Date: 22 October 2014 (13:00 - 15:00 UTC)
Attendees:
Members: Wanawit Ahkuputra; Jaap Akkerhuis; Donna Austin; Fouad Bajwa; Graeme Bunton; Eduardo Diaz; Lise Fuhr; Erick Iriarte; Staffan Jonson; Paul Kane; Elise Lindeberg; Seun Ojedeji; Greg Shatan; Vika Mpisane.
Participants: Guru Acharya; Carolina Aguerre; Paradorn Athichitsakul; Maarten Botterman; Martin Boyle; Marc Carvell; Derby Chipandwe; Stephanie Duchesneau; Amr Elsadr; Lars-Erik Forsberg; Tomohiro Fujisaki; James Gannon; Chuck Gomes; Alan Greenberg; Byron Holland; Yasuichi Kitamura; Pitinan Kooarmornpatana; Brenden Kuerbis; Cheryl Langdon-Orr; Allan MacGillivray; Kieren McCarthy; Desiree Miloshevic; Milton Mueller; Kris Seeburn; Matthew Shears; Mary Uduma; Suzanne Woolf; Jiankang Yao; Peter Van Roste.
Staff: Grace Abuhamad; Bart Boswinkel; Berry Cobb; Marika Konings; Bernard Turcotte.
Apologies: Olawale Bakare; Fatima Cambronero; Olivier Crepin Leblond; Keith Davidson; Avri Doria; Robert Guerra; Tony Holmes; Stacey King; Jonathan Robinson
**Please let Grace know if your name has been left off the list (attendees or apologies).**
Proposed Agenda:
1. Welcome & Roll Call
2. Notes from last meeting & Review of action items
3. Proposal on how to structure the work
4.. Status on work on items 1 and 2 in RFP and volunteers
5. Example of triage of IANA Functions Contract
6. Any other business
7. Summary of action items and agreed items
Action Items
Action item 1: Send draft principles document out to the list to solicit written comments (see draft principles attached). Lise, Martin Boyle to work with Bernie to update document based on input received, suggestions made and determine whether updated version needs to be discussed further during next meeting or not.
Action item 2: WG members and participants to identify for which sub-groups they would like to volunteer (note, if you volunteer, please make sure that you are able to actively contribute - all members will be able to provide input / feedback throughout the process, but sub-group members are expected to hold the pen and move the discussion forward).
Action item 3: Volunteers to work with Allan on the triage effort to express their interest on the mailing list.
Action item 4: Staff to include a separate work item for this effort and update slides accordingly
Action item 5: Staff to send further details about F2F meeting as soon as possible, including confirmation of whether SO/ACs can appoint an alternate (from current CWG participants) to be supported to attend the F2F meeting if a member is not able to attend.
Full meeting notes are available here: Notes & Action items - 22 October 2014.docx
Transcript
The transcript is available here: Meeting3_22Oct.doc
Recording
The Adobe Connect recording for today's call is available here: https://icann.adobeconnect.com/p249g8lfadc/
The MP3 is available here: https://icann.box.com/shared/static/v7z1eaz6bhm40gen8f57.mp3
Documents Presented
CWG_Stewardship_Timeline_v0.2.pptx
SAMPLE TRIAGE OF IANA FUNCTIONS CONTRACT.docx
Chat Transcript
Marika Konings:Welcome to the IANA Stewardship Transition CWG meeting of 22 October 2014
Marika Konings:Please note that this meeting is starting at 13.00 UTC
Pitinan Kooarmornpatana:Hi, Thanks Marika
Seun:Hi Marika
Seun:kindly remember to call my number
Marika Konings:Hi Seun, we have you on the list for a dial-out, no worries
Wanawit Ahkuputra GAC:Hi Marika
Yasuichi Kitamura (ISOC-JP):hi, all.
Graeme Bunton:Good morning
Yasuichi Kitamura (ISOC-JP):unfortunately, soon, 22:00 here. :-)
Pitinan Kooarmornpatana:soon 8pm here :)
Pitinan Kooarmornpatana:could I test the audio... some background music?
Yasuichi Kitamura (ISOC-JP):I could hear the voice of the conference center.
