Attendees:
Members: Wanawit Ahkuputra; Jaap Akkerhuis; Donna Austin; Avri Doria; Graeme Bunton; Olivier Crepin-Leblond; Eduardo Diaz; Lise Fuhr; Robert Guerra; Erick Iriarte; Staffan Jonson; Paul Kane; Elise Lindeberg; Vika Mpisane; Seun Ojedeji; Jonathan Robinson; Greg Shatan
Participants: Guru Acharya; Martin Boyle; Keith Davidson; Stephanie Duchesneau; Amr Elsadr; Lars-Erik Forsberg; Alan Greenberg; Malcolm Hutty; Boyoung Kim; Stacey King; Wolf-Ulrich Knoben; Allan MacGillivray; Camino Manjon-Sierra; Desiree Miloshevic; Sivasubramanian Muthusamy; Minjung Park; Kurt Pritz; Jorg Schweiger; Matthew Shears; Maarten Simon; Mary Uduma; Peter Van Roste; Jiankang Yao.
Staff: Grace Abuhamad; Bart Boswinkel; Berry Cobb; Marika Konings; Jim Trengrove; Bernard Turcotte; Theresa Swinehart
Apologies: Chuck Gomes;
**Please let Grace know if your name has been left off the list (attendees or apologies).**
Notes & Action Items
Transcript
The transcript will be posted here upon receipt
Recording
The Adobe Connect recording is available here: https://icann.adobeconnect.com/p28vd73rk35/
The audio recording is available here:
Documents Presented
Functions Table Format - 19 November 2014.docx
Chat Transcript
Marika Konings:Welcome to day 2 of the CWG Stewardship F2F Meeting
Erick Iriarte Ahon:good morning
Grace Abuhamad:Hi erick!
Erick Iriarte Ahon:hi grace
matthew shears:morning all
Allan MacGillivray:Erick - great that you could join us. What time is it there?
Erick Iriarte Ahon:2.00 am here in lima
Lise Fuhr:Very early...
Erick Iriarte Ahon::)
Avri Doria:disagree. i think it is a reprots review, and a review of the peiodic audits. not specifically technical.
Guru Acharya:+1 Elise
matthew shears:we should look at the current deliverables in the existing contract for guidance - there are a number of reports , etc. some of which go beyond performance
Avri Doria:as some one who missed the first conversations, this makes nto sense to me. i will just lisen for now.. i think the peiroci reviews might be technical. but everything else is a review of those audits. i do not see this organizations as do deep dives on anything. i cannot beleive we are now talking about multiple roganizations, when i do not think we need more that a minial organization.
Robert Guerra:instead of "body" use "entity
Robert Guerra: that could be within ICANN's structure
Robert Guerra:suggest then also add the following characteristics - independance
matthew shears:is the review function responsible for assessing the totaity of the IANA function deliverables?
Greg Shatan:@Robert -- for which function? Do you need an indendent entity to review IANA's reports?
Avri Doria:so this SLA and Technical audit is new functionality that NTIA does not already do. correct?
Avri Doria:ie we are already into function creep.
Seun Ojedeji:I don't think so....at least i know those are usually done on the numbers side and i believe the same happens for names
Avri Doria:Seun, but not by the NTIA.
matthew shears:NTIA assesses whether or not the contract deliverables have been met right?
Avri Doria:This is new IANA functionality, not new NTIA Stewardship functionality
Donna Austin, RySG:Avri, I would think NTIA does some type of monitoring of performance against the contract, so I don't see how this is necessarily different
Seun Ojedeji:Yes correct...not by NTIA as its currently done by the community
Mary Uduma:What do we mean by technical expertise?
Seun Ojedeji:@Avri i don't think its a new IANA functionality because IANA does release reports and the respective communities use it as they please
Avri Doria:These are things that Registries may rightly want done, but they are not things that NTIA does. IT seems to be new fnctionality.
Seun Ojedeji:so i don't think its a new thing per see
Mary Uduma:Is technical here generic?
