ASO AC Teleconference 6 February 2013
Members Present
Apologies
|
Observers
Secretariat
|
1. Welcome
LL called the meeting to order at 1209 UTC.
2. Agenda Review
LL read through the draft agenda and noted that the discussion on ICANN Board Seat 10 status (proposed agenda item 5) should move to the end so as to hear the report from the IC about the phone Interviews while allowing observers to drop off the call.
3. Approval of minutes from the 04 Jan 2013 meeting
LL called for a motion to approve the minutes of the previous meeting. FA moved to approve the minutes. TF seconded and there was none opposed. The motion was carried and LL asked the Secretariat to remove “draft” from the published minutes.
4. Review of open action items
130104-01: Secretariat to create a doodle poll to determine if AC members will be able to attend the ASO Face to Face Meeting in Beijing at ICANN46.
LL asked the Secretariat to confirm the status of this action item. EB confirmed that this action item is now closed, with 14 members having participated in the Doodle poll.
130104-02: DO to send out an updated draft of the ICANN Board Selection Documentation Destruction Procedures to the list for further discussion.
DO confirmed that he sent the updated draft to the Secretariat but forgot to copy the ac-coord list, which he said he will do. He mentioned that some feedback was received and incorporated before he resent it to the list. LL mentioned that this action item can be closed and perhaps reopened at a later stage if the matter is still ongoing, and that the AC can start working on the next steps for having documentation destruction procedures that can be reviewed for further consideration.
DO requested this item to be moved to the next level since there appears to be no more feedback. He said if there is no negative feedback, it should be brought up for voting either on the list or during a meeting.
RS joined at 1221UTC
5. Selection of Vice Chairs
LL said he has requested for those interested in being vice chairs to notify him. He mentioned that he asked AB who has already accepted. LL said per the procedure, he needs to select two vice chairs, and that the chair and the two vice chairs need to be from three different regions. NA expressed interest and LL asked NA to confirm if he would like to be a vice chair. NA confirmed. LL then asked the AC to confirm these two candidates as vice chairs for 2013 through a motion.
HG moved the motion to approve AB and NA as vice chairs. RS seconded. There was none opposed. The motion was carried and LL will start to include the new vice chairs in all communication so that they can contribute when needed.
6. Formation of the 2013 PPFT
LL stated that according to the procedures, the PPFT must be formed at the first meeting of the year. He stated that the PPFT (Policy Proposal Facilitator Team) watches global policy proposals, following their evolution around the regions and provides support to the AC as needed. He said the PPFT follows those proposals through to the end until they are passed to the AC for consideration.
LL called for volunteers to the PPFT from each region. The following presented themselves to serve on the PP
AFRINIC: FA
APNIC: TF
ARIN: JS
LACNIC: RP
From RIPE, WW said he is very busy in the year and asked if HP would like to volunteer instead. LL asked the 3 RIPE members to get together and see who is available. WW said they shall report back by e-mail on the ac-coord list.
LL asked for a motion to confirm the 4 volunteers to the PPFT. NA moved the motion. AB seconded and there was no objection. LL said that the PPFT volunteers are now confirmed, and the AC is looking forward to hearing from RIPE members regarding the volunteer from the RIPE region, on the mailing list.
7. Overview of on-going IANA Consultations
LL asked LV from ICANN to lead.
LV stated that ICANN is currently running consultations on an number of IANA issues, and these are all on the IANA website at www.iana.org/reviews
LV said there are 5 consultations going on, first – Customer Service Complaint Resolution Process – for Seeking feedback on how ICANN should resolve customer complaints relating to how IANA functions have been executed – and stated that anyone that is a customer of the IANA functions is a potential user of these processes. LV said he will appreciate if the ASO AC as a group, or individually, can make any comments.
LV stated that the second and third consultations are about Performance Standards for ccTLD and gTLD Delegation and Re-delegation respectively. He said that no sessions have been planned for these consultations at Beijing but if there is demand for a generalized face-to-face consultation, it can be arranged.