Marika Konings:We are connecting the audio bridge
erick iriarte:hi marika
Marika Konings:Hi Erick
erick iriarte:i had some troubles with the conference center
Pitinan Kooarmornpatana:okie sound - checked
Marika Konings:@Erick - sorry to hear. If we can assist with a dial-out, please let us know.
James Gannon:Morning/Evening All
Bernard Turcotte:Hello!
jaap akkerhuis:Looks like I'm on
Bernard Turcotte:Very Bad echo on my end - anyone else?
Alan Greenberg:Still waiting to get on bridge.
Derby:Hello, its Derby from Lusaka Zambia joining the meeting
Marika Konings:@Bernie - no echo on my end. Maybe try connecting again?
Alan Greenberg:On now
Bernard Turcotte:muting speakers on Adobe seems to clear it up
Marika Konings:that should definitely help ;-)
Chuck Gomes (RySG/Verisign):Is everyone else hearing the static?
Marika Konings:sound is loud and clear here in Brussels
James Gannon:Yes Chuck its someones Mic
Alan Greenberg:No static here
Cheryl Langdon-Orr:audio all clear for me @chuck
Chuck Gomes (RySG/Verisign):Static stopped on my side.
Marika Konings:Please mute your lines and mics when not speaking
Derby:all clear for me
Allan MacGillivray (.ca):I am here as well.
Matthew Shears:Hello
Kieren McCarthy:Kieren McCarthy also here
Amr Elsadr:I'm in the AC room, but will dial in now.
Mary Uduma:Mary Uduma is here
Seun:Seun Ojedeji is also present
Grace Abuhamad:thanks you. noted
Byron Holland (ccNSO):Audio is clear for me - Byron
Berry Cobb:This chart and its dates are a visual summary extract of the Work Plan that was reviewed at the ICANN51 LA session.
Marika Konings:Please mute your lines and mics when not speaking.
Martin Boyle:martin boyle joined: I can't dial in and my line keeps interupting
Alan Greenberg:Under AOB, can we please add the possibility of Alternates. Given the possible difficulty with visas, this seems essential.
Seun:It was suggested that the f2f be added under AOB
Marika Konings:@Martin - do you need a dial out?
Greg Shatan:I've joined the call and the Adobe room.
Amr Elsadr:Not getting anything on the screen.
Marika Konings:@Amr, you may want to try restarting your AC
Amr Elsadr:Are these principles on how we do our work, or principles on which the proposal will be developed?
Guru Acharya:W.R.T Transparency: If volunteers are working in smaller working groups, then their deliberations should also be available in a publicly archived mailing list.
Byron Holland (ccNSO):Good point Elise!!
Alan Greenberg:Can we please have scrolling of principles?
Cheryl Langdon-Orr:nice catch indeed @elis
Philip Corwin:Yes, unlock the screen so we can scroll and see entire document
Amr Elsadr:http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2408226
Seun:is that the url referred @Amr
Amr Elsadr:Yes. It's an updated version of the IGP paper. Not the same as the one submitted earlier this year.
Byron Holland (ccNSO):Alan - too granular at this point
Alan Greenberg:Perhaps but I would like to understand expectations.
Matthew Shears:the delinking issue has sort of been addressed through the two track approach in the accountability process (although the degree of linkage or delinkage is a matter of debate)
Seun:Under the second item, i am thinking its a proposal and not proposal(s)
Amr Elsadr:To be clear, I was suggesting the the IGP's principles be discussed and considered, not adopted. I am more in favour of the more granular type of principles. We don't have very much time to submit the first draft proposal. We need to get into the nitty-gritty quickly.
James Gannon:Under transparency at a high level I think a note that all CWG deliberations must be public and on list (with the exception of F2F) would be worth adding
Maarten Botterman:trying to talk
Maarten Botterman:back now
Lars Erik Forsberg:Agree with Milton
Seun:I think Milton made my point
Amr Elsadr:Also agree with Milton. We need the more granular and detailed principles. Lets start talking about those.
Seun:if we have to state any principle then we just copy and paste what is on the NTIA requirement
Guru Acharya:+1 for Milton
Matthew Shears:Probably need two separate sets of principles - CWG working principles; transition principles.
