...
Sub-Group Members: Donna Austin, Kurt Pritz, Martin Boyle, Staffan Jonson, Stephanie Duchesneau
Staff: Bart Boswinkel, Bernard Turcotte
**Please let Brenda know if your name has been left off the list (attendees or apologies).**
Transcript
Transcript CWG DT-C 10 April 2015.doc
Transcript CWG DT-C 10 April 2015.pdf
Recording
The Adobe Connect recording is available here: https://icann.adobeconnect.com/p48twarb76o/
The audio recording is available here: http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-dtc-10apr15-en.mp3
Notes
Mission
Includes language why it was established (first sentence)
Agreed
Include /change to :
as it relates to monitoring the performance of..."
Last paragraph
Agreed
Scope of responsibilities
First sentence (new)
Agreed
Change to fifth paragraph:
CSC is NOT a dispute mechanism
CSC may receive complaints ( re statisticsre statistics, etc.) NOT for individual cases.
Staffan: DT M was not pleased with repsonse DT M was not pleased with response ( see Staffan's email)
Martin: Useful to know, as to why DT M the CSC should go into details of other people problems DTM process approach,
Martin: CSC part of potential forum shopping
Staffan: Fear of forum shopping.
Sooner or later, deadlock of each other
Donna: Potential issues may have arisen from one of the papers
According to this paper
Stephanie: Question from Chuck ( DT M) whether escalation
Raise issue at DT leads
New sentences As suggested by David
Martin: Generally agreement , suggested refinement of language
"This consultation is expected to include any *proposed* changes to the IANA services that are underway or are anticipated in the future. "
Stephanie Strike underway.
Kurt: Retain expertise if necessary, expand the option.
Staffan: If CSC ehas an expended mandate If CSC has an expended mandate, make it not too big
Donna: Await
Donna: CSC is first and foremost a monitoring entity.
On the other hand David C, changes
No Authorization
CSC can facilitate consultation, _. IFO should take it forward ad implementation is its responsibility. CSC should not be in the position.
Donna:
DT CSC is uncomfortable with role of CSC to undertake a role in development
There is a need for such a mechanism, but need somewhere else
The CSC has an overview role. Overview is typically problem oriented, a reactive function to mend what doesn't work in a predefined order. Development (innovation) of IANA functions is not necessary in the scope of the CSC (maybe rather in IETF)
Composition
Only change, accepted
Terms:
Recall of Members
New language:
Agreed
Review
Separate the review of charter and effectiveness of CSC itself on -> one
Martin: review of charter in two year.
Turn round: At the request CSC, GNSO or ccNSO
Service levels review targets> it is initiated in one of the annual meetings. Should be driven by need
Stephanie: agrees with Martin
Review of Service level targets will be most important piece of data for review service
Change second paragraph: can be done at request of CSC, ccNSO and GNSO
Final Sentence: should be picked - up though in annual meeting, or as part of review of SOW.
Martin:
Good point Kurt, if SL no longer appropriate -> to be raised.
CSC should be able to raise issue and then go through consultation. CSC should not be put in a position to review every 18 month
Last paragraph:
The CSC or IFO, can request changes any time, any proposed
Martin: replace "changes" -> review
Donna: need a reasonable quick process to change
-------- (04/10/2015 14:45) ---------------------
Donna Austin, RySG: The CSC or the IFO can request a review or change to service level targets. Any proposed changes to service level targets as a result
of the review must be agreed by the ccNSO and GNSO.
Add : in accordance with a pre-defined process
Include general sentence around mechanism to define and change processes (to be approved by GNSO and ccNSO)
Action
Donna & Staffan Raise issues around
1. Potential overlap and divergence in interpretation of CSC with respect to its role in escalation process (limited view)
2. Placeholder for role in development/evolution of (new) services. Potential conflict with strict monitoring role. However recognition role is necessary
Chat Transcript
Brenda Brewer: (4/10/2015 06:45) Welcom to the DT-C Meeting on 10 April.
Staffan Jonson: (07:00) Hi all
Donna Austin, RySG: (07:00) Hi Staffan
Staffan Jonson: (07:04) let's start with the clean
Kurt: (07:04) clean version is good
Bart Boswinkel: (07:05) It is scrollable for all
Stephanie Duchesneau (Neustar): (07:05) change looks ok to me
Staffan Jonson: (07:05) yupp
Kurt: (07:06) "as it relates to monitoring the performance of..."
