ASO AC Attendees:

AfriNIC

Fiona Asonga, FA
Alan Barrett, AB, Vice Chair
Jean Robert Hountomey, JRH

APNIC

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

ARIN

Ron da Silva, RdS
Louie Lee, LL, Chair
Jason Schiller, JS

LACNIC

Hartmut Glaser, HG
Francisco Obispo, FO

RIPE NCC

Hans Petter Holen, HPH
Dave Wilson – DW
Wilfried Woeber, WW

Secretariat:

Therese Colosi (ARIN)

Observers:

AfriNIC

Ernest Byaruhanga, EB

APNIC

German Valdez, GV

ARIN

Einar Bohlin, EB
John Curran, JC
Nate Davis, ND
Leslie Nobile, LN

LACNIC

Sofia Silva, SS

RIPE

Emelio Madaio, EM

ICANN

Ray Plzak, RP

Absent:

Sebastián Bellagamba

1. Welcome

The Chair called the meeting to order at 12:04 p.m. EDT. The presence of quorum was noted.

2. Agenda Review

The Chair called for any comments on the agenda. WW requested an item on the ASO AC workshop in Dakar. The Chair stated it would be discussed under item 11 along with any other ASO AC activities. WW thanked the Chair.

3. Approval of the Minutes

It was moved by NA, and seconded by AB, that:

“The ASO AC approves the Minutes of August 4, 2011, as written.”

The motion carried with no objections.

New Action Item 0908-01: SECRETARIAT. Remove Draft from August 4, 2011 Minutes.

4. Open Action Item Review.

0622-02 (2010): WW. ASO AC Wiki.  WW to work with P. Rendek, and the RIPE NCC, on the Wiki. The Chair stated that if WW needed more help, he could turn to the Communications Committee. OPEN.

WW stated that there has not been much progress due to heavy schedule. Chair asked if he wanted to give this to another ASO AC member. WW stated yes, or it can stay as is until he can address it. No other volunteers.

0707-02: CHAIR. Send Request from ASO AC to NRO EC regarding providing a copy of the draft ASO Review report to the ASO AC for review and comment. OPEN

The Chair stated this item would be discussed under item 10 of the agenda.

0804-01: SECRETARIAT. Remove Draft from July 7, 2011 Minutes. The Secretariat confirmed this had been done. The Chair stated this item as Closed.

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

PPFT: DW, AB, FO, RdS

The Chair stated there had been no activity in the ARIN region. All other members confirmed there had been no activity in their regions.

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

PPFT: JS, FO, HPH, TF, FA

TF stated that this policy had been adopted in the APNIC region and that they were awaiting decisions from the other RIRs.  AB stated it was in last call in AfriNIC but no comments have been seen on the mailing list. Working Group Chairs have not taken any actions following last call.  The Chair stated that activities will ramp up as the year progresses. SS stated it was ratified in the LACNIC region.

The Chair stated if there were any updates that needed to be sent to Olof Nordling, to please do so.  Additionally, if any updates needed to be added to the ASO AC website, please send them to the Secretariat.

7. ICANN Review Teams: Related Activities Update.

A) Security Stability Resiliency Review Team (SSR RT) Update.  HG stated that the RT is preparing a report for the Dakar meeting. Some leaders are working on internal reports, which the RT can discuss in Dakar. The Chair stated that the Chair of the SSR RT wants to know if the ASO AC wanted to meet outside of the public sessions.  HG stated it was his understanding to use any input from Dakar between that meeting and the ASO AC’s next meeting.

The Chair stated he would send a message to the RT Chair stating that the ASO AC had a meeting, and did not see the need for a formal meeting.  Individual members can contact the RT, either directly or though HG. HG agreed.

B) WHOIS Review Team (WHOIS RT) Update.   WW stated that they would submit the final report before the end of this year.  There will be a two-day meeting in Marina del Ray, CA, September 20 and 21 to discuss the structure to be established and the library of draft modules. He stated he will use the 2 days to process the information and what needs to be done. Then it will be presented Dakar.  There will be a full day meeting before the ICANN meeting. The RT plans to interact with the community to find out their input. Input was received in the ‘comments phase’ as well, and will be incorporated into the final report.  He stated it would be a good idea to report to the ASO AC after the meeting in California to keep the AC members up to date.

