in, would not need to revisit the text.  JS replied, for example, that the 2009 GPP passed in all 5 regions, and ARIN had a revised version. If 2009 is not abandoned, ARIN could revisit the original text and pass it and then, all 5 regions would gain consensus with the same text. But he wondered if that can happen and can it actually move forward – or would the RIRs need to start over from the beginning? These were the types of issues that the Chair was suggesting.

RP stated the aging process of policy proposals calls for reconsideration to ensure that they do not become ‘stale’ due to circumstances that may have changed.

AL pointed out that APNIC passed the 3rd policy proposal, which makes 2009, the 1st policy proposal on the matter, abandoned due to it being superseded.

RP suggested that 1 person from each RIR volunteer to form a group to look at the PDP and work on addressing the issue. The Chair agreed and called for volunteers to form a group. SB, AL, AB, DW, JS volunteered to do so.

6. Status of GPP-IPv4-2011: Global Policy for Post Exhaustion IPv4 Allocation Mechanisms by the IANA.


The Chair stated that ON’s updated background report was sent for review. He asked for any new activities or other changes.  ON stated that the material change was added and he would add that LACNIC has moved it to last call. He stated it was adopted in APNIC, and it is under discussion in AfriNIC, ARIN and RIPE.  The Chair stated there is a link to the ASO website in ON’s report.

DW mentioned that he was not sure if it would be discussed at the next RIPE meeting or not because it could be adopted before then. ON stated that, although it may not be required for an RIR’s next Public Policy Meeting, there will be reports from the other RIRs and that will have some relevance. He reminded the AC that any further edits/comments are welcome before Wednesday June 8.

7. ICANN Review Teams: Related Activities Update. Chair to lead.

A) Security Stability Resiliency Review Team (SSR RT) Update.  HG stated they are working on a paper and will have many meetings in Singapore during the ICANN meeting.  There are three teams with specific missions and most of the work is paperwork – going through ICANN and other documents. The RT will provide an update at the ICANN meeting in Singapore.

ON confirmed that the SSR RT meeting will be held on Thursday, during the ICANN meeting, and the WHOIS RT meeting will be held on Wednesday.

B) WHOIS Review Team (WHOIS RT) Update.  There was no update at this time, as WW was not available. Chair will request an update via email to the ASO AC list.

8. Status of 2011 ICANN NomCom.

The Chair asked for an update to be sent to the list.

9. Status of ASO Review.

The Chair stated that the Chair of the NRO Executive Council had sent an e-mail to him yesterday evening, stating that the NRO has accepted a proposal from IETMS International to perform the ASO Review. The NRO is finalizing the formalities, and expects work to begin as soon as possible.  The Chair stated he then requested if the ASO AC would be asked to participate. The Chair is awaiting the NRO EC’s reply.

10. Procedure for Selection of Individuals to the ICANN Board of Directors.

At the last meeting, the Chair asked the ASO AC to review the revised text sent by the Secretariat.  The Chair stated that the Secretariat did send the revised text, which was from the ASO AC’s face to face meeting. Once the ASO AC members reply, ND will incorporate the comments and send it back to the ASO AC’s list.

11. ASO AC Workshop in Singapore.

  • ASO AC Volunteers. The Chair, HPH, AL, AB, and FO (who agreed to participate remotely if that is possible).
  • Workshop Schedule. The Chair confirmed that the Workshop is scheduled for Wednesday afternoon, (22 June from 13:00 to 15:00 hours).

RP stated that the ICANN Board has a workshop that begins at 14:00. He spoke with Diane Schoeder at ICANN and proposed that the Board, ASO AC, ASO and RIR staff have lunch from 12 to 13:00. At 13:00 the meeting will start and the ICANN Board can participate until their own workshop at 14:00.  He stated that once Diane clears this with the Chair of the Board, a memo will be sent to the ASO AC.

He further suggested that discussion points be provided to the Board during the lunch, or a presentation, with regard to the 1st hour of the ASO AC workshop.

The Chair thanked RP and agreed with the ideas.  The Chair stated that the presentation for the ASO AC workshop is 90 minutes with a question/answer period. If the Board can attend the 1st hour, it will be a substantial portion of the ASO AC workshop. There is a great interest in the status of IPv4 and the ASO AC has a simple presentation on global policy status. RP also suggested presenting the status of actions in the RIRs with regard to IPv4 and any legal matters. He stated that Diane would need to be provided with a date for the luncheon, and the names of the attendees of the ASO AC, ASO and RIR staff, and the ICANN Board. The Chair agreed. RP stated he would let Diane know of this discussion.

JS asked if prior to the meeting, items be sent to the ICANN Board to help determine what they would like discussed at the luncheon? RP agreed and stated ON can help coordinate this effort. AL stated it would also help him to craft APNIC information.

NEW ACTION 0602-02: SECRETARIAT/CHAIR: ASO AC/ICANN Board Lunch. The Chair tasked the Secretariat to contact the ASO to see who can attend. The Chair stated he would contact ASO AC members.

RP stated that the Board is interested in what is contentious, etc. EG added they are interested in items that may be coming their way in the future. RP reiterated that a handout at the luncheon would be helpful.

The Chair stated that EB had sent him items regarding the ASO AC workshop including revising the regional slides to five slides with the most important information shown for relevancy to the community.

12. Any Other Business.

The Chair called for any other business.

  • The Chair stated that Leo Vegoda had emailed him information on a session to be held during the ICANN meeting in Singapore, entitled “The need for IPv6 deployment in the domain business”. This will be presented on Thursday morning. As the title implies, it is focused on explaining the need for IPv6 deployment to people in the domain industry, particularly domain registrars. Registrars are on the critical path for IPv6 deployments in some organizations, as they don’t support IPv6 glue registration.

The Chair asked the ASO AC to send the Chair any thoughts on they may have on this item.

  • The Chair mentioned that the Supporting Organization and Advisory Council Chairs are meeting as well, in Singapore and a dinner.  He stated that the invitation should be extended to the Vice Chairs and Co-Chairs and to request names.
  • JS asked about World IPv6 Day with regard to any role for the ASO AC? The Chair stated that the ASO AC does not have an official role. However, individuals being subject matter experts in the numbering world can participate. He stated that people will ask about it; but, reiterated that as the ASO AC, we do not have an official role. He noted that ARIN is posting about it, but was not sure about other RIRs. SB stated that LACNIC has reached out to local stakeholders and has regional events planned for World IPv6 Day – more information can be found at: SB felt there can be a lot done to promote it and was very supportive of it.

HG left at this time, 12:58 pm EDT (16:58 UTC).

The Chair stated that if anyone from the ASO AC wanted to speak on the subject at the workshop, it would be helpful. The Chair stated others from ISOC will be in Singapore and can possibly do it and that SB can point them to the Chair. The Chair asked if SB would check his schedule, however, to see if he could be available for a few minutes during the meeting. SB stated he would do so.

13. Adjournment.

The Chair entertained a motion to adjourn at 1:00 p.m. EDT (17:00 UTC). SB moved to adjourn, and FO seconded this. The meeting was adjourned with no objections.

Last modified on 29/01/2020