Avri Doria:isn't what we are calling technical really operational. It isn't technology per se.
Avri Doria:it will become an army.
matthew shears:are we confusing function 2 with the work of the IANA itself?
Kurt Pritz:If there is a problem - there might be an ability to coach / advise / mentor - before escalation
Avri Doria:it does seem like the creation of a function creep wish list to me.
Avri Doria:why does IANA need daily oversight? it needs audit os performance but not micromanagement.
matthew shears:agree this is not what NTIA does
Seun Ojedeji:+1 to that @Avri
Amr Elsadr:Also +1 @Avri. Day-to-day review by MS oversight will be burdensome and unnecessary.
Avri Doria:Amr, day to day review of IANA would be burdensome. Within IANA they need to do that. Externally we need an audit once or twice a year of how they did.
Avri Doria:and e need something multistakeholder to read the audits and decide if anything needs to be done about it.
matthew shears:don't we just want the continuation of the deliverables as they are in the contract now - which include peformance review, etc.
Amr Elsadr:On the day-to-day - within IANA, sure. But not by the steward.
Amr Elsadr:Wouldn't the audits become publicly accessible for anyone to review? Is it the ability to escalate in response to audits that requires MS representation?
Amr Elsadr:I'm still not entirely sure why MS is necessary vs. the direct customer.
Amr Elsadr:@Jonathan: +1
Avri Doria:Amr, becasue the indirect customer is as important as the 'direct' customer.
Amr Elsadr:Not even sure the ability to escalate requires MS involvement. Perhaps the body the escalation goes to.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond:@Avri: +1
Olivier Crepin-Leblond:This is not just a fringe function. IANA functions affect all Internet users if they are performed badly
Guru Acharya:+1 Greg
Desiree Miloshevic:most audits/ reports are currently published and available on iana's website
Amr Elsadr:@Olivier: I'm not disputing that at all, but suspect the direct customers would flag any problems appropriately.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond:@Amr: ...or shut their eyes if it was a shared problem
Amr Elsadr:@Marika: +1
matthew shears:does NTIA do global customer surveys? They receive a report annually on customer service but don't undertake them...
Desiree Miloshevic:i believe they do not do it
Desiree Miloshevic:and we're adding something new here
matthew shears:we really need to remain within scope of what NTIA does vis-avis performance which is to receive and review performance reviews and reports as outlined in the current contract
matthew shears:+ 1 Alan
Desiree Miloshevic:+1 Alan
Amr Elsadr:Also +1 @Alan.
Desiree Miloshevic:I would delete customer surveys
Avri Doria:Agree wit Alan, we are going so far beyond IANA Stewardhsip in these discussions..
Robert Guerra:(off topic for this conversation..but worth looking at. .In case you haven't seen this yet, wanted to share details of the - The Defending Internet Freedom Act http://kelly.house.gov/sites/kelly.house.gov/files/documents/DIFA%20-%20KELLPA_035_xml.pdf , put forward by US Congressman Mike Kelly (R-PA), would see the creation of a board made up of techies and reps from the domain name world, as well as a new consortium to run the IANA body. )
Robert Guerra:being reported by the register and mentioned on twitter - http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/11/20/legislation_icann_oversight_body/
Guru Acharya:+1 Greg
Eduardo Diaz - (ALAC):I suggest that we move to category #3: Contracting Fuction which is something that NTIA actually does as Alan said
Guru Acharya:Agree Diaz
Avri Doria:" the perfect architecture is achieved when everything that can be removed is removed"
Guru Acharya:Also, the requirement for legal personality will be determined by the Contracting Function (#3)
Camino Manjon:+1 guru and eduardo
Guru Acharya:yes!
Guru Acharya:@Avri: Removing what can be removed might require the maximum number of changes. Minimalist means the minimum number of changes or the minimum weight of the resulting structure?
Avri Doria:even on a som called miniml soltuion there is still often much that can be eliminated.
Grace Abuhamad:Will start soon. Still on coffee break