Chuck Gomes (RySG/Verisign):+1 to Matthew
James Gannon:I think given the timelines we need to more proposal based work as soon as possible.
Guru Acharya:+1 to Matthew
Mark Carvell:The point was well-made in the GAC discussions in LA that the articulation of high level principles should be beyond what is already well understood and established but assist in setting out the vision for IANA. its stewardship and inter alia appropriate effective accountability, redress mechanisms and review.
Staffan Jonson:Maarten: hear hear
Chuck Gomes (RySG/Verisign):Because of the large number of participants it would be helpful if everyone identified who they represented along with their name in Adobe.
Milton:Mark: the way to do that is to construct a particular organizational proposal for how the new IANA should operate
Marika Konings:Please note that you can update your name in Adobe Connect by using the 'edit my info' menu option when you hoover over your name in the attendee pod and right click
Byron Holland (ccNSO):Chuck +1 - we are not all known to each other, so name, community, and member or participant would be helpful in the early going
Amr Elsadr:The requirement of this CWG to follow bottom-up processes in its work, and the need to meet the NTIA requirements are all part of the charter of this CWG. We don't need new principles on how the CWG works.
James Gannon (Independent - Security Focus):Thanks Marika
Byron Holland (ccNSO):Good point Greg. Perhaps a n action item ?
James Gannon (Independent - Security Focus):+1 Amr
Mark Carvell:Milton: agree entirely but not yet at that stage - in UK at least. I woudlexpect that agreeing principles with our stakeholder advisory group will enable us to focus on potential model(s). Maybe more widely in the GAC as well.
Seun Ojedeji (AFRALO/ALAC):+1
Stephanie Duchesneau:the CWG charter does distinguish certian principles for the proposals and others for the conduct of the CWG
Milton:Yes, Amr is right!!!! The leisurely pace in which we repeat the work that is already done is a bit disturbing
Lars Erik Forsberg:again someone talking sense
Martin Boyle:Amr+1
James Gannon (Independent - Security Focus):Yes full agreement, we need to move to working on proposals not process
Matthew Shears (CDT):Agree - need to move to considering models and set a deadline for the submissions
Allan MacGillivray (.ca):+1 to Amr
Martin Boyle:But need principles or criteria to judge the proposals
Greg Shatan:As long as everybody agrees on the principles, we can move on. If not, we can see how we disagree.
James Gannon (Independent - Security Focus):Yes lets work on what the solutions needs as opposed to the CWG
Kieren McCarthy:I agree with moving forward. There simply isn't time to spend a week discussing principles. If we must have them, why not set up a parallel team
Greg Shatan:In my view, these are simply a "short form" version of the requirements for the proposal (other than sub-bullet 1 under transparency).
Martin Boyle:Milton + 1
Greg Shatan:We are now wasting time talking about wasting time. This is becoming regressive....
Kieren McCarthy:I understand this culture of allowing everyone to speak and walking through issues but fundamentally we need the ability to run much more work-driven meetings
Brenden Kuerbis:Would suggest folks take a read of IETF draft proposal to get a good sense of the issues, depth at which we need to be discussing.
Guru Acharya:Request chair to please stop comments on current item and move to the next item.
James Gannon (Independent - Security Focus):I think we need to have discussions about options such as the document Guru Acharya offered here: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1B46mlsyZUFF4bZfeWgGCdqIQHCP2BMOy4KZU4RiRiE8/edit?usp=sharing
Milton:Elise, have you read the charter of the CWG?
Kieren McCarthy:What about links to proposals already put forward by others? I'm thinking APNIC and IETF - to get a sense of what others are already doing
Byron Holland (ccNSO):Reminder to put your hand down when you are finished your comment
Milton:Right, Seun!
Matthew Shears (CDT):this may help: http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ianaplan-icg-response/?include_text=1
Graeme Bunton:Going mobile, may drop.
