- Alan Barrett, AB : AfriNIC
- Jean Robert Hountomey, JRH : AfriNIC
- Kenny Huang, KH : APNIC
- Tomohiro Fujisaki, TF : APNIC
- Naresh Ajwani, NA : APNIC
- Hartmut Glaser, HG : LACNIC
- Francisco Obispo, FO : LACNIC
- Sebastian Bellagamba, SB : LACNIC
- Louis Lee : ARIN (Chair)
- Jason Schiller, JS : ARIN
- Martin Hannigan, MH : ARIN
- Dave Wilson, DW : RIPE
- Fergal Cunningham, FC : RIPE NCC
- Nick Hyrka, NH : RIPE NCC
- Ray Plzak, RP : ICANN
- Raimundo Beca, RB : ICANN
- Olof Nordling, ON : ICANN
- Einar Bohlin, EB : ARIN
- Nate Davies, ND : ARIN
- Einar Bohlin, EB : ARIN
- John Curran, JC : ARIN
- Roque Gagliano, RG : LACNIC
- Filiz Yilmaz, FY : RIPE NCC
- Axel Pawlik, AP : RIPE NCC
- Vincent Ngundi, VN : AfriNIC
- Wilfried Woeber, WW : RIPE
- Agenda review
- Approval of the minutes from the 25 May 2009 face-to-face meeting
- Review of open action items
- ICANN Board Election Process Committee update
- Communications and Procedures Committee update
- New Global Policy Proposal for the Allocation of IPv4 Blocks to Regional Internet Registries
- Return of legacy IPv4 space
- IANA Policy for Allocation of ASNs to RIRs as a Global Policy Proposal
- RIR meeting update – LACNIC XII
The Chair opened the meeting at 13:04 UTC and welcomed attendees. He noted it had been 10 weeks since the last ASO AC meeting.
2. Agenda review
LL went through the agenda and added two items:
a. AC report at Asia Peering Forum
b. ASO nomination to ICANN nominating committee
3. Approval of the minutes from the 25 May 2009 meeting
The Chair said there were no comments on the minutes received on the mailing list.
Suggested motion: Proposed by AB. Seconded by KH. Motion passed.
AB proposed the motion “The ASO AC approves the minutes of the 25 May 2009 meeting as presented to the list by the Secretariat.” The motion was seconded by KH and there were none opposed so the motion carried.
Action item 0809-01: Secretariat to change the status of the minutes of the 25 May 2009 meeting from draft.
4. Review of open action items
The Chair said he would review only those action items that are not part of the agenda elsewhere:
Action: 1211-01: The Chair to send a message to the NRO EC Chair with a list of items pending a response from the EC.
The Chair had no update on this action item.
Action: 0409-01: Secretariat to change the status of the minutes of the 5 March meeting from Draft.
This has been completed.
Action 0609-01: The Secretariat to change the status of the 2 April 2009 meeting from draft.
This has been completed.
Action 0609-02: The Secretariat to change the status of the 22 April 2009 meeting from draft.
This has been completed.
5. ICANN Board Election Process Committee update
The Chair said Committee members identified in the previous meeting were:
Naresh Ajwani, Jason Schiller, Francisco Obispo, Hans Petter Holen. He asked if the Committee was missing a volunteer from the AfriNIC region and AB said that he had volunteered for the committee.
The Chair said there were three more volunteers to participate in this committee:
ND, FY and WW.
FO proposed the motion “I move to accept Nate, Filiz, and Wilfried into the ICANN Board Election Process Committee.” The motion was seconded by JRH, there were none opposed and the motion carried.
The Chair asked the Committee members to provide an update on progress since our last meeting. He asked NA if there had been any movement with the Committee since he presented his thoughts at the previous meeting and NA confirmed there had been no movement.
LL said this should be taken to the list to get things moving.
6. Communications and Procedures Committee update
The Chair said, in case people hadn’t noticed from one of the list messages he sent, the AC Operating Procedure document is posted on the ASO website. He said the PDF file is linked from the “Documents and Archive” webpage as well as the “About the ASO” webpage. The document can be retrieved from:
The Chair asked the Committee members to provide an update on progress since the last ASO AC meeting.
Related open action items:
Action: 0209-04: WW to work on draft charter for the Communications and Procedures Committee and present it to the ASO AC.
There was no update on this action item.
Action: 0409-02: The Communications and Procedures Committee to investigate providing a way for external organisations to easily link to the ASO website.
There was no update on this action item.
FC said the Secretariat would be able to provide a wiki and new version of the public website to be reviewed in the following week. JS asked if this was the public website and FC confirmed that it was.
The Chair said it was important to note that it was an ASO website and not an ASO AC website.
7. New Global Policy Proposal for the Allocation of IPv4 Blocks to Regional Internet Registries
The Chair said ON had updated the background report on 11 June 2009:
ON said the final call was closed in LACNIC and closing. He said he hadn’t posted an update on this but he will soon.
