ASO AC Attendees:
Fiona Asonga, FA
Alan Barrett, AB
Jean Robert Hountomey, JRH
Naresh Ajwani, NA
Tomohiro Fujisaki, TF
Kenny Huang, KH
Louis Lee, LL
Ron da Silva, RD
Jason Schiller, JS
Hartmut Glaser, HG
Francisco Obispo, FO
Hans Petter Holen, HH
Dave Wilson – DW
Wilfried Woeber, WW
- Therese Colosi, (Secretariat) ARIN
German Valdez – GV
Nate Davis, ND
Einar Bohlin, EB
Susan Hamlin, SH
Leslie Nobile, LN
Sofia Silva, SS
Emilio Madaio, EMa
Olof Nordling – ON
Ray Plzak – RP
Leo Vegoda, LV
Kuo-Wei Wu – KW
Elise Gerich, EG
LL began the meeting at 18:04 UTC and welcomed the following new members to the 2011 ASO AC: Fiona Asonga from AFRINIC; and, Ron da Silva from ARIN.
LL then provided a brief orientation for the new members, to include:
- Meetings are held monthly. (Schedule TBD)
- Quorum is achieved when we have a majority of all AC members (i.e., 8 or more of 15 members), and at least one member from each of the five regions.
- One full AC face-to-face meeting annually. Typically coordinated with a public ICANN meeting.
- 4-5 AC members plus the Chair attend all public ICANN meetings to give update on significant number resource activities. There are 3 ICANN meetings each year. (March meeting is in San Francisco, CA, USA. This presentation was first given this past October.)
- A subset of the AC may meet face-to-face to facilitate work as warranted (e.g., ICANN Board Nomination Committee).
LL asked if RD wanted to say a few words but due to audio difficulties, RD asked to table the request until a later time. The Chair agreed.
2. Election Results 2011 ASO AC Chair
The Secretariat announced that the winner of the 2011 ASO AC Chair election was Louie Lee.
Louie, as Chair, resumed conducting the remainder of the meeting. HG requested knowing all the votes and the results in detail. The Chair explained it was a secret vote and read the operating procedure regarding that issue. The Chair stated it could be revealed how many votes each candidate received. There were no objections.
ND stated that LACNIC, who held the election, reported LL received 7 votes, AB received 6, and that there were 2 abstentions.
LL asked AB if he wanted to serve as Vice Chair for 2011. AB accepted the nomination. The Chair asked NA if he wanted to serve as secondary Vice Chair for 2011, as NA had expressed interest in doing so. NA accepted the nomination.
It was moved by DW, and seconded by WW, that:
“The ASO AC approves the appointments of Alan Barrett and Naresh Ajwani as Vice Chairs of the ASO AC.”
The Chair called for any objections. Hearing no objections, the motion carried. The Chair stated that he might ask AB assist him this year. AB stated he would be happy to do so.
3. Agenda Review
The Chair reviewed the agenda with the Council. There were no objections.
4. Approval of the Minutes
It was moved by AB, and seconded by NA, that:
“The ASO AC approves the Minutes of December 2, 2010, as written.”
The motion carried with no objections.
NEW ACTION ITEM: The Chair asked the Secretariat to change the December 2, 2010 minutes from draft to final.
FA joined at this time (18:10 UTC)
5. Open Action Item Review
0622-02: WW to work with PR and the RIPE NCC on the Wiki. If WW needs more help, he can turn to the Communications Committee. ON-GOING.
The Chair asked if WW had an update on this item. WW stated that the ICANN meeting in Cartagena and review team issues kept him from making progress on this item, however it is on his own agenda for January. He stated he would distribute on the ASO AC mailing list that LACNIC has implemented a wiki and it is working. He mentioned that Confluence is a robust wiki engine and asked if ARIN was using it. ND confirmed that ARIN indeed uses Confluence and was happy to assist. WW thanked ND. He also thanked individuals at LACNIC and RIPE for their support and assistance.
WW noted it would be difficult to test-drive the wiki remotely, and cumbersome to distribute URLs. He suggested that a few workshops be scheduled to display and describe how it works to ASO AC members, and give them a chance to have hands-on training.
The Chair thanked WW for the update and suggested WebEx as a tool. WW felt that scheduling a few time slots and providing training sessions in batches would work well.
1014-03: ASOAC to send possible review to the NRO EC to ensure that the RIRs do not have any issues with regard to the Global ASN Policy (ratified and implemented on September 21, 2010). ON-GOING.
