ASO AC Teleconference
SPECIAL MEETING
Wednesday, 8 February 2017
Teleconference
MINUTES

 

Attendees

AFRINIC
Fiona Asonga, FA
Douglas Onyango, DO
Omo Oaiya OO

APNIC
Tomohiro Fujisaki, TF
Brajesh Jain, BJ

ARIN
Louie Lee, LL (Vice-Chair)
Kevin Blumberg, KB
Jason Schiller, JS

LACNIC
Jorge Villa, JV
Hartmut Glaser HG
Ricardo Patara RP (Vice-Chair)

RIPE NCC
Filiz Yilmaz, FY (Chair)
Nurani Nimpuno NN

Secretariat
German Valdez, GV (Executive Secretary)
Bhadrika Magan, Scribe

Observers
APNIC
Adam Gosling, AG
ARIN
John Curran, JC
Nate Davis, ND
Sean Hopkins, SH
LACNIC
Gianina Pensky, GP
ICANN
Ron Da Silva, RDS
Carlos Reyes, CR
MAEMURA, Akinori, AM

Apologies
Wilfried Woeber, WW
Aftab Siddiqui, AS

Agenda

0. Welcome
1. Agenda Review
2. Review of Open Action Items
3. Approval of Minutes
a) January 2017
4. ICANN CCWG Report
5. ICANN 58 ASO AC Agenda
6. ASO Work Plan 2017
7. ASO 2016 Work Plan Review
8. ASO AC 2017 Meeting Calendar
9. Editorial rewrites to Global policy
10. Any Other Business
11. Adjournment

Open actions

Action Item 20160803-05: JS and GV to work on conducting a ‘mock election’ with all the AC in participation.
Action Item 20160630-06: GV and Secretariat to develop a comprehensive ASO slide template for future public session use.
Action Item 20160630-04: Chair to recommend to the NRO EC that Work Stream 2’s work be completed before ATRT3 begins, and share the EC’s response with the ASO AC.
Action Item 20161012-06: FY to Prepare Discussion Points on Grey Areas of Responsibilities between the ASO AC and the NRO EC.
Action Item 20161012-05: FA and JV to provide report to ASO AC on the new procedures of Accountability Roles.
Action Item 20161212-09: Chair to work with RP on the ASO 2017 Work Plan.
Action Item 20161212-08: RP to review the 2016 Work Plan.
Action Item 20161212-11: Secretariat to create a doodle poll for the first Wed of every month and provide two options – the current hour or an hour earlier. The Chair noted that if the hour earlier works out well for the Secretariat and other, that might be acceptable.
Action Item 20161212-12: Secretariat to check that AC meetings don’t conflict with RIR meetings when scheduling ASO AC meetings.
Action Item 20161212-14: KB and BJ to participate in group to create and vet document. KB will follow up on the email list for other volunteers.
Action Item 20170111-01: GV to remove draft status from December minutes
Action Item 20170111-02: GV to draft news announcement of change of Chair and LL’s contribution.
Action Item 20170111-03: AC members to comment on 2016 work plan by 25 January.
Action Item 20170111-04: FY will summarize the discussion about a closed F2F meeting and a public meeting and start a thread on the mailing list.
Action Item 20170111-05: AC members to consider proposed meeting calendar sent by GV and come back with comments by 25 Jan.
Action Item 20170111-06: BJ to send the suggestion about a second F2F meeting to the list.

Minutes

0. Welcome

After confirming quorum, FY welcomed the attendees to the call.

1. Agenda Review

JS suggested to switch the CCWG report to the end of the agenda if there is time.