The Chair said the status in each region as of 11 June was as follows:
- AfriNIC – final call closed
- APNIC – adopted
- ARIN – in discussion
- LACNIC – final call closed
- RIPE NCC – in discussion (DW said there has been a RIPE Meeting since the update was posted then so he will check his notes and get back but on the ac-coord list. He said his understanding was that it was still in discussion.).
FY said there was a change proposed at the ARIN Meeting and RIPE was fine with that change. She said RIPE wants to see if consensus is reached on wording in ARIN and will then see if same version can be placed in RIPE. JS asked FY if she was saying that will see what happens in ARIN adopts and if it is what is expected then RIPE will go with that version. FY confirmed this was the case.
RG said the final call ended in LACNIC on 3 August and the next step there would be review by the Board of LACNIC. ON said he would take note of these details.
The Chair said he would like to ask the PPFT members to provide any additional updates on this GPP.
8. Return of legacy IPv4 space
The Chair said there was a lively discussion on this topic at the last meeting 10 weeks ago and since then there has been no additional discussion on the mailing list. He invited all AC members and observers, especially those who were unable to participate previously, to review the minutes and provide additional comments.
JS asked if the group could take care of other business before any discussion on this matter. The Chair said this was a good idea.
9. IANA Policy for Allocation of ASNs to RIRs as a Global Policy Proposal
The Chair said he was made aware of a new policy proposal that the ASO AC must review. He gave the following summary of the proposal:
According to the current global policy, IANA will cease to make any distinction between 16 bit and 32-bit only ASN blocks by 31 December 2009, when making allocations to RIRs. This proposal is to extend this date by one year, to 31 December 2010.
We are to examine the proposal to determine if it meets the definition of a global policy. Section 6.4.1 of our operational procedure provides the specific language regarding our duties in this matter:
- AfriNIC: submitted?
- APNIC: http://www.apnic.net/policy/proposals/prop-074
- ARIN: http://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/2009-June/014661.html
- LACNIC: http://mail.lacnic.net/pipermail/politicas/2009-July/012654.html
- RIPE: http://www.ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/2009-07.html
The Chair said once the ASO AC has determined the policy proposal to be a global policy proposal, it should form a PPFT to track the GPP through the RIR’s PDPs and initiate processing the GPP if/when the NRO EC forwards it after a common text is produced.
The Chair said there was a suggestion that it will be submitted in the AfriNIC policy process soon.
FY said she contacted AfriNIC staff and they talked about this. She said news should be coming in the next few days but not officially yet.
The Chair asked if this policy met the definition of a global policy.
There was a motion proposed by DW to accept the policy “IANA Policy for Allocation of ASNs to RIRs as a Global Policy Proposal” as a global policy proposal. JRH seconded the motion.
There was a roll call vote on the motion. There were 12 members of the ASO AC in favour and none opposed so the Chair declared the motion carried. He confirmed this was now a global policy proposal.
The Chair said the ASO AC now needed volunteers, one from each region, to make a PPFT and track the proposal. The following people volunteered:
MH for ARIN, DW for RIPE, FO for LACNIC, KH for APNIC and AB for AfriNIC. JS also volunteered for the ARIN region and MH said he could work with JS to track the policy proposal in the ARIN region.
The relevant section on the make-up of the PPFT from the ASO AC operating procedures is:
“6.3 Global Policy Proposal Facilitators
At the beginning of each term the Address Council shall organize at least one (1) Policy Proposal Facilitator Team (PPFT) consisting of one council member from each of the regions. During the course of the year additional teams may be formed at the discretion of the council. The members of the PPFT will be responsible for the actions described in the procedures below. ”
10. RIR meeting update – LACNIC XII
The Chair invited the AC members from the LACNIC region to email the meeting report and provide highlights of the report during the teleconference. SB emailed an update to the list and FO gave an overview.
The list of policies that reached consensus and that SB sent to the ac-coord list are as follows:
- LAC-2009-01 Global Policy for the allocation of IPv4 Blocks to Regional Internet Registries
- LAC-2009-02 IPv6 Allocations to ISPs or LIR with previous IPv4 allocations
- LAC-2009-03 ASPLAIN notation for 32-bit ASNs
- LAC-2009-05 Allocation of 16-bit only ASNs
- LAC-2009-06 Resource Recovery
- LAC-2009-07 Modification of the minimum initial IPv4 allocation size for ISPs to a /22
FO said that LACNIC also had a regional meeting in Trinidad and Tobago. FO said he would send the link for that meeting to the mailing list. He explained that this meeting was exclusively for Caribbean people. RG said there were around 70 attendees and there were no major comments or issues raised there.
The Chair thanked FO, SB and RG for the report.
The Chair asked if there was any other business before he discussed his two new points.
