Transcript

Transcript CWG DT-C 24 March.doc

Transcript CWG DT-C 24 March.pdf

Recording

The Adobe Connect recording is available here:   https://icann.adobeconnect.com/p5vo7ciw284/

The audio recording is available here:   http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-dtc-23mar15-en.mp3

Notes

Notes DT C call 23 March 2015

1. Roll call

All except Sarah at the call

Discussion Overview Document

Overview section

Section 1. Agreed

Section 2. New section. Agreed

Section 3. Agreed

Ensure in the charter that the CSC is mandated to develop its own working methods 

Section 4. Agreed

Section 5. 

Suggestion: CSCS and NTIA run in parallel for a while. 

Hand-over responsibilities of operational oversight role 

If reporting is different, the reporting would be burdensome. 

Face in approach, to avoid smooth transition.

Agreed but need to take into consideration issues identified above

Section 6: 

Martin comment: avoid to be unduly prescriptive

Suggestion: 6, 7, 8 and 9 are linked / should be clustered with section 1

Action re-number section 

Kim: In which circumstances, should you endeavor to change.

Martin: leave the world "will" in.

Kurt: Grouping them together supported

Include word usually -> shall

Other groups will be talking about escalation. At the same time core is cooperation between IANA and CSC.

Donna: reference to escalation is included in section 10.

Martin: At the end of cooperative process, and only if this fails, escalation process will be pursued.

Proposal  is to separate it.

Staffan: DT M proposal, quite detailed proposal on escalation process. 

Donna: need to find middle ground

Section 7: Agreed

Section 8: Agreed

Section 9: new.

Staffan: do we need to decide it should be "annually"?

Donna: to have a regular meeting

Stephanie: Annual is included to distinguish from 4. 

Kurt proposal: The CSC shall hold a formal regular (at least annual) meeting.

Action update language 

Martin: The CSC shall hold a formal regular (typically annual) meeting..

Kurt suggestion adopted

The CSC shall hold a formal regular (at least annual) meeting.

Action update language 

Section 10: 

Donna: the reason to move away from escalation, the word "escalation" comes with baggage.  At the same time needs to be addressed.

Martin: Will propose some language

10 bis or 11 bis could read "should resolution processes not remedy failings in the provision of the IANA functions service, CSC can escalate the issue in the process identified bt DT-M

Donna: CWG is used to the world "escalation"

Martin: concern is that "escalation" goes out of CSC. Remedial action should stay within the CSC.

Staffan: CSC is initial point of escalation.

Donna: 

1. direct customer can come to CSC

2. Overall management of the IANA, based on reporting. These two remedial should be clearly distinguished.

Individual TLD could seek remedial assistance from CSC, which is dealt with in Section 11

Donna: Revisit section 10 and 11, following conversation with DT M

Action: Revisit section 10 and 11, following conversation with DT M

Section 12.

Financial issue

Concern raised, some stakeholder group want to participate in CSC.

Stephanie: need for a narrow. At the same time it will be contentious also in context of discussion around MRT

Staffan: suggest to include two alternatives, to choose for consideration by the CWG

Martin: If CSC is doing its job well, it will be boring. Having liaisons will be unnecessary under these circumstances. Not mention the origin of liaisons. The liaisons from other ICANN groups, who should keep their group informed.

Donna: Include qualifications: should be kept small, and people on CSC should be qualified

Stephanie:  Differentiating between members and liaisons gives us some flexibility to define the roles (as martin is suggesting) when we have a sense of what kind of participation other groups are seeking

Strike the number and include reference to liaisons with description of role.

Martin: issue around "expert" . Suggestion CSC: CSC could seek "expert advisors". 

Staffan: Frankfurt take away was the sense of capture, by including multi-stakehoderism. at other level.

Suggestion Kim: IANA liaison to CSC. AS part of reporting function need for IANA to have a seat at the table. as non-voting participant.

Staffan: supports idea. 

Martin: more then support. If there issues, this person would be able to explain to what and why

Stephanie: not opposed. The CSC will be interacting but to have one at the table .

Donna: Steve C suggested that RSSAC represent direct customers of naming function. 

Staffan: include as liaison

Martin: Root server operators, special role, and as such should be part of CSC.

Kurt: Question whether liaison or member? they can always be elevated.

Kim: rare direct interaction. At the same time high interest, in the Root zone. 