Bernard Turcotte - staff support: (07:06) The mission is will be achieved through regular monitoring
Bernard Turcotte - staff support: (07:07) IS is superfuous
Martin Boyle, Nominet: (07:07) i'm just in on audio now!
Staffan Jonson: (07:16) Agree Bart
Stephanie Duchesneau (Neustar): (07:16) i also flagged this discrepancy to chuck on DT M
Stephanie Duchesneau (Neustar): (07:16) yesterday, and he mentioned that he would take it back
Martin Boyle, Nominet: (07:21) "This consultation is expected to include any *proposed* changes to the IANA services that are underway or are anticipated in the future. "
Stephanie Duchesneau (Neustar): (07:21) if we are introducing proposed should we also strike underway
Staffan Jonson: (07:23) Let's leave it right nopw
Staffan Jonson: (07:23) and push on
Martin Boyle, Nominet: (07:24) good point, Stephanie
Staffan Jonson: (07:24) Type of a second opinion
Martin Boyle, Nominet: (07:24) That's very operational, isn't it, Kurt?
Staffan Jonson: (07:25) Yupp
Kurt: (07:25) yes
Kurt: (07:25) "operational" is in the first line of this charter
Kurt: (07:26) "changes to IANA operations or services"
Martin Boyle, Nominet: (07:26) Yes, but it is monitoring, not taking action...
Stephanie Duchesneau (Neustar): (07:27) in the first sentence the second period should be plural
Kurt: (07:27) "The CSC is authorised to retain the expertise necessary to oversee the changes"
Martin Boyle, Nominet: (07:27) I'm nervous about CSC taking what would then be decisions
Kurt: (07:27) i think we should reopen that issue
Kurt: (07:27) lets just talk
Martin Boyle, Nominet: (07:27) preempting the IFO's job!
Kurt: (07:31) You should be able to amend the charter whenever you want
Donna Austin, RySG: (07:31) @Kurt, which is at the request of the CSC
Kurt: (07:32) I agree with Martin, I think the Charter will be changed rarely but should be changed when it becomes necessary
Martin Boyle, Nominet: (07:35) "Thereafter, the Charter will be reviewed at the request of the ccNSO, the GNSO or the CSC."
Martin Boyle, Nominet: (07:36) and final para fine suggestion, Donna
Kurt: (07:41) "The CSC can raise for review Service Level Agreements by the ccNSO and RySG and initiate a process"
Kurt: (07:42) It's Martin's language - isn't it?
Staffan Jonson: (07:43) regularily
Kurt: (07:43) Don't say "may", say "can"
Donna Austin, RySG: (07:45) The CSC or the IFO can request a review or change to service level targets. Any proposed changes to service level targets as a result of the review must be agreed by the ccNSO and GNSO.
Bernard Turcotte - staff support: (07:46) +1 Ðonna
Martin Boyle, Nominet: (07:46) Good proposal Donna
Bernard Turcotte - staff support: (07:47) good point
Bernard Turcotte - staff support: (07:53) If we go back to the current system the NTIA ensures IANA actually does the properly consult the community on any changes - if the CSC is replacing the NTIA in this should it not replace this role?
Bernard Turcotte - staff support: (07:53) So the CSC technically is responsible for making certain the performance of this function is done properly
Donna Austin, RySG: (07:54) Bernie, I think the issue here is that we are trying to keeping the remit of the CSC to monitoring, and while this was done by NTIA previously, the CSC is not as well resourced.
Bernard Turcotte - staff support: (07:54) yes exactly this is what I am proposing for this
Kurt: (07:55) I don't think the CSC is "technically responsible" - I think it is a monitoring body
Kurt: (07:55) there should be an authorization function
Martin Boyle, Nominet: (07:55) happy with monitoring body
Martin Boyle, Nominet: (07:56) but would object to authorisation
Kurt: (07:56) they decided there should not be authorization of root zone changes
Bernard Turcotte - staff support: (07:56) There is no authorization for changes to the Root Zone - we have not talked about changes in technology
Kurt: (07:56) which was a mis-informed decision but nonetheless....