ON wished to add a comment on agenda point 9 that he will propose to the ICANN Board that it should track the policy now that it has been recognised as a global policy by the ASO AC. The Chair said SB reported that it was introduced to LACNIC PDP and accepted by a policy chair following an expedite process. The Chair said he would send that message to ON (The Chair noted on the ac-coord list after the meeting that this was done via unicast email).
The Chair said he had been invited to provide an update on the activities of the ASO AC and developments at the ICANN level (Ray’s appointment, new CEO, IDNs, new gTLDs) during the Asia Peering Forum that takes place from 31 August to 2 September in Bangkok. He said the AC part won’t be different from the AC reports given at the RIR public meetings. He said he’d also like to provide a brief report on the APNIC 28 Meeting that will take place the week before, hopefully with the help of the APNIC ASO AC members to compile the report. He said there would not be too much work involved but it would be good to have someone make sure he has everything correct.
He asked the ASO AC to grant him permission to present these reports if the ASO AC felt it was necessary to explicitly grant it.
MH asked if he would present as Chair of the ASO AC, in which case MH said it should be vetted by the ASO AC. He added that if LL wanted to present as an individual he could do as he wished.
The Chair said he intended to present as Chair of the ASO AC.
MH asked if they would be the views of the ASO AC that would be presented or the views of a member of the ASO AC.
The Chair said he could do either as it would be presented in public.
MH said if the Chair was speaking for the ASO AC then the rest of the ASO AC should see it.
JC asked what the content of the presentation would be and the Chair said it would be the activities of the ASO AC.
JC said if it was a statement of activities to date there was no reason not to present as head of the ASO AC but the Chair should send it to the group.
The Chair said there would be no opinions presented.
JC said it would lend the presentation more validity to present as head of the ASO AC.
DW said he wouldn’t worry personally and he said some of the ASO AC have presented to their regions and circulated to the full ASO AC often after the event. He said he would appreciate seeing it before but he said he didn’t want to tie the Chair’s hands if he needed approval too close to the event.
The Chair suggested that the ASO AC give tentative permission to him to present as the head of the ASO AC pending the full ASO AC seeing the presentation and there not being any objections.
DW said he did not like the idea the ASO AC chair needing a motion to carry out something like this.
MH said the Chair should send it top the group and JS said he should note during the presentation whether there was consensus in the full ASO AC and what the objections were if any.
The Chair he would proceed as the ASO AC suggests.
Action item 0809-02: The Chair to send his proposed presentation to the Asia Peering Forum to the ASO AC for its comments.
The Chair said he wished to discuss the ASO AC nomination to the ICANN Nominating Committee.
The Chair asked HG if he was on is last term on the ICANN Nominations Committee and HG confirmed this was the case because he needed to step aside for two years to comply with ICANN bylaws. He said there was now an open place for a new candidate that needed to be appointed by the next ICANN Meeting in Seoul at the end of October. He said the ASO AC needed to go ahead with an election process.
HG said his understanding was that the Nominations Committee has no chair at the moment. HG gave an overview of the timeline and said he thought that the ICANN Board wanted all the constituencies to make their appointment to the Nominations Committee as soon as possible so the could begin their work in Seoul.
The Chair said he would like to open nominations now for the next ASO AC appointment to the ICANN Nominations Committee and have a vote at next teleconference at the start of September. HG said this should work perfectly.
HG said he did not know if Seoul would be working meeting of the new Nominations Committee. He said if it were informal then no travel would be paid. He said Nairobi 2010 would be the first official face-to-face meeting with ICANN and ICANN would pay. The Chair asked ON to check this out and ON agreed to come back to the mailing list with an answer.
The Chair opened the nominating period for the ICANN Nominations Committee and said people should contact HG is they had any questions. The Chair said the ASO AC could only ask the candidate to serve for one year but the expectation is that they would serve for two years.
HG gave the likely working time of the candidate as 12-15 teleconferences and two face-to-face meetings for final appointment of candidates. He said this amounted to approximately 40 hours of teleconferencing and then three days at the end of ICANN meetings.
The Chair asked the Secretariat to send to the mailing list announcing the opening of the nomination period. JS also asked that the rules regarding the election procedures be sent to the list. The Chair said he drafted procedures last year and JS asked that the Chair resend that to the list. JS said these rules should then be validated as part of the official procedures. There were no other comments.
Action item 0809-03: The Secretariat to send an announcement to the mailing list opening the nomination period for appointment to the ICANN Nominations Committee and the period to close when the next meeting begins.
Action item 0809-04: The Chair to send the draft procedures regarding the ICANN Nominations Committee election process to the mailing list.
MH left the call. [15:55 UTC]
The Chair asked people to look at the minutes regarding the return of IPv4 legacy space and come back to the mailing list if they had anything further to add.
DW made a motion to adjourn and JRH seconded. There were none opposed and the motion carried. The meeting adjourned at 13:59 UTC.