Bernard Turcotte:Good idea
Elise Lindeberg GAC:Milton - just pointing out that i think the community will expect us to have some agreed principles that has guided our work - not as principles that is going to be put out there as part of the final ressult
Milton:Elise, I think the community expects us to get our work done. Note that the protocols and numbers people are already discussing draft proposals, and the protocols proposal is on its third draft
Elise Lindeberg GAC:Milton - noted :)
Milton::-)
Mark Carvell:Martin & Bernie: I will check with Peter Nettlefold (Australian GAC rep lead on this issue) when the GAC document of guiding principles can be made available to the CWG as a cross check with consensus government expectations.
Guru Acharya:If smaller working groups (sub-groups) are working in parallel, then the deliberations of the smaller working groups should also be available in publicly archived mailing lists.
Seun Ojedeji (AFRALO/ALAC):I don't think we need those details about commuities use of IANA function. I think it should be relative, this group is all about names and we should focus on that alone
James Gannon (Independent - Security Focus):+1 Guru we cannot obfuscate the transparency of any of these subgroups
Alan Greenberg:SSAC reports SAC067 and SAC068 cover a lot of what is being described here regarding background knowledge needed.
Seun Ojedeji (AFRALO/ALAC):+1 to that Alan
erick iriarte:marka/grace question, could you share the ppt in the emailing list?
James Gannon (Independent - Security Focus):I think we are massivly overcomplicating this by having subgroups, subgroup chairs and again addinng layers of process that are going to slow down work.
erick iriarte:marika/grace question: could you sahre the ppt in the emailing list?
Marika Konings:@Erick - we'll share all the documents presented during this meeting as well as notes shortly after this meeting and will also have them posted on the wiki
Bernard Turcotte:sorry I just fell off the call dialing back in
Kieren McCarthy:Can I grab that presentation file somewhere?
erick iriarte:thanks. :)
Milton:Agree with Chuck
Amr Elsadr:Yes. It'd be great if the slides were uploaded to the wiki.
Greg Shatan:+1 to Chuck
Matthew Shears (CDT):+1 Chuck
Carolina Aguerre:Agree wtih Chuck.
Guru Acharya:+1 to Chuck
Bernard Turcotte:back
Greg Shatan:Who does NOT want to be in subgroup 3?
Marika Konings:Maybe the work of subgroup 3 can be carried out on the main mailing list so that everyone can follow along? While for the others we could create separate, publicly archived mailing lists.
Matthew Shears (CDT):+1 Marika
Kieren McCarthy:+1 Marika
Amr Elsadr:Will this subgroup have additional calls apart from that of the whole group?
Guru Acharya:+1 to Marika
Allan MacGillivray (.ca):+1 Marika
Brenden Kuerbis:+1 Marika
James Gannon (Independent - Security Focus):+1 Seun
Guru Acharya:Maybe atleast the higher level option/scenario can be first decided on the main mailing list and once that option is agreed upon then we can give the detailed work to the smaller sub-group.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr:No we do need a degree of stucture for this nit ad hoc organisations to b more timeley and show responsabilities.
Amr Elsadr:Can we get scrolling control of the slides being shared please?
Marika Konings:@Amr - you should be able to scroll through the screen
Greg Shatan:Agree with Seun. We can't all hold the pen simultaneously. But we should all be in the discussion.
Mary Uduma:The line breaks and I am finding it difficult to keep up with the meeting
Seun Ojedeji (AFRALO/ALAC):I don't think they should
Seun Ojedeji (AFRALO/ALAC):thats why i suggested it should not be a formal group
Marika Konings:Additional calls could also be set up, depending on the needs of the sub-group
Cheryl Langdon-Orr:Yes to the ipoeness but siomeone needs the 'responsabilities' especially when in sub group mode
Marika Konings:From experience with other efforts, it really depends on the sub-group whether work is done via the mailing list and/or calls
Seun Ojedeji (AFRALO/ALAC):Just a team of about 3 to 5 who will be pen holders for the draft with all of us having a comment access
Guru Acharya:+1 Seun
Amr Elsadr:If there won't be dedicated calls for subgroup 3 to help their work coming along quicker, then I don't really see the point?
Mark Carvell:Not sure why IV is a separate chunk of activity from III - ok if in parallel with III I guess. Correct me if I missed the main objective of IV.