Kurt: (07:57) but the other team did not discuss authorization of operations or services changes
Kurt: (07:57) Martin wants to take the CSC out of the "line of blame" which is a very good idea
Bernard Turcotte - staff support: (07:57) correct
Staffan Jonson: (07:59) Yes CSC should be out of 'line of blame'
Staffan Jonson: (08:01) “In the event a change in IANA services is anticipated, the CSC may *invite* an ad hoc committee of technical and other …”
Staffan Jonson: (08:02) Indicating there is no right, nor no promise to taka help from the ad hoc committee
Kurt: (08:02) I agree with Donna and Martin - IANA should provide independednt corroboration that the change is implemented compentently
Bernard Turcotte - staff support: (08:05) I still think that the role of the CSC is to supervise that the IANA process has been properly followed
Kurt: (08:06) Some one has to write a process / procedure to address David Conrad's concern that this review needs a home
Bernard Turcotte - staff support: (08:06) Ah but there should be a process for how to bring in new services
Bernard Turcotte - staff support: (08:07) yes
Staffan Jonson: (08:07) Bernie: aagree that's what I tried to pronounce, I think
Kurt: (08:08) this is an authorization role: NTIA authorized root zone changes and authorized shanges in operations
Staffan Jonson: (08:08) So let's leave a placeholder for some other fnction to innovate development of DNS somewhere else
Bernard Turcotte - staff support: (08:08) there should be an IANA process for doing so - the CSC 's role is like everything else to ensure IANA performs this properly?
Bernard Turcotte - staff support: (08:09) CSC cannot be responsible to carrying out the process
Kurt: (08:09) "The CSC can raise proposed changes in operations for review and authorization"
Staffan Jonson: (08:10) “The role of the CSC is *not* to ensure development of new features of IANA services, since that need a wider input from community.” ??
Bernard Turcotte - staff support: (08:11) sorry no mike
Kurt: (08:11) NTIA, Verisign and IANA work together and determine when changes can be "turned on"
Bernard Turcotte - staff support: (08:13) I think this may be for DTF to request that IANA develop this process and that the CSC is responsible for monitoring that IANA actually follows it
Donna Austin, RySG: (08:14) Bernie is DTF a Design Team?
Bernard Turcotte - staff support: (08:14) yes changing processes given removal of NTIA
Donna Austin, RySG: (08:14) that would make sense
Martin Boyle, Nominet: (08:15) Like facilitation of dialogue wording
Martin Boyle, Nominet: (08:16) @Kurt: "NTIA, Verisign and IANA work together and determine when changes can be "turned on"" isn't NTIA changed to ccNSO & RySG?
Bernard Turcotte - staff support: (08:16) yes and that should be part of the process that has to be developped by IANA
Bernard Turcotte - staff support: (08:17) which can be monitored by CSC
Kurt: (08:18) Staffan put it well
Bernard Turcotte - staff support: (08:19) +1
Bernard Turcotte - staff support: (08:19) +1
Kurt: (08:19) "The CSC can raise proposed changes in operations for review and authorization"
Staffan Jonson: (08:20) The CSC has an overview role. Overview is typically problem oriented, a reactive function to mend what doesn’t work in a predefined order. Development (innovation) of IANA functions is not necessary in the scope of the CSC (maybe rather in IETF)
Bernard Turcotte - staff support: (08:21) sorry headset died
Bernard Turcotte - staff support: (08:21) back now
Bernard Turcotte - staff support: (08:22) sorry no mike
Bernard Turcotte - staff support: (08:22) we can talk after the call
Bernard Turcotte - staff support: (08:23) for some reason Adobe is not letting me talk
Bernard Turcotte - staff support: (08:24) Agree with Bart
Stephanie Duchesneau (Neustar): (08:25) there are some changes to the language pre-istanbul
Stephanie Duchesneau (Neustar): (08:26) i would have concerns about including without revisiting
Donna Austin, RySG: (08:26) I agree Stephanie, my intention was to make the two consisent. If Bernie and Bart think the Charter is adequate I'm happy to go with that.
Stephanie Duchesneau (Neustar): (08:27) got it - thanks donna
Bernard Turcotte - staff support: (08:30) Sound workable
Bernard Turcotte - staff support: (08:32) bye
Stephanie Duchesneau (Neustar): (08:32) thanks!
Staffan Jonson: (08:32) Thak You all