Donna: minimum of 2 ccTLD and 2 gTLDs, and liaisons from other groups and 1 IANA liaison. 

Fundamental principles

Should be kept small and members should have relevant expertise

Two options:

1. TLDs ( cc and g) + RSSAC Liaisons + 1 IANA Liaison

2. As 1, + other liaisons

Section 13

Staffan: Sounds reasonable. Original with MRT, but now back with CSC

Related to change on how IANA does its business

Kurt: Endgame in escalation process. Depends on composition

Martin: section 13 reflects outward facing aspects of the CSC. 

Need to go out with proposals if changes.

Stephanie: 13 should include a change to how IANA does its business OR to how the CSC does its business

Review language to ensure it is about day-to day business

Action Strike affect oversight of the IANA Naming Functions.

and replace with Stephanie's suggestions:  a change to how IANA does its business OR to how the CSC does its business

Section 14

Donna:

14  is about escalation and step in separability, not mandated to make such a change. 

Add, change to:   remediation /escalation process 

Dependencies section of Document

Action Add dependency relating to DT M (Escalation)

Kim: IDN repository is not contracted, but falls under responsibility of IANA department. Other example: List of accredited registrars (also maintained by IANA department)

Martin: Management of .INT similar to other functions. If considered to be part of role of CSC, customers of INT should also be aprt of CSC

Kim: Majority of customer International org. 

From general perspective. it is considered part of naming function

Keep reference to .INT in.

Keep in reference to IDN repository as placeholder 

Discussion on Table

Take out column CSC Perform

Row 3.4 Security Plan

Kim: if security , not to made public.

Martin: Okay with Kim's suggestion. Supports concept of 3rd party auditor, to show it has been gone through. 

See comment Kim, to be included

Row 4.6: leave it in but recognize it is deliverable at he end of contract. Left in to acknowledged it has been looked at.

Row 7.2: suggestion to include language that it is being done.

Strawman section 

Kurt suggest to include principles. Need to adjust and evolve over time. 

Martin: DT M and remedial action are not parallel but different processes.

If remedial process fails, the escalation process kicks in.

Question: whether the level of detail as in strawman is needed in this document. 

If Remedial action does not resolve then next step.

Donna: let's leave in , understanding that level of detail will be challenged. 

Process to make complaints

Donna for individual cases keep information confidential

Kim: in some cases information needs to be remain confidential.

Work Plan needs to be on list

Onsite  visit of IANA facility

Is there a need to maintain. 

Question how often does NTIA visit? Hardly

Onsite visit is not needed

Review of reporting requirements post-transition

Second paragraph: agreed

Composition of the CSC: should match the suggestion in Overview

Keep in description to delineate differences

CSC 

Take out Travel funding out for Onsite visit. 

No travel support recommended for CSC

Action Items

Action re-number section (section 6)

Action update language (section 9)

Action: Revisit section 10 and 11, following conversation with DT M

Action Strike affect oversight of the IANA Naming Functions.

Action Add dependency relating to DT M (Escalation)

Chat Transcript

Brenda Brewer:Welcome to the DT-C Meeting on 23 March.

  Brenda Brewer:calling you now Bart

  Grace Abuhamad:Hi all

  Staffan Jonson:Hi all

  Donna Austin, RySG:Hi All, I'm just dialling in now.

  Staffan Jonson:waiting for voice connection

  Martin Boyle, Nominet:I'm in on he same line as Bart

  Grace Abuhamad:Kim -- do you have the dial in details

  Kim Davies:Calling in now

  Grace Abuhamad:ok great

  Brenda Brewer:This call is being recorded.

  Stephanie Duchesneau (Neustar):just got through the bridge

  Kim Davies:Forewarning — I am in a noisy hotel lobby. WIll try and stay on mute.

  Staffan Jonson:I'm Noiseing down my office - slight revenge for office landscape :-)

  Staffan Jonson:...based on its charter

  Kurt:I wouldn't change the sentence here

  Kurt:I agree with Martin

  Staffan Jonson:Maye cluster together 1, 6,7,8, & 9 together

  Kurt:Just take "usually" out

  Kurt:The CSC shall...

  Staffan Jonson:You fell out MArtin

  Staffan Jonson:fell out of hearing

  Kurt:How can you sound like you're gone?

