Terri Agnew:Dear all, Welcome to the At-Large Ad-hoc WG on IANA Transition & ICANN Accountability call on Wednesday, 13 May 2015 at 13:00 UTC
Terri Agnew:meeting page: https://community.icann.org/x/t4c0Aw
Tomohiro Fujisaki:Good evening!
Yasuichi Kitamura:hi, all
Alberto Soto:Good morning from Buenos Aires!
Leon Sanchez:Hello everyone
Seun Ojedeji:Hello all
Heidi Ullrich:Hi All.
Carlton Samuels:Morning everybody
Gordon Chillcott:Hi, all
Carlton Samuels:Is it just me or there is no sound?
Terri Agnew:@Carlton, are you able to hear now?
Carlton Samuels:@Terri: Nothing at all coming over
Terri Agnew:What browser are you using? AC prefers Firefox
Carlton Samuels:@ Terri: Aaaah, I'm using Chrome
Carlton Samuels:Let me try with Firefox and see
Jean-Jacques Subrenat:Hello All, sorry I'm late (traffic jam).
Alan Greenberg:sorry, had another call come in just as I was connecting.
Terri Agnew:Welcome Beran Gillen
Seun Ojedeji:not quite long...short agenda but with lots of devil in the details ;-)
Terri Agnew:Action Items 04 May 2015: https://community.icann.org/x/sIA0Aw
Terri Agnew:IANA Stewardship Transition Coordination Group Issues Proposal Assembly and Finalization Process and Updated Transition Process Timeline: https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2-2015-01-07-en
Jean-Jacques Subrenat:@Tijani +1.
Seun Ojedeji:As i read the wordings of NTIA in that letter....its also indirectly poses a challenge to CCWG/CWG to get thing done as fast as possible. (re: I wonder whether NTIA is even totally ready to transition)
Seun Ojedeji:So that CWG/CCWG proposal is not ready should not be the stumbing block to transition
Terri Agnew:finding line
Jean-Jacques Subrenat:Here's the link to what I just mentioned (ICG Statement), https://www.ianacg.org/icg-statement-on-contracts-and-other-agreements/
Olivier Crepin-Leblond:@Jean-Jacques: thanks
Terri Agnew:Finding line
Leon Sanchez:where is that noise coming from?
Olivier Crepin-Leblond:I am 100% in agreement with Alan
Jean-Jacques Subrenat:@Alan +1.
Gordon Chillcott:I agree with Alan on the jurisdiction issue.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond:I have been dropped
Olivier Crepin-Leblond:sorry
Olivier Crepin-Leblond:Did JJS want to respond?
Terri Agnew:@Olivier calling back out to you
Jean-Jacques Subrenat:@Olivier: yes please.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond:sorry -- :-)
Olivier Crepin-Leblond:back on
Jean-Jacques Subrenat:@Tijani +1, yes the 2 aspects are linked, and we as At-Large should insist on the 2 being linked.
Jean-Jacques Subrenat:@Tijani +1 about escalation: GNSO and/or ccNSO cannot replace a proper body of accountability.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond:dtropped again
Olivier Crepin-Leblond:back on
Jean-Jacques Subrenat:@Alan, my use of the word "trick" was not the most appropriate, I agree. But I would really request that you bring back the discussion, at some point, to linking the 2. Thanks.
Jean-Jacques Subrenat:@Alan: from the global user perspective, yes, the track should be direct to PTI Board.
Jean-Jacques Subrenat:@Alan +1, "a full functional Board".
Leon Sanchez:I rather contract with Ferrari or Lamborghini
Leon Sanchez:that would at least make the internet faster
Carlton Samuels:@Alan: Who makes the decision for contracting?
Jean-Jacques Subrenat:@Leon: if that is paid for by the community? ;-)
Carlton Samuels:..and if the PTI is an ICANN proprietary, why would it matter?
Leon Sanchez:@Jean-Jacques if it's for the good of the community, yes :P
Jean-Jacques Subrenat:@Leon: a long train would accommodate more members of the community, but... ;-)
Leon Sanchez:@JJ LOL! no doubt!
Carlton Samuels:@OCL: See, you got it! So the least problematic is PTI is the 'contract company'!