The Chair asked if there were any recommendations from the RT that relate closely to the addressing community. WW stated there were with regard to names world, and felt there will be some proposed for consideration for the addressing world related to WHOIS – regarding privacy and law enforcement agencies, etc. The Chair stated that he was not expecting any recommendations that would cause any major shift in how WHOIS is done – other than individual privacy issues, and what information is made available. WW agreed. WW stated that IETF work will develop on an overall WHOIS protocol, and support for character sets.

8. Status of 2011 ICANN Nomination Committee.

WW stated that the NomCom accomplished the work expected for this year. Individuals selected in Singapore have been announced and published on the ICANN website. A vacancy arose in the North American region for an at-large seat. The Nomcom mandated to identify a replacement for  the remaining period of the term. They did this as soon as possible so the person would be seated in time for the meeting in Dakar, and the NomCom was successful. He noted that there was a large number of capable people who expressed interest with an excess of 80 candidates for the regular set of open positions. A quarter of them were women and he stated that was a nice surprise. He was also happy about the geographic distribution. He stated it was a very labor and time intensive effort but a very interesting experience. It was not just hard work, it was rewarding.

The Chair thanked WW for his efforts.  He acknowledged that HG was selected to serve on the 2012 NomCom.  He noted that the next ASO AC meeting agenda will list this item as “Status of 2012 ICANN Nomination Committee”. The first meeting will be in Dakar

WW expressed his satisfaction with how well the assessment and legwork went to reach consensus on the candidates. He considered it important and strengthened the credibility of the roles.

Chair stated with regard to accountability and transparency – ICANN has been having webinars about implementing the recommendations for the SSR RT and that he would forward notices to the ASO AC if they had interest.

9. Status of ASO Review

The Chair stated that the survey was distributed. WW stated that he had received it via e-mail and was interviewed in person in Singapore with Raimundo Beca present, who was supporting the effort. HG, AB, HPH and AL stated they too were interviewed. The Chair stated he had seen the list of people who were interviewed which included previous ASO AC members.

The Chair stated that if there is a status, to please forward the information to the group. NA stated that he too had received the survey via e-mail and completed it with regard to the role and future situation for the ASO AC at ICANN.

Chair stated that with regard to Action Item 0707-02, he had send the request to the Chair of the NRO EC to send the draft review document to the ASO AC for review. He forwarded the request to the AC’s list for their information.  He stated that he will prompt the NRO EC for a reply if he did not see a reply.

The Chair requested that the next two item be positioned at the top of next month’s agenda to dedicate enough time to each subject.

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

The Chair thanked the Secretariat team for their work regarding this document. The procedure now incorporated legal suggestions from ICANN. The Chair explained that after selection of the individuals, the names will be forwarded to ICANN for approval. ICANN will let the ASO AC know, and then the ASO AC can publically announce the person. The Chair noted this was the major aspect they had not discussed previously. The document was sent to the ASO AC list for their review yesterday via their mailing list.

Discussion ensued with the AC members reviewing the document. After discussion, HPH moved to approve the procedure. JS stated he needed more time to review the document and could not ‘second’ the motion. AB stated that he was not comfortable approving it at this time as it was too soon after receiving it.

The Chair stated that the deadline was not until November 1 and the ASO AC can still work on the procedure.  He asked them to please review it this week and provide input  and it can be voted on via e-mail. JS recommended that if there are changes, an emergency meeting to discuss this one topic could also be done.

The Chair stated that if there were changes, the ASO AC would need a few days to incorporate them into the procedure and vote on the final procedure. By the time that was done, the ASO AC would be ready to meet for their next regularly scheduled meeting (October 6). He considered this acceptable.

WW noted that any new procedure can only become effective after review by NRO EC.  The Chair agreed and pointed out that the draft could be forwarded to the NRO EC to let them know what is being worked on, and if they have input they can provide it in order to have it incorporated prior to the ASO AC voting on the procedure.