The Chair stated it is up to the customers/members to let RIRs know of any problems with receiving ASN blocks, in order to issue a new global policy; noting that he has not seen any complaints. He suggested discussing this at RIR meetings to see if there are any problems that are not coming to light. He suggested closing this action item with a status of “no action taken” and called for any objections. There were no objections.
1202-01: Secretariat to change status of December 2, 2010 Minutes from Draft to Approved. OPEN.
The Chair stated this has been done and the item is closed.
6. 2010 AC Activity Review
The Chair provided a run-down of 2010 activities:
- The Council held monthly teleconferences;
- The Council held one face to face meeting, which the Chair reported was very productive. They discussed the possibility of a second one but there were not enough items to warrant requesting it.
- At the end of 2010, the Council provided an update to the ICANN community that is typically short and global policy-focused. The Chair suggested the Council now cover regional policies as well because they affect the ICANN community as individuals live in different regions.
- At ICANN 39 in Cartagena, an update was provided by the Chair and 5 other AC members: MH, WW, FO, NA and AB. EG from IANA also provided an update from IANA’s perspective on IPv4. Axel Pawlik, of RIPE NCC, provided NRO updates; and, ICANN provided information on how individuals can participate themselves, or in groups. They corrected the idea that you do not need to go to every region to participate, you can do so in your own region.
- The Council appointed Ku-Wei Wu to the ICANN Board. The Chair noted that in 2011 there will be no appointments to the Board and the Council can more easily make updates to the procedures for appointing Board members.
7. 2011 AC Workplan
A motion was passed during the ASO AC June face to face meeting in Brussels, for a Subcommittee to develop a draft work plan and present it to the Council. The members of the subcommittee were KH, FO, Vincent Ngundi, HH, and the Chair.
The Chair suggested the following, going forward:
- ICANN Board appointment procedure
- ASO Update presentations at public ICANN meetings
- Face-to-face meeting agenda development
- Global policy proposal: Global Policy for IPv4 Allocations by the IANA Post Exhaustion
The Chair called for any other suggestions. WW brought up the issue of RFC 2050 and the fact that it may no longer be applicable to the IPv4 world; that it become historical and that currently it is not a historical document but perceived as being used as leverage for distribution policies.
He felt this matter may be something the Numbers Council rather than ASO AC Council think about. WW noted he was bringing this topic up for AC members to consider to try to understand the RFC 2050 issue in a post IPv4 world.
The Chair thanked him for the idea. HH also noted that when the ASO AC was established there was a working group formed to revise the RFC and some replacement documents have been made. There had been an agreement for replacement in order to make sure the RFC becomes historical. He felt it is important to achieve a common understanding of whether it is a formal document. He stated there is confusion within the Internet community and when discussions do begin, we need to know if it is a valid working document, or replaced by other documents.
WW stated it’s a strange situation where we have document with distribution policy, and policy goals, but it ignores other mechanisms that are now in place. It is logistically outdated.
RP agreed with WW. He stated it would be beneficial to take action and move it to historical status and also look at policy issues that are followed by RIRs that need to be accommodated. He stated that legal counsel would need to look at RFC 2050 to determine issues with regard to IPv4 addresses if the status of the RFC were to change.
Chair stated it is a worthy topic for the work plan. WW clarified that he personally had no preference for any mechanism, but wanted everyone to be aware the issue, and to share his views. He stated he is not in a position to propose anything, but would like to see a group activity and problem statement; and, then collectively get to an agreement of which possibility will work going forward.
The Chair stated he too would like to see it as a group effort in lieu of subcommittee. WW felt it an appropriate topic for an ASO AC face-to-face meeting.
The Chair stated he would write up the work plan, have the AC review it, and then forward to the NRO EC for comments.
8. 2011 Meeting Schedule
Teleconferences, and Face-to-Face Meeting. The Chair posed the question whether it is possible to hold the monthly teleconference on the 1st Thursday of each month, per the schedule in the agenda, at 1800 UTC.
KH stated that it was currently 2:50 a.m. in Taipei and suggested having the call either two hours earlier or 2 hours later. NA stated that later would be difficult in APNIC region; earlier would be better. KH agreed to an earlier time.
The Chair asked if ARIN staff would support the earlier time. ND replied that ARIN would be happy to support the time. The Chair called for a motion.
It was moved by KH and seconded by WW, that:
“The ASO AC will hold its teleconference on the suggested meeting dates at 16:00 UTC.”
The Chair called for any objections. The motion carried with no objections.
NEW ACTION ITEM: The Chair requested that the Secretariat post the new schedule to ASO AC Website.
HH requested the teleconference bridge be opened 15 minutes early in order to resolve potential technical difficulties. ND stated calls will be opened 15 minutes before the scheduled times.