Seun Ojedeji (AFRALO/ALAC):+1 to Elise
Mary Uduma:I strongly support the process of working in subgroups or draftig groups to develop the draft work for the review of the CWG .
Amr Elsadr:I also think subgroups is a good idea. I would also support extra calls for the subgroups to fascilitate faster delivery.
Allan MacGillivray (.ca):+1 to Amr
Suzanne Woolf:Are "participants" eligible to join sub-groups?
Suzanne Woolf:Oh, that's answered, never mind :)
Derby:the sub group is good idea, this way work will be done faster
Allan MacGillivray (.ca):I think we have to get Group III staffed today
Guru Acharya:The deliberations of Group 1 and 2 are already ongoing? Can you please point us to thier mailing list?
Mary Uduma:+1@ Suxanne
Matthew Shears (CDT):The bulk of the work lies in 3 and 4 - the work in 1 and 2 is more just research and listing of existng processes.
Matthew Shears (CDT):Need to jump into 3 now to save time I think
Greg Shatan (GNSO/CSG/IPC):+1 to Mark Carvell
Kieren McCarthy:So I agree with Bernie - may be useful to have one week where everyone focuses on what the situation is now so we all have a baseline understanding before starting work
Martin Boyle:sorry, got to leave
Guru Acharya:I dont understand why group 1 and group 2 deliberations are not open.
Suzanne Woolf:@Matthew: no time to lose
Elise Lindeberg GAC:Agree Mark- we could start group 3 now, - lot of work could start even if result from group 1 and 2 are pending
Chuck Gomes (RySG/Verisign):@ Guru: Group 1/2 is open. please join.
Staffan Jonson:structure adreed
Staffan Jonson:structure agrreed
Guru Acharya:Please point me to the mailing list?
James Gannon (Independent - Security Focus):Chuck: I think the issue was more are the discussions public?
Kieren McCarthy:Where is Group 1 /2 online?
James Gannon (Independent - Security Focus):Yup I'll work with Group 3
Greg Shatan (GNSO/CSG/IPC):I volunteer for Group 3.
Staffan Jonson:volunteer group 3
erick iriarte:i volunter for group 3 too :)
Allan MacGillivray (.ca):I volunteer for Group 3
Kieren McCarthy:So I will volunteer to work with group 1/2 in order to help produce documents that are easy to read and understand
James Gannon (Independent - Security Focus):Can we just have a signup on list please
Cheryl Langdon-Orr:As do I @CLO
James Gannon (Independent - Security Focus):For public archive
Mark Carvell:Keep sub-group set up as simple as possible to avoid overlap and irisk of inconsistency - e.g. merge III and IV . Happy to join this group.
Seun Ojedeji (AFRALO/ALAC):I am up for 1 and 3 if its not overkill already
Matthew Shears (CDT):who does not want to be in group 3?
Chuck Gomes (RySG/Verisign):@James: A first draft will be posted to the CWG before the next meeting for everyone to review and comment on. Alan will talk about that in the next agenda item.
Kris Seeburn:i think signup is better
Milton:Kudos to Kieren to make sections 1 and 2 clear
Mary Uduma:+1@ Bart
Amr Elsadr:Also please upload the slides to the CWG wiki.
James Gannon (Independent - Security Focus):@Chuck thanks for the clarification =)
Seun Ojedeji (AFRALO/ALAC):i presume item 4 to 6 would not require a sub-group
Donna Austin:Donna Austin from th RySG also volunteers for sub-group 3.
Amr Elsadr:@Seun: +1. I guess those two could be done collectively by the whole group when the others are done.
Milton:When and where does one OFFICIALLY volunteer/sign up for something?
James Gannon (Independent - Security Focus):Milton: I would hope on lsit for transparency
James Gannon (Independent - Security Focus):*list
Matthew Shears (CDT):I volunteer for 3 and 4
Brenden Kuerbis:Agree that proposed groups, volunteering needs to happen on list
Paul Kane:I volunteer for 3
Seun Ojedeji (AFRALO/ALAC):I think we should agree on which of the items require a sub-group and which does not
Suzanne Woolf:@brenden +1 or an open wiki or....public, easily accessible.