LV stated that the fourth consultation is about Performance Standards for Internet Number Resources, for Seeking feedback on appropriate performance standards for the allocation of Internet Number Resources such as IPv4 and IPv6 allocations, primarily to Regional Internet Registries. He stated that the consultations are looking mainly for how IANA is to be measured, and what are IANA’s reasonable targets.
The last consultation concerns a Secure Notification Process, seeking feedback on how ICANN should notify the community relating to service changes, outages, and other important announcements.
LL suggested that LV kicks off the discussions on the ac-coord list as some of these are very relevant to the ASO AC. He also asked LV to push for feedback from Registration Services staff of the RIRs.
LV said he already reached out to CEOs and RS Managers but has not received feedback yet. He said it’s possible they are formulating a unified NRO response
LL asked LV if other than in-addr.arpa for reverse lookups, whether there are any other services that are operationally impacting the Internet if they fail unexpectedly. LV said rDNS management is not a US government contracted service albeit very important and that there are discussions about RPKI development and if ICANN can host a global trust anchor and take this important operational function of rPKI. LV said there would be a series of documents and processes and such actions won’t happen without significant consultation.
LL asked if anyone had questions for LV & BR. There were none.
8. ASO AC Face-to-Face Meeting: Determine Location
LL said there is a need to formalize a decision of when and where to have a face-to-face meeting and move on. He stated that it is still early on ICANN process for assigning rooms and getting scheduled onto the agenda for Beijing. LL asked BR to confirm. BR said ICANN will be accepting room requests beginning next week, and that she communicated with EB about that, as soon as the requirements from the ASO AC have been finalized, they should be sent. EB said they have been sent to BR already. BR said her email was broken and that EB should resend.
LL asked EB to read out results of the doodle poll that was held for determining if ASO AC members will be able to attend the Beijing meeting. EB said according to the results of the poll, 14 members participated, 11 will be able to attend, 2 might not be able to attend and 1 will not be able to attend.
HG asked for those that indicated they will not able to attend, if it was a decision due to timing or financial matters. HP said it was not a money problem on his side but rather a scheduling problem. LL asked to know the AC member that did not participate since it looks like 14 participated. EB indicated it was Alejandro Guzman.
LL called for a motion to have the face-to-face meeting in Beijing. HG moved the motion and WW seconded. There was none opposed and the motion was carried. The ASO AC face to face meeting will be held in Beijing during the April 2013 ICANN meeting.
HG asked LL to propose an agenda for this meeting and share on the list, as well as a request to other stakeholders requesting 20 or 30 more participants to the meeting, so that more contributions come from all constituents. WW said we should instead reserve part of the meeting time for just AC activities, like discussions on procedures for Chair elections and other matters. LL said that in a previous meeting, it was decided that any face-to-face meeting at ICANN must be open to observers all the time.
RS left the call at 1301UTC
HG said the AC needs to use the time in Beijing to reach out to more people and that other business requiring just the AC involvement can be discussed on email. HP also said it is good to attract as many new folk as possible and that the AC needs to get in touch with other groups in ICANN, which is best done during this time although he indicated that 95% of ICANN meeting goers may have other schedules and may not come to an AC meeting.
LL suggested a general meeting in the first part of the morning, then ASO internal business later in the afternoon.
LL left at 1310UTC
LL rejoined at 1314UTC
BR said it is necessary to split the meetings between Tuesday and Wednesday and that Tuesday is the constituency day – where if there are participants in other constituencies, they will have a hard time attending any ASO AC meetings on the same day. LL said LV and BR will need work together along with the secretariat on the detailed agenda and scheduling.
9. ICANN Board Seat 10 Status
All observers left the call at 1633UTC
Minutes from this agenda item have only been availed to ASO AC members.
10. AOB
There was no other business to discuss.
11. Adjournment
WW moved to adjourn the meeting and AB seconded. There were no objections.
LL adjourned the meeting at 1405UTC
Action Items
No action Items were assigned during the meeting.
Last modified on 29/01/2020