AC Attendees:

Sebastian Bellagamba (SB), Chair
Alan Barrett (AB), Co-Chair
Sanford H. George (SHG)
Hartmut Glaser (HG)
Martin Hannigan (MH)
Hans Petter Holen (HPH), Co-Chair
Jean Robert Hountomey (JRH)
Dr. Kenny S. Huang (KH)
Sabine Jaume (SJ)
HJ Kwon (HJK)
Louis Lee (LL)
Francisco Obispo (FO)
Mao Wei (MW)
Wilfried Woeber (WW)

Secretariat:

Raymond Plzak (RP), Secretary (ARIN)
Therese Colosi, Recording Secretary (ARIN)

Observers:

Save Vocea – APNIC
Einar Bohlin – ARIN
Richard Jimmerson – ARIN
Raimundo Beca – ICANN
Bart Boswinkle – ICANN
Dave Wodelet – ICANN
Raul Echeberria – LACNIC
Filiz Yilman – RIPE

Absent:

Sylvia Geha Kezengwa

Draft Agenda:

  1. Welcome
  2. Agenda Review
  3. Approval of the Minutes
  4. Global Policy Proposal
  5. Any Other Business
  6. Adjournment

1) Welcome

The Chair called the meeting to order at 22: 15 UTC. The presence of a quorum was noted.

2) Agenda Review

The Chair called for any comments on the agenda.  LL asked to add a discussion on the recent circumstances regarding Peter Dengate-Thrush. The Chair agreed and also added a discussion on the presentations given at the ICANN meeting in Marrakesh. HG requested adding a discussion regarding the ASO responding to the NTIA’s NOI.  The Chair added all items to Item 5, Any Other Business.

3) Approval of the Minutes of June 7, 2006

AB moved that:

“The ASO AC approves the Minutes of June 7, 2006 as written.”

This was seconded by AB.  The motion carried unanimously.

4) Global Policy Proposal

Allocation of IPv6 Address Space by the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) Policy to Regional Internet Registries.   The Chair stated that the policy was delivered June 6, 2006 to the ASO AC and all reports have been submitted and reviewed per the ASO AC procedures.

HG moved that:

“The ASO Address Council, having reviewed the proposed global policy, entitled “Allocation of IPv6 Address Space by the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) to Regional Internet Registries”, finds that each RIR followed its defined policy development process to reach a position of common agreement, and a common text to describe the proposed global policy; finds that the significant viewpoints of interested parties were adequately considered; and, recommends that the ICANN Board of Directors adopt the proposed global policy.”

This was seconded by LL.  The Chair called for discussion. HG wanted to ensure that there were no technical or administrative measures left to provide. LL proposed reviewing the report from each region. RP suggested that grammar and punctuation changes can be done later if the ASO AC decides to publish the reports at a later date, since they are internal documents for the ASO AC’s use.

AB asked if each document was identical to each other. The Chair stated it is not considered a global policy if there is no common text, and stated the NRO EC had ensured this before they sent it to the ASO AC. RP stated that NRO was satisfied that the text sent to the ASO AC was a common text.  The Chair agreed. The Chair asked if the ASO AC had any doubts.  LL stated that he felt the document was a common text, and HPH agreed, and felt the checks had been accomplished sufficiently. There were no objections.

The motion carried, via roll call, with one abstention (MH).

Dave Wodelet commented on the process to date, noting that he thought the NRO, ASO AC, and RIRs had all done a good job in collecting information relating to the policy. He stated that he intended to raise the profile of these organizations within the ICANN Board, ensuring that they were aware that the process had been followed.

Dave further explained that he wanted to work with the ASO AC and the ICANN Board for agreement on this policy, and stated he may need assistance from the NRO and ASO AC.  He stated he will contact the ASO AC to move the policy forward, and asked them to contact him if they had any questions. The ASO AC thanked him.

LL raised the issue of drafting a response to an anticipated message from ICANN regarding clarification of the proposed policy. After a lengthy discussion of the nature of this letter, HPH volunteered to work with LL on this matter.

The Chair stated that two proposed versions of the letter to send the policy to the ICANN Board were sent to the ASO AC’s list. One was drafted and sent to list by MH, and one by RP. MH suggested using RP’s version. There were no objections.  The Chair tasked the SEC to send the letter to ICANN’s SEC on 13 July 2006. The SEC agreed and there were no objections.

5) Any Other Business

Chair called for any other business.

A. Peter Dengate-Thrush of the ICANN Board.  LL stated that there is information on the ICANN website regarding Peter’s recent tragedy. He requested the Chair send a message on behalf of ASO AC, and presented language for the message to the Council.

LL moved that:

“The ASO AC Chair send the letter, with any grammatical changes if necessary, to offer our condolences to Peter Dengate-Thrush for his family’s tragedy.”

This was seconded by HG.  The Chair stated he would send it on 13 July 2006. The motion carried with no objections.

B. Presentations given at ICANN Marrakech.

1. ASO AC Presentation. The Chair stated that he and the NRO Chair gave a joint presentation. He stated he was honored to present in a public forum, and felt very good about the presentation. He thanked the NRO for the opportunity to do so.

2. GAC Presentation. The Chair stated the GAC invited the NRO to a session regarding the global v6 policy, and he too, was invited.  He stated it was a basic presentation to present the global policy to the governments to educate them about the policy, and the policy development process. The Chair felt it was a constructive meeting and very informative. RP stated that one of the issues addressed was the fairness of the policy, and how it was fair to both developing and developed regions. He stated that this is a matter of concern in governments, and is raised in Internet Governance forums.

C. The ASO and Comments to the NTIA. HG asked if the ASO AC was ready to send a formal document to the NTIA and if the NRO was ready.  RE stated that the NRO EC had approved a document to send to the NTIA which would be published on its website tomorrow. RP stated he would send the NRO EC’s document at this time to the ASO AC’s list.

HG suggested, as a proposal only, that the RIRs and ASO AC send a document, as was done in the LACNIC region, to show that all are united, and join in the same idea – supportive of each other.

The Chair stated the ASO AC can send a document, but each RIR would needs to decide to do so. RP stated that ARIN Board is satisfied that the NRO’s comments reflect the comments of the ARIN Board and they have no desire to comment further.

The Chair suggested further discussion to take place on the ASO AC’s list. All agreed.

HG then stated he noticed the agenda has been lacking reports of the regional meetings and requested the next agenda include this item. All agreed.

6) Adjournment

The Chair entertained a motion to adjourn at 23:19 UTC.  HG moved to adjourn, and this was seconded by AB. The motion carried unanimously.