James Gannon (Independent - Security Focus):Marika throw me down for Group 4 aswell please
Carolina Aguerre:I volunteer for 4
Stephanie Duchesneau:please include me for subgroup three
James Gannon (Independent - Security Focus):turn off speakers
Amr Elsadr:Definitely not better. :)
Milton:ALL: I thought we were told that volunteering here was NOT the place to do so
Alan Greenberg:Impressive echo!
Vika Mpisane:No that's not better at all:-)
Amr Elsadr:Volunteering will be on-list.
Marika Konings:We can create a wiki page for each sub-group and list members that have volunteered so there is an easily accessible public record.
Amr Elsadr:Thanks Marika. :)
Marika Konings:including a link to the google drive, so sub-groups can decide whether to post any drafts there or use the wiki instead (in either case there will be one location from where you will be able to get to any information concerning the sub-groups)
Vika Mpisane:That's a good idea, Marika
Suzanne Woolf:there's some decent background reading available, work in ietm 1/2 is largely in producing an assessment focused on the naming functions specifically
Kieren McCarthy:Link Suzanne?
Suzanne Woolf:I think the SSAC67 link has been here before but: https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/sac-067-en.pdf(overview of IANA functions) and https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/sac-068-en.pdf (deconstruction of the contract)
Kieren McCarthy:great tks
Vika Mpisane:Allan's breaking up
Alan Greenberg:SSAC reports 67 and 68 at https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/documents-2012-02-25-en
Greg Shatan (GNSO/CSG/IPC):@Allan: I will volunteer to assist with contract triage.
Milton:activate my mic! no longer on phone
James Gannon (Independent - Security Focus):Allan I can assist with that asweel as an 'outside eye' if needed
Kieren McCarthy:Ah - the SSAC doc - I thought I'd missed something
Amr Elsadr:Milton, YOU need to activate your mic.
Milton:still getting on the phone
Donna Austin:I like Allan's approach
Alan Greenberg:Mark hard to hear
Kieren McCarthy:I am thinking whether there are missing categories. So far this looks like a very logical approach
Seun Ojedeji (AFRALO/ALAC):am here
Suzanne Woolf:One of the challenges of parsing the contract is that it incorporates ICANN's proposal as part of the contract, so there may be provisions specifics to USG and there may also be provisions specific to ICANN choices of how to provide it.
Milton:I am on the line now
Guru Acharya:+1: I agree this presupposes a contract
Mark Carvell:Many thanks Alan. The A- E breakdown looks just right to me. Very good basis for this important analysis that will provide a base-line arrangement on which to build.
Kris Seeburn:But can also be used a a checklist against proposal as well...
Matthew Shears (CDT):+ 1 Kris
Seun Ojedeji (AFRALO/ALAC):In which of the 6 items does the reviewing IANA contract fall?
Guru Acharya:+1 to Milton
Matthew Shears (CDT):Agree with Milton - perhaps rather than retain we should say "take into consideration"
Mark Carvell:A,C and D should intersect with the principles asap. Then see what needs tobe enhanced or augmented in a proposal for a structure.
Eduardo Diaz:Which group is going to go through this? Groop II?
Mark Carvell:Eduardo: more for baseline for group III.
Guru Acharya:I think everyone agrees that this work is necessary as long as the "retain in contract" is renamed to "retain for consideration"
Chuck Gomes (RySG/Verisign):Agree with Alan that the triage work should be done by a separate group.
Chuck Gomes (RySG/Verisign):I think it will be easier to do the contract triage after we finish 3.
Chuck Gomes (RySG/Verisign):Some of the triage could start now though.
Eduardo Diaz:@Mark: it seem to me that this is another group all by itself. It should be a sub-group of subgroup II
Cheryl Langdon-Orr:agree @`\
Greg Shatan (GNSO/CSG/IPC):@Chuck, I think the triage will inform the work of Group 3.
Alan Greenberg:@Guru Where does it say "retain in contract"?
Greg Shatan (GNSO/CSG/IPC):Let's call it Group 2.5, since it is both backward and forward looking.