Jean-Jacques Subrenat:@Carlton: not the same.
seun:I thought PTI is the operator and not contractor
Alan Greenberg:@Seun, PTI is the operator BECAUSE it has a contract to do that work (ie it is a contractor).
seun:my connection is really failing me in this call
seun:apologies
seun:that said, I really encourage us to use the list more, for sake of people like myself
seun:@Alan yes that's correct in that sense
seun:I think what is not clear whether indeed PTI will have the current power that ICANN has as the IANA operator
Carlton Samuels:I always start at the end game and work myself backwards. First non-negotiable end game: the IANA function must remain under the inlfuence/purview/ command of ICANN.
seun:@Carton which is fine. So we are just creating the PTI to please some even though we know the real thing
Carlton Samuels:How we achieve that while making it appear ICANN is not in control? We find a way to separate the instructor from the instructee while keeping the instructee as a single issue ops; it can only say yes and can only do what is instructed.
seun:maybe I can live with that as well. Just like Alan said... at a cost
seun:although the cost will still end-up at end-user table
seun:I see some interesting future where the voice of the end-user may become more rant than now
Carlton Samuels:How we achieve that? Corporate structure that gives ICANN effective control. We have a choice an entity that is a wholly-owned CA PBC or a Delaware LLC. The LLC is a better one for we can make the employees directors and seconded from ICANN.
Carlton Samuels:So we control the 'Board' as well as the 'employees'.
Carlton Samuels:All neat and nicely tied up.
Carlton Samuels:Of course there will be howls. It will die eventually. And we move right along.
Leon Sanchez:audio is cutting
seun:yes
Terri Agnew:@JJS audio is cutting in and out
Terri Agnew:Apologies: @Sébastien, audio
Olivier Crepin-Leblond:@Terri -- it is Sébastien, nos JJS
Olivier Crepin-Leblond::-)
seun:WOW! @Sebastine...it defeats the essence of PTI I think
seun:I agree @Olivier
Sébastien:@Olivier let's organize demonstrations in the whole world for that ;)
Sébastien:We are the end users!!!!
Sébastien:@Alan we don't need PTI for that (separation)
seun:I think ensure ms involvement in the new structures going forward is the only thing we could ensure
Carlton Samuels:What would we be polling?
Jean-Jacques Subrenat:@Olivier: I think this requires consulting the full membership.
seun:+1 @JJ
Carlton Samuels:@OCL: Avoid confusion with clarity of the poll question.
Alberto Soto:Sorry, I must leave the meeting..
seun:@Alan what does fully control by ICANN mean?
seun:the CWG proposal has not indicated the powers of ICANN over PTI except the awarding of contract
Alan Greenberg:@Seun Wholly owned if that makes sense depending on the structure. Or the sole Member with rights to remove PTI board in that form of structure.
Terri Agnew:Welcome Christopher Wilkinson
Alan Greenberg:@Seun, ultimately, "Control" of PTI is moot if they no longer has the IANA contract. Do we really care what it does?
seun:Ops was they what the sole member mean? that ICANN can remove PTI board? I think we need to clarify if this is ICANN board or community
Carlton Samuels:IMHO, that question will attract overwhelming derision and be savaged by people who read! Let's ask the question on stewardship properly defined!
seun:@Alan I guess control I refer is in terms of whether ICANN controls PTI management including it's board and staff
Carlton Samuels:@Sebastien: "we are trying to sell something without the reason why" +++1
Carlton Samuels:You got it sah!
seun:running AC on mobile, apologies for typo
Carlton Samuels:All matters absent context is and remians just noise!
Jean-Jacques Subrenat:@Sébastien about our final aim being to concentrate on the interests of the global Internet user: +1.
christopher wilkinson:Is it a problem that ccNSO delays the process.
seun:@CW are they delaying the process?
christopher wilkinson:It was just said so.
seun:I think ccTLD is the least of the problem as it concerns CWG maybe yes for ccwg
Terri Agnew:CCWG Accountability: https://community.icann.org/x/IIMHAw
seun:@Olivier you have not said way forward for atlarge statement to CWG PC?
seun:looks like Olivier is no longer on AC?
Alan Greenberg:@Seun, at this point, you, I and Vanda are only ones who have commented. I will take what is out there in the next couple of days, and draft text for submission, and see what comments it receives.
seun:okay thanks.... may I know the deadline to comment on the wiki? may need to add my comments later?
seun:question to ccwg: is there any indication that ICANN board may not implement( in a timely manner) the recommendation of ccwg?
Alan Greenberg:@Tijani, no. Individual people HAVE a legal status.
Alan Greenberg:@Seun. We have not set a final deadline, but if you have substantive comments, you need to add them sooner rather than later.
seun:lol
Leon Sanchez:then we would spill the Board
Alan Greenberg:And what if they refuse to leave.
seun:@Alan refuse to leave... I guess that could happen for any organisation board but unlikely
Jean-Jacques Subrenat:Alan & Seun: in that case, the one with the deepest pocket wins with lawyers...
Alan Greenberg:@JJS, ONLY if you have the rigght to sue!
Heidi Ullrich:Thanks!
Aída Noblia:Saludos a todoss,
Tomohiro Fujisaki:bye!
Alan Greenberg:ATM, we have no standing to do so.