  Kurt:Sorry for messing up the numbers and the person

  Bart Boswinkel:Document is scrollable for all

  Kurt:I agree with Martin

  Kurt:"Regular" instead of "annual"

  Kurt:"at least annual"

  Kurt:The CSC shall hold a formal regular (at least annual) meeting..."

  Kurt:The CSC and the Iana functions  operator

  Kurt:Remember others in the CWG will be looking for "escalation" and we don't want to cede this issue to them

  Bernard Turcotte - staff support:@Kuert - why?

  Martin Boyle, Nominet:10 bis or 11 bis could read "should resolution processes not remedy failings in the provision of the IANA functions service, CSC can escalate the issue in the process identified bt DT-N

  Staffan Jonson:DT M is escalation

  Martin Boyle, Nominet:"by DTY-M"

  Martin Boyle, Nominet:DT-M

  Bernard Turcotte - staff support:+1

  Staffan Jonson:I do like the formulation The CSC will have the ciscretion..."

  Bernard Turcotte - staff support:From AlanG this AM - I strongly support the need for a MS component in the CSC. I have routinely said it will not be swamped by such people even if there were no limit to the numbers (which we are not even contemplating) because there will be a moderately heavy workload with no companion mandate from employers. But we need some level of balance.

  Kurt:Creating liaisons is the way to go

  Kurt:Choice A: registries only; choice B Registries plus liaisons

  Grace Abuhamad:All -- headed out. You don't need me anyway :)

  Stephanie Duchesneau (Neustar):differentiating between members and liaisons gives us some flexibility to define the roles (as martin is suggesting) when we have a sense of what kind of participation other groups are seeking

  Stephanie Duchesneau (Neustar):bye grace!

  Donna Austin, RySG:All, I have to step away for a minute. I'll be back.

  Martin Boyle, Nominet:IANA observer would be good, if not vital

  Staffan Jonson:Seems more reasonable to me that IANA is at the table than non-direct customers

  Kurt:right, Staffan

  Kurt:I agree there should be an iana liaison

  Donna Austin, RySG:I'm back

  Kurt:I like "liaison" better than "observer"

  Kurt:@Stephanie: if IANA is a liaison, it makes sense that the CSC can hold meetings with and without liaisons

  Kurt:which has multiple benefits

  Kim Davies:Root Server Operators are direct customers of IANA very rarely (i.e. once a decade if you're lucky changing IP addresses for a root server)

  Bart Boswinkel:MAybe ask RSSAC if they want to particpate and if so in what capacity

  Kurt:remember the two proposals

  Kurt:One: TLDs only + RRSAC liaison

  Kurt:Two: TLDs plus other liaisons

  Kim Davies:+ IANA Liaison

  Kurt:+ IANA liaison

  Kurt:in both options

  Kurt:SOmeone else (Staffan?) had the idea that we present two options

  Staffan Jonson:sugest Two for starters, at least

  Staffan Jonson:Yes, let's suggest IANA functions operator

  Kurt:What is the escalation end game ?

  Staffan Jonson:Escalation end game is making impossible to capture IANA functions ;-)

  Bernard Turcotte - staff support:1 there is a group looking at this

  Bernard Turcotte - staff support:2 there is an expectation of the registries that this would go back to them

  Bernard Turcotte - staff support:+1 Donna

  Stephanie Duchesneau (Neustar):13 should include a change to how IANA does its business OR to how the CSC does its business

  Staffan Jonson:MArtin you're fading

  Bernard Turcotte - staff support:+1 Martin

  Kim Davies:Shouldn't IANA be empowered to speak with its customers, and not do so via the CSC?

  Kurt:how many times can I speak to the wrong point in one meeting?

  Kurt:I don't think 13 precludes the communication that Kim is talking about

  Stephanie Duchesneau (Neustar):i sugggest removing idn repository

  Stephanie Duchesneau (Neustar):as an explicit reference

  Staffan Jonson:lets keep for now

  Bernard Turcotte - staff support:LarryS comment is that each element of the NTIA Functions contract should be covered in the CWG work

  Staffan Jonson:Martin: that is a relevant and good point

  Staffan Jonson:In DTM on talk about Internal and external remedies

  Kurt:I agree with Martin

  Staffan Jonson:I need to leave Adobe, will remain in phone audio

  Kurt:I wouldn't say burning

  Stephanie Duchesneau (Neustar):thanks all

  Kim Davies:Thanks :)

  Bernard Turcotte - staff support:bye all