2. Review of Open Action Items

Action Item 20160803-05: JS and GV to work on conducting a ‘mock election’ with all the AC in participation.
– GV noted this action is in process. GV needs to prepare the mock election based on the information received from JS. This has been sent to the NRO EC for approval and are awaiting a response.
– GV will send through more information regarding this action to the list.
– Action OPEN.
Action Item 20160630-06: GV and Secretariat to develop a comprehensive ASO slide template for future public session use.
– GV is waiting on some information from the CCG and should have this information by ICANN 58.
– Action OPEN
Action Item 20160630-04: Chair to recommend to the NRO EC that Work Stream 2’s work be completed before ATRT3 begins, and share the EC’s response with the ASO AC.
– LL will need to work with JC on this.
– LL clarified if this was meant to roll this into the work plan.
– FY requested to be looped into this discussion. GV suggested taking this offline.
– Action OPEN
Action Item 20161012-06: FY to Prepare Discussion Points on Grey Areas of Responsibilities between the ASO AC and the NRO EC.
– FY is attending APRICOT 2017 and is hoping the NRO EC there to discuss this further.
– Action OPEN
Action Item: 20161012-05: FA and JV to provide report to ASO AC on the new procedures of Accountability Roles.
– JV sent through a document to the list last week. There is a pending response from the NRO EC. JC noted that this will be on the agenda at the next NRO EC meeting.
– Action OPEN.
Action Item 20161212-09: Chair (LL) to work with RP on the ASO 2017 Work Plan.
– With LL
– Action OPEN
Action Item 20161212-08: RP to review the 2016 Work Plan.
– RP has completed this and sent it to the mailing list. RP noted that he couldn’t find the names of the PPFT team for 2016.
– DO noted that FA, WW, were in the team. FY noted that there was a team, but there was no global policies.
– RP will update the names to the PPFT team and will send the update to the list.
– Action CLOSED.
Action Item: 20161212-11: Secretariat to create a doodle poll for the first Wed of every month and provide two options – the current hour or an hour earlier. The Chair noted that if the hour earlier works out well for the Secretariat and others, that might be acceptable.
– This is done.
– Action CLOSED.
Action Item: 20161212-12: Secretariat to check that AC meetings don’t conflict with RIR meetings when scheduling ASO AC meetings.
– The second version has been sent to the list. GV considered all the input. GV hasn’t received an negative feedback.
– Action CLOSED.
Action Item 20161212-14: KB and BJ to participate in group to create and vet document. KB will follow up on the email list for other volunteers.
– KB is compiling document. He intends to send a draft to the list by 25 Feb.
– Action OPEN.
Action Item 20170111-01: GV to remove draft status from December minutes
– Done.
– Action CLOSED.
Action Item 20170111-02: GV to draft news announcement of change of Chair and LL’s contribution.
– Done.
– Action CLOSED.
Action Item 20170111-03: AC members to comment on 2016 work plan by 25 January.
– Done.
– Action CLOSED.
Action Item 20170111-04: FY will summarize the discussion about a closed F2F meeting and a public meeting and start a thread on the mailing list.
– Done.
– Action CLOSED.
Action Item 20170111-05: AC members to consider proposed meeting calendar sent by GV and come back with comments by 25 Jan.
– Done.
– Action CLOSED.
Action Item 20170111-06: BJ to send the suggestion about a second F2F meeting to the list.
– BJ is working on this and will send this to the list by 25 Feb.
– JS stated that there should be a discussion on another F2F meeting at ICANN 58.
– BJ clarified that this is for the accountability review.
– Action OPEN.

3. Approval of Minutes

a) January 2017

TF proposed motion to approve minutes after some minor changes which GV will do. This was seconded by RP. Motion carried and minutes approved.

4. ICANN CCWG Report

This report was pushed down the agenda to discuss if there is time.

5. ICANN 58 ASO AC Agenda

Regarding the proposed joint open session with GAC members, FY contacted the GAC Chair to have the joint session. But FY has still not heard from the Chair, so at this point there is no confirmation of having a shared session with the GAC. CR also has no update on this. RS offered to reach out to the Chair as well. HG suggested sending an email to Olaf, who may be able to help. LL also offered to reach out to one of the GAC’s vice-chairs to follow up.
FY asked if there is no joint session with GAC, do the AC still want to have a public session?
RP suggested that the AC should have something if possible. NN agreed with RP. FY suggested having a plan B in case given there is already have a slot secured.
GV noted the ASO review will start soon by ITEMS. ICANN 58 might be a good opportunity to run some interviews there with the ITEMS team members, and GV will be in contact with FY for interview times.
KB asked if there was on overall timeline regarding the review. GV noted that the timeline is in the CFP on the NRO website, available here: https://www.nro.net/request-for-proposals-for-consulting-services-independent-review-of-the-icann-address-supporting-organisation/

6. ASO Work Plan 2017

LL still has to send this out to the list. He hopes to send it out this next week. FY asked if there was a deadline for the work plan to be concluded. GV needs to check the procedures, but thinks there should be a specific deadline. FY suggested a volunteer to help LL with this. DO expressed his willingness to volunteer. FY suggested a specific deadline. This was supported by JC in a chat comment.
NEW ACTION ITEM 20170208-01: LL and DO ASO work plan 2017 to be sent to mailing list within one week of today.

7. ASO 2016 Work Plan Review

This was discussed in the open actions review .

8. ASO AC 2017 Meeting Calendar

GV went through the suggested meeting times (considering the clashing other meetings). NN and LL noted that NANOG 69 is currently on and there will be no clash with 8 Mar. FY noted that the AC has the option to cancel this or have this as a prep meeting for ICANN 58. KB supported this suggestion. NN, TF and BJ also expressed their support.
FY also reiterated that representatives from AFRINIC should make these calls and questioned whether there case there was an issue with the time. DO and OM stated that this time was fine.
NEW ACTION ITEM 20170208-02: GV to set meeting for march 8 to discuss preparations for ICANN 58.