The Chair requested that this information be posted as a reminder on the teleconference invitations. ND agreed.
The approved teleconference dates for the ASO AC calls are as follows:
- 6 January
- 3 February
- 3 March
- 7 April
- 12 May (second Thursday due to RIPE meeting)
- 2 June
- 7 July
- 4 August
- 1 September
- 6 October
- 10 November (second Thursday due to RIPE meeting)
- 1 December
The Chair stated the following dates for potential ASO AC face-to-face meeting during the posted 2011 public ICANN meetings:
- ICANN 40: 13-18 March – San Francisco, CA, USA
- ICANN 41: 19-24 June – Amman, Jordan
- ICANN 42: 23-28 October – TBD in African region
WW proposed have the meeting near the ICANN 40 meeting. He stated the ASO AC might want to try to meet in the first half of the calendar year to work on issues as soon as possible. The Chair agreed with the idea and asked if it held a problem for members needing visas. It was the sense of the AC it would not. The Chair noted this meeting needed to be approved by the NRO EC.
It was moved by HH, and seconded by JS, that:
“The ASO AC will hold its physical meeting at the ICANN San Francisco meeting, pending approval from the NRO EC.”
The Chair called for discussion. JS then stated he wanted to see an agenda published before making the decision. HH disagreed for the reason of time constraints and stated it is better to have a deadline in place for the agenda rather than wait to craft one and push off making the meeting arrangements. JS acknowledged this and agreed.
The Chair agreed and stated he would have an agenda by Friday, January 14, 2011.
Discussion ensued on a meeting agenda. The Chair noted that the NRO EC needed to approve the agenda as well as the physical meeting. HH stated he would like to amend his previous motion.
It was moved by HH, and seconded by JS, that:
“The ASO AC will hold its physical meeting at the ICANN San Francisco meeting, conditional to the agenda being developed, and approval by the NRO EC.”
The Chair called for any discussion. There were no comments.
The amended motion carried unanimously via roll call.
The Chair requested all AC members to contribute to the agenda.
FO stated that for those outside the USA, to begin the process for your visa if needed as soon as possible as some countries have a long processing timeframe.
The Chair stated that all members should register on the ICANN website, request a letter of invitation, and contact their Regional Registry for a letter of support. He stated he will contact the NRO EC to let them know of these requests.
WW also want to let ICANN folks know about the AC’s request for support for visas and scheduling. He noted it is considerably easier to cancel plans than to have a late request. The Chair agreed and stated he will contact ICANN in the next 48 hours.
RP noted that RFC 2050 might be on the agenda at the next ICANN meeting as well. He also suggested that when the AC requests meeting rooms, to request rooms for other functions, i.e., policy update meetings and space for a booth. He suggested that the booth could possibly be manned by ASO AC members. The Chair stated he would request Monday and Tuesday during the ICANN meeting to have space reserved.
9. Update on activities related to the ICANN Review Teams
The Chair stated there was no update at this time and that the Facilitator Team should post an update to the AC’s list. JS noted there was a four-week review period in the RIPE region and there was no discussion during the review period seen.
The Chair stated that EG left at this time (19:10 UTC).
10. ICANN 39 Update.
The Chair stated that he sent his update to the ASO AC list earlier. He thanked to Kuo-Wei Wu and Ray Plzak in facilitating the ICANN Board in attending the first hour of the ASO AC workshop; and, that it was well received by those who attended. He noted that for the next AC workshop, he would look for timeslot less conflicting with other members of ICANN community – like the Government Advisory Committee (GAC).
RP replied that when the Chair request space, that he request it for the ICANN Board to attend, and to communicate with Heather Dryden or the scheduling folks at ICANN, so that the GAC can also attend. He suggested including this in the Chair’s meeting requirements. The Chair agreed.
The Chair stated he had mentioned a GAC/ASO liaison to Heather during ICANN 39. She did not have any comments at the time, but noted that the bylaws allow for it. RP clarified that the ICANN bylaws allow for it. He stated he is GAC WG Chair and that the liaisons speak highly of relationships that they’ve had with other groups; and, that they are open to it. He noted, however, that they do not want the opinion that they are speaking on behalf of the GAC or of any government. He cautioned that the Chair be specific about the information exchange or role of the liaison because they also have time constraints. The Chair acknowledged this.
HH stated that some European GAC members attend every meeting, and that the Chair may find some liaisons there. RP agreed, stating it was important to carefully consider the role and then present it.
The Chair noted organizational and logistical items for the workshop and WW volunteered to assist.