Mark Carvell:Who would be in this sub-group in addition to Alan? That woudl usefully input into III I would suggest
Matthew Shears (CDT):+1 Greg
Allan MacGillivray (.ca):@Guru - I purposely chose the term 'retain in a future arrangement' rather than 'contract'
Chuck Gomes (RySG/Verisign):@ Greg: the triage will inform 3 and 3 will inform triage.
Greg Shatan (GNSO/CSG/IPC):@Chuck: A virtuous cycle :-)
Guru Acharya:@allan: Understood and agreed
James Gannon (Independent - Security Focus):Yes
Mark Carvell:Greg: 2.5 - this is getting bureaucratic (that is a bureaucrat speaking).
Elise Lindeberg GAC:I think the group on lokking into the contract is at the core of our work - we need an early up discussion on this - how to secure perfomance and replace IANA function if not by contract....
Matthew Shears (CDT):do we need to set a deadline for the submission of proposals for consideration?
Seun Ojedeji (AFRALO/ALAC):i think google drive is good for both
Bernard Turcotte:That was the idea = repository
Eduardo Diaz:@Seun: How do you use it for commenting anything
Brenden Kuerbis:Agree with Seun. Re commenting on Google Docs, see https://support.google.com/docs/answer/65129?hl=en
Seun Ojedeji (AFRALO/ALAC):it has highlight and comment
Amr Elsadr:@Eduardo: Drive allows threads of comments on specific text.
Amr Elsadr:@Eduard: What Seun said.
Chuck Gomes (RySG/Verisign):Alternates should be funded if the member cannot attend.
Amr Elsadr:@Alan: +1
Cheryl Langdon-Orr:of course needs to be sorted
Amr Elsadr:I think Olivier's request was for anothe CWG, right?
James Gannon (Independent - Security Focus):No for this one
Alan Greenberg:Since dates are fixed and so close, there WILL be people who cannot get visa. Also, several people have said they cannot attend due to prior commitments. SO we will need to resolved this quickly if alternates will be allowed.
Eduardo Diaz:@Amr: The way comments work in Google drive is by document (withing the document) you can 't add a general comment about various documents or work in general.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr:Exactlky Alan
Amr Elsadr:@Eduardo: Yes. That's true. A wiki would work better for that purpose.
Guru Acharya:Will the calls of the sub-groups be transcribed and translated?
Cheryl Langdon-Orr:@edwardo @Amr, go for a hybrid model develope the drfts in G Docs, and ensure that regular versio updates are posted to wiki for more general comment ??
Marika Konings:@Guru - I believe the agreement was concerning the main CWG meetings as there was no talk of sub-groups at that time yet.
Amr Elsadr:@CLO: Sounds like a plan. :)
Cheryl Langdon-Orr:LOL that's 'my line' @ Amr ;-)
Amr Elsadr::)
James Gannon (Independent - Security Focus):For those of us travelling independently so we have a confirmed venue for Frankfurt (Want to get hotel closeby)
Seun Ojedeji (AFRALO/ALAC):I don't understand how alternates will really work in this case since its going to be a lot of pre activity and post activity
James Gannon (Independent - Security Focus):*do we
Alan Greenberg:Participants can do as much work as "members", so no reason that they cannot be alternates.
Greg Shatan (GNSO/CSG/IPC):I assume the alternates would be drawn from the Participants.
Alan Greenberg:Only thing they cannot do is vote.
Marika Konings:@Alan - correct, the assumption is that alternates would be chosen from the existing participants as those have the background and have hopefully actively participated
Byron Holland (ccNSO - participant):can we go back to the timeline slide
Cheryl Langdon-Orr:Indeed @`Greg
Greg Shatan (GNSO/CSG/IPC):I assume the Participants acting as alternate Members would be able to vote.
Seun Ojedeji (AFRALO/ALAC):Okay i just lost my Audio
Seun Ojedeji (AFRALO/ALAC):again i don't understand what made the time to be the best
Seun Ojedeji (AFRALO/ALAC):can i just get an explanation about why that is the best
Amr Elsadr:@Alan, @Greg: If I'm not mistaken, Seun may be concerned that not all members have participants repping their communities who could act as alternates. I may, of course, be mistaken.