The Chair stated the ASO AC should review the document and send feedback over the next few days. JS requested that the members summarize any changes to the redlined document in plain text format so that no one will have issues reading or opening the document.

Chair stated there would be a one-week deadline for any changes and to send them to the Secretariat.

11. ASO AC Workshop at ICANN 42.

The status of the RIR volunteers is as follows:

  • ARIN: the Chair will attend.
  • AfriNIC: AB stated it has not been finalized if there is enough funding. Given that fact, he suggested it would be best if JRH would represent. JRH agreed.
  • APNIC: The Chair asked AL, NA and TF who could volunteer: TF volunteered to attend.
  • LACNIC: The Chair asked if HG or FO could attend. HG stated he could not but but noted that SB most likely could attend. The Chair asked HG to ask SB to confirm, as SB was not on this teleconference.
  • RIPE: DW stated he was undecided, but will know in next few days and asked what day the workshop would be held. The Chair stated workshop would be held on the Wednesday of the ICANN meeting.

The Chair stated that the ASO AC members were asked to meet with the Chairs of the SO’s and AC’s during their meetings in Dakar, and they are working on scheduling. It has not been firmly decided what days ASO AC members will be needed. Most requests will arrive on Tuesday of that week, however, some may be on Sunday. If that is the case, it will be expressed that the ASO AC needs to know in advance.

The Chair suggested an ASO AC dinner be held on Tuesday evening. He also stated he would work with the Secretariat to rework the format of the workshop to allow for more discussion and information sharing.

RP stated it would be beneficial to provide handouts to distribute. He noted that the presentation the ASO AC had at the last workshop, on Friday morning of the ICANN meeting, sparked interest because it relayed issues on how they related to the audience. He noted that less engineering-speak, and more language in tone with the people you are trying to reach is very effective. He stated it would be successful again to do it the same way in Dakar. The invitations to present again are a direct result of the last presentation the ASO AC provided. He suggested the topics speak to how IP address policies affect other organizations within ICANN.

The Chair suggested that the workshop presentation could be modeled on the Friday morning presentation. RP agreed and suggested moving from an inward focus of RIRS, to other people in the region and it how it affects them. Get input from the SO and AC Chairs as to what they want to hear and provide handouts about IP addresses. He pointed out that no one realizes the number of policy discussions regarding WHOIS and the amount of discussion that has taken place over the years.

The Chair stated that he had forwarded Leo Vegoda’s agenda for his IPv6 discussion in Dakar to the ASO AC via their mailing list.

RP suggested providing the nature and types of outreach from the RIRs and how they can provide assistance to IPv6 outreach activities. The Chair stated he would provide this to AfriNIC for their upcoming meeting.  The Chair thanked RP for his useful suggestions.

12. APNIC 32 (Busan, So. Korea) Report

The Chair congratulated TF for his re-election to the ASO AC.

AL provided a report from attending the recent APNIC meeting in Busan So. Korea, and provided a link to the ASO AC of the report. AL stated that he was the Policy Sig Chair and that there are 2 new co-chairs. He provided an overview of the four proposals that were on the table and administrative business. He stated that proposal #96 was in last call and that it will appear in the transfer policy and should not hold up the process. The other 3 proposals were in regard to allocation of IPv6 address space larger than /32 blocks.

NA stated that the Working Group that emerged from the BOF has recommended the engagement of Government in APNIC. Soon after the EC-comment process, there may be a multi-stake body in accordance.

John Curran joined the meeting at 1:34 p.m. RdS joined at 1:43 p.m.

13. Any Other Business.

The Chair called for any other business items.  FA asked how many members will attend the IGF meeting in Nairobi as she was working on an informal gathering. HG stated he and SB would be in attendance and that there will be an NRO booth with staff members. The Chair thanked FA for her efforts in organizing a get together.

14. Adjournment.

The Chair entertained a motion to adjourn at 1:53 p.m. EDT. HG moved to adjourn, seconded by WW. The meeting was adjourned with no objections.