11. ICANN Review Teams: Related Activities Update
When the Joint Project Agreement between ICANN and the US Department of Commerce ended near the end of 2009, the 2 parties signed the Affirmation of Commitments (AoC). This document calls for the periodic review of 4 key ICANN objectives. As a result, 3 of the 4 teams have been created so far to conduct these reviews:
- Accountability and Transparency Review Team (ATRT)
- Security, Stability, and Resiliency of the DNS Review Team (SSR Review Team)
- WHOIS Policy Review Team (aka WHOIS RT / RT4)
The Chair served on the ATRT, which concluded the work on 31 Dec 2010. HG is serving on the SSR RT. And WW is serving on RT4.
The ATRT issued our final recommendations for improvements on 31 Dec. There is an open public comment period that ends on 14 Feb. The ATRT did receive some comments from the public about perceived difficulties in participating in the RIR PDPs. But no specific recommendations were made to address those concerns in part because I had provided feedback on behalf on the ASO to the satisfaction of the ATRT. Also, it would be out of scope for the ATRT to conduct a review of the ASO.
The Chair asked HG to please provide an update on the SSR RT activities, as he is serving on this team. HG reported that at the first meeting Alejandro Pisanty was elected as the Chair. Given the ICANN 39 meeting and the holidays, there was little time to work on this. He stated work would begin again this week.
The Chair asked Wilfried to please provide an update on the WHOIS RT activities, as he is serving on this team.
WW stated it was a difficult start because ICANN and the team expected its first formal meeting during ICANN 39, but it did not happen due to late distribution of information and scheduling conflicts. They had an informal meeting before ICANN 39 started. He felt it was a very useful exercise and there were a number of interested people in the room and remote participation was provided. WW noted that ICANN was tremendously supportive with regard to logistics for this meeting. Discussion revolved around the interpretation of the words in the Explanation of Commitment (EOC). It was decided the most pressing need is to work on the Scope of Work (SOW) – what the team plans to achieve – and that a substantial contribution would be to define the terms used in the EOC language.
WW stated that additionally, there is the formal adoption of the Conflict of Interest Policy document and that they have good examples from which to work. He stated there will be a face-to face meeting January 19 and 20th, hosted by members of the team from UK law enforcement. He is working with ICANN on the scheduling. He stated that when he returns, he would report to the AC on the current status.
12. 2011 ICANN NomCom Update
WW provided an update the AC on the ICANN NomCom activities. He stated that the first official meeting was on Saturday at the end of ICANN 39. They made good progress and discussed adopting suggestions from new members. WW stated that Adam Peake is an accomplished Chair for this group. He noted that the Call for Interests was made publically available on ICANN’s website. Currently they are identifying mechanisms and events to provide outreach and distribution of information. The call for applications is open.
The second meeting will be in San Francisco near the time of ICANN 40 and they are planning interviews by time of ICANN 41 in June. They are considering holding interviews in a different location for which travel will be easier, than Amman, Jordan (where ICANN 41 will be held). WW stated that they will try to keep the community up to date on status of this effort.
The Chair thanked WW and HG for their work at the ICANN level, as HG worked on the NomCom in 2010. He stated if there are urls or links to information to please provide. They agreed.
13. ASO Review
The NRO has put out a call for an independent review of the ASO. The deadline for responses is 31 January 2011.
10. Any Other Business
The Chair called for any other business items.
A) HG queried about the IANA Contract with regard to any contribution being needed from the AC. RP stated the DoC needs to take its first steps and depending on how that turns out, depends on whether the NRO needs to act. HG asked if the ASO AC could be part of the discussion. RP stated that he was not sure if the Board would even be involved. Staff will be doing most work and, in the end, the Board would consider ratification, but not negotiating terms. The bulk of the work will be done under the CEO. RP suggested it may be more appropriate for NRO EC to contact ICANN and open a dialog there.
B) LV stated there was an IETF draft currently in progress, draft-hamarsheh-behave-biav2-04, but not through the normal submission stream. It is going through the independent subcommittee stream and there will be no IETF last call. It is in the RFC Editor queue, and may be of interest to the ASO AC because in the IANA section it states that there be a range that will not be used for external addressing. This may be of interest of discussion.
WW observed that people would try to circumvent the policy development process by using IETF mechanisms to interfere with the distribution of IPv4 address space. The Chair noted that there was a robust discussion of this in Cartagena at ICANN 39 regarding reserving address blocks. The Chair stated he had a link in chat and encouraged e-mail exchange on the subject.
Chair entertained a motion to adjourn at 19:52 UTC. WW moved to adjourn, seconded by AB. Hearing no objections, the meeting was adjourned.