Marika Konings:@Greg - the CWG is expected to operate on the basis of consensus, not voting
Seun Ojedeji (AFRALO/ALAC):thats my point @Amr
Marika Konings:To see current list of members and participants, please see https://community.icann.org/x/1QrxAg
Alan Greenberg:@Amr, correct, some participants are private agents. But if a group names someone as alternate, then they defacto represent.... At least in my view.
Brenden Kuerbis:Given the time, other contraints it is imperative that drafts are circulated among stakeholders _as they are developed_. Its the only way we'll hit the target.
Marika Konings:@Chuck - yes, we will confirm this as soon as we can
Byron Holland (ccNSO - participant):Chuck +1
Seun Ojedeji (AFRALO/ALAC):@Alan not sure i understand what private agents mean....but the point is that the f2f is a critical meeting that requires members to participate. Its not just about attending
Allan MacGillivray (.ca):Who would decide which Partcipant' would be chosen as the replecment =
Seun Ojedeji (AFRALO/ALAC):its the ability to participate
Greg Shatan (GNSO/CSG/IPC):@Marika: Then the alternate should be able to participate as a Member in the consensus call (and in any polling, which does not constitute voting per the Charter).
Greg Shatan (GNSO/CSG/IPC):@Allan: I assume it would be the nominating organization.
Amr Elsadr:@Alan: Yes of course, and I appreciate the challenge in scheduling a F2F. Still, I'm guessing it won't be easy to get an alternate for AFRALO.
Chuck Gomes (RySG/Verisign):@ Allan: The group that a member represents should decide who the alternate is.
Allan MacGillivray (.ca):@Chuk - what is 'the group'? The GNSO Council as a whole for example?
Bart Boswinkel:I assume alternates have to be particpants of the group, if appointed by SO/AC?
Amr Elsadr:@Marika: +1
Greg Shatan (GNSO/CSG/IPC):@Allan: In GNSO, each SG put up a Member, so the SG would decide which alternate to "elevate"
Allan MacGillivray (.ca):@Bart - they can become 'participants' fairly quickly
Eduardo Diaz:@Marika: Thnaks for the clarification
Chuck Gomes (RySG/Verisign):@ Alan: The RySG for the group I am in. etc.
Greg Shatan (GNSO/CSG/IPC):@Bart, functionally that would the most useful method, esp. given the short timeframe.
Alan Greenberg:@Allan, should be participants from start (or at least now) - otherwise to much catch up
Seun Ojedeji (AFRALO/ALAC):what is wrong with nov 20th to 22nd if it works for all?
Chuck Gomes (RySG/Verisign):@ Alan Greenburg: Yes, alternates should come from participants.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr:yup
Cheryl Langdon-Orr:ACTIVE participants
Marika Konings:@Amr - yes
Greg Shatan (GNSO/CSG/IPC):@Cheryl: Hyperactive participants? :-)
Amr Elsadr:Thanks.
Chuck Gomes (RySG/Verisign):@ Cheryl: Yes, Active Participants.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr:LOL @ Greg
Staffan Jonson:Excellent chairing, Lise. Thank You all for a very focused meeting. A lot is beeing covered in short time
Byron Holland (ccNSO - participant):Well done Lise :=)
Cheryl Langdon-Orr:Thanks all good call...
Chuck Gomes (RySG/Verisign):Thanks Lise.
Seun Ojedeji (AFRALO/ALAC):and for my region active participants is not readily available
James Gannon (Independent - Security Focus):Thanks Lise
Matthew Shears (CDT):Many thanks!
Cheryl Langdon-Orr:Thanks @Lise
Amr Elsadr:Thanks all. Bye.
Eduardo Diaz:Adios
Peter Van Roste - Participant (ccNSO, CENTR):Thanks LIse, bye everyone.
Seun Ojedeji (AFRALO/ALAC):bye
Mary Uduma:Bye
Seun Ojedeji (AFRALO/ALAC):cheers
Carolina Aguerre:Thank you Lise and All
Paradorn Athichtsakul:Thank you
Guru Acharya:I'd like to thank Grace for managing everything wonderfully!