9. Editorial rewrites to Global Policy

JS noted the ARIN AC’s ability to edit policies within specific guidelines (changing text to make it clearer etc, but not changing the intent or the implementation of the policy). The ARIN have embarked on checking every policy to determine where there is a reference to IP addresses, whether this relates to IPv4 or IPv6. There are a number of instances where they want to change IP address to IPv4 address. One of the affected policies is a global policy – the distribution of IPv4 addresses from IANA to the RIRs. In JS opinion, the recovered pool pertains to IPv4 addresses only, and the reference to IP address in the policy is clearly a reference to an IPv4 address. He doesn’t believe a change of IP address to IPv4 address will change the intent or implementation of the policy.
JS asked that where this affects global policy, and if the ARIN Board approves the change and if they sends this to the NRO EC as a global policy change and if the NRO EC considers the ARIN text as unified text to the pre-existing (already ratified) global policy proposal, and if the NRO EC forwards that change to the ASO AC, would the ASO AC consider the PDP has been followed and consider whether theif the rewrite substantially changed the policy or not?
FY understood that the PDP does allow wording differences; it allows different text as long as the meaning is the same and the intention is agreed by the ASO AC even if the wording has changed.
JS noted that if the four RIRs passed the policy as written and ARIN had a slight change, then NRO EC would have to choose one set of language and send it to the ASO AC for review, and we would have to decide to send it up to the ICANN Board for ratification. The issue here is that the ARIN region will be changing the global policy after the fact. JS understands that any change to an approved global policy can only be changed through a global policy, so he doesn’t think that ARIN can change only their version of the global policy and have it different from the other regions.
FY thinks it may be an editorial change as described.
JC stated that if there is a global policy change, then is must go through the global PDP; however, the global PDP isn’t clear on the status of an editorial change. He asked, how the AC accommodates a non-substantial, editorial change? JC doesn’t believe a separate process is provided for. Would an editorial change need to go through a global PDP? This leads to the question, that if the global PDP only applies, is it then worth making an editorial change to global policy, because of the heavy lifting?
DO commented on the cost-benefit for one region to make editorial changes, especially if another region doesn’t believe them to be only editorial. There could be a lack of consensus by the time it gets to the ASO AC. DO echoed JC’s concerns of the lack of process for such a change.
KB questioned whether other regions would consider the change editorial. KB also questioned whether it is worth going through the process.
JS noted that if there are minor differences in global policies from the RIRs – for example, if there are editorial changes, the ASO AC does have the discretion to make a decision if the unified text represents what was accepted in each of the regions.
In answer to KB’s question, JC confirmed that any editorial change to ARIN policy is open for public comment for 30 days; followed by concurrence of the ARIN AC board.
FY suggests adding this to the agenda for ICANN 58, but believes this still has to be analysed at the NRO EC level first by the relevant RIR policy analysts; and would like a recommendation from the EC to evaluate this before 8 March.
JS notes there are many ’what ifs’ here, for example: What if the ARIN AC passes this as a global policy change; how would the NRO EC compare the change? Would they compare the ARIN change to the existing proposal text and then would this then be passed to the AC to consider?
FY commented on the second point, and suggested this be put to the NRO EC as to how they would respond to that.
JC stated that at this time, he sees no way to make an editorial change to global policy other than following the global PDP. JC noted that the global PDP is an attachment to an agreement between the RIRS and ICANN. He stated that it is inappropriate for the RIRs not to follow it even if it is a trivial change. Unless there is a strong argument that precludes the AC using this mechanism, the AC would have to follow the current process.
JC will discuss this with the NRO EC, but doesn’t see a way around this.
NEW ACTION ITEM 20170208-03: JC and NRO EC to review the issues of an editorial change to a global policy and whether such a change is within the scope of the global PDP.
AM stated that in his understanding, that before ratifying a global policy, the proposal text must be identical across the regions. If there are discussions on improvements to the global policy process, it must involve the AC, the NRO EC and the ICANN board.
NN agreed with JC. There is no other specific process for making editorial changes. So, any change would have to go through the same process.

10. Any Other Business

RS noted the NRALO is doing a general assembly concurrent with the ARIN meeting in April. He suggested that if the GAC meeting is not occurring, then perhaps the AC could reach out to the ‘at large’ community about a similar intersection of meetings at other RIR meetings. He suggested this could be a topic for discussion at the F2F at ICANN 58.
RS noted that the NRALO board met recently, and he wanted to share about the format of the meeting, which was divided into different workstreams that proved to be very effective. This could be a possible format for the ASO AC F2F meeting.
NN reiterated the comment made earlier by the Chair; the AC members must ensure they respond to the meeting invitation with confirmation (or not) of their participation to establish quorum and not waste the time of the other participants.
AM suggested that those AC members who are attending APRICOT 2017 should connect and meet up with the attending ICANN board meeting.
FY noted that GV is coordinating an informal meeting with the AC members and ICANN board.
On that point, KB noted that if other AC members are attending a conference, to share this with the list, in case a meeting can be arranged.

11. Adjournment

NN motioned to adjourn with TF seconding. Meeting adjourned at 22:30 (UTC +10).