[ec-tf] EC-TF meeting minutes, DRAFT

[Malcolm Hutty malcolm@localhost]

Here are the draft minutes of the meeting at RIPE55.

Would anyone who would like to propose any alterations or additions
please let me know as soon as possible?

My thanks to Chris Buckridge of the NCC for scribing.

Regards,

Malcolm Hutty
Chair, Enhanced Co-operation Taskforce.



RIPE Task Force on Enhanced Cooperation
Meeting minutes, RIPE 55, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

Meeting commenced 14:33

Malcolm outlined the agenda and recapped the task force charter. He
noted that the task force is not a replacement or way around the PDP, it
will not in any way supplant the NCC or the Board, but that it will
produce a report on the RIPE community's sense of what should be done
regarding Enhanced Cooperation.

Malcolm noted that it would be useful to have an attendance sheet that
would allow attendees to be contacted, but that people should not feel
they have to sign.

Géza Turchanyi noted that it is important for the task force to produce
something concrete. Malcolm noted that the RIPE NCC is also working in
this area already, and that the task force will be offering advice and
guidance on Enhanced Cooperation activities, rather than actually
conducting them.

Patrik Fältström asked for clarification on the aim of the taskforce,
and suggested that perhaps a working group would be a more logical forum.

Jim Reid suggested that the task force could have a relatively brief
existence, and could perhaps issue a statement for the IGF meeting in
Rio in two weeks time. This statement could be along the lines of "the
RIPE community is addressing the issue of Enhanced Cooperation, and this
task force is an example of that".

It was suggested and seconded that discussing the charter and immediate
timelines ahead of membership issues would be useful.

Malcolm cautioned that the Rio meeting is very close, and that planning
to issue any substantial statement would be unwise. He also noted that
this would increase the expectations on the task force at later IGF
meetings. Jim confirmed that he had only intended a statement on the
creation of the task force, and Malcolm suggested that the NRO could
deliver any statement, as well as pointing to the instigation of the
task force as evidence of ongoing work.

Mirjam Kuehne suggested that the Internet community's administrative
structures are already confusing for external parties, and adding a
further structure might exacerbate this. She suggested that a working
group or plenary statement might be more useful. Malcolm noted that
according to his discussions with RIPE NCC staff, establishing a task
force was the appropriate way to start work on this subject, and that
this task force might then lead to the creation of a working group.

Patrik noted that the charter is not clear, but that he would support a
charter that specified that the task force would look at whether
existing RIPE NCC processes were sufficient and evaluate the potential
of a working group.

Ischa noted that the RIRs would be at the IGF as the NRO, no under the
RIPE banner.

Malcolm noted that the task force was created at RIPE 54, so it is
really a matter now of deciding what will be done by the task force and how.

Ischa asked whether the motivation for forming the task force formation
was as a response to a perceived a gap in the work currently being done.
Malcolm responded that this was not the case, but that it was important
to be seen to be doing work in this area. The task force is a visible
explanation of how the RIR community works, and could illustrate the
bottom-up process in action.

Mirjam was noted that there are already open structures, and maybe
people need to be directed to these, for example, mailing lists, RIR
meetings etc.

Patrik noted that the there was some confusion about whether the task
force would be involved in policy.

Nurani noted that this is not about creating a second body, but showing
people how they can participate in the existing spaces. Jim Reid noted
that we also need to find new ways to talk to the external parties in
the language they understand about issues that are important to them.
Patrick disagreed, and believes the existing cooperation between the
RIPE NCC and the regulatory bodies is very successful, as demonstrated
by the recent Roundtable meeting. Malcolm noted that this task force
could be a forum for evaluating the success of activities such as the
Roundtable meetings; Patrik agreed with this and supported the proposed
role of the task force.

Malcolm raised the issue of membership and whether to have an open or
closed membership. Open membership would imply involve submitting
iterative drafts to an open mailing list, like an IETF task force; a
closed group would rely on a limited number of people working on the
outcome, and would then present to the Plenary. Patrik's preference is
that the task force be tasked with evaluating the existing and proposed
structures for EC, and that it should be done in a closed group, because
the scope for confusion on this subject is very easy. Jim agreed, and
noted that a closed list might allow more honest discussion. Keith
Mitchell noted that it was best to have things as open as possible
unless there is a reason otherwise; he suggested a compromise of having
nominated task force members who are responsible for specific
deliverables, but public deliberations. This was supported by several
others in the room.

There is a general expectation that the mailing list will be publicly
readable; there were no objections to this. Paul Rendek noted that it is
possible to set up a list so that people can watch the deliberations of
a closed task force. He noted though, that this work will need to be
down quite quickly, and a limited number of people will facilitate this.
He also agreed with Patrik that adding this structure could be confusing
for people external to the RIPE community, particularly hen considering
something like a statement at the IGF.

Malcolm noted that having a fix duration will mean that after the final
report is delivered, the task force will cease to exist. Jim agreed that
this task force will not "take on a life of its own".

Patrik noted that if the task force still exists at the next RIPE
Meeting he would be disappointed, and that the goals of the task force
should be able to be met in the very short term. He suggested that the
task force's work might start with a survey on what is already being
done within the RIPE community regarding Enhanced Cooperation. Malcolm
noted that he had planned for the RIPE Meeting Plenary to give its input
to the document, which would mean the task force was not wrapped up by
the next meeting. Patrik feels that this is too slow, though he accepted
the suggestion that a first draft of the report be prepared well before
the next RIPE meeting; the formal death and implementation of the task
force could extend beyond that. Ischa noted that the task force could
define its own timeline.

Jim suggested that the strategy be to compile a report ASAP, ideally in
time for the ICANN meeting in New Delhi. Malcolm noted that while the
work needs to be done in a timely fashion, there should also be a
recognition that the work must be done properly.

Malcolm emphasized the need for diversity in the make-up of the task
force, especially in terms of experience, sectors, geography etc. Géza
suggested that Malcolm himself suggest some people to be on the task
force. Fearghas McKay noted that the demands of time may also affect the
diversity, particularly in regard to the smaller groups working on very
short-term sub-projects. Mirjam noted that it would be best to give some
idea to the amount of time commitment required, and that perhaps a
co-Chair would be useful.

Malcolm suggested a separate list on which members of the public could
talk in parallel about the same issues. Leo Vegoda noted that a parallel
group of people watching the task force work in progress might not be
very useful. There was an observation that if discussion on a parallel
mailing list differed significantly from the task force outcome it would
appear that the community had not been listened to. There was a further
comment that any mechanisms or strategies decided on must meet the needs
of the bodies with whom the RIPE is hoping to cooperate.

Malcolm closed the meeting, and summarised that the task force needs to
be short term, produce a report early, and utilize a limited number of
people within the task force, though the task force itself may recommend
a working group be established. There is a preference for a small group
acting urgently, with less focus on diversity. He noted that people
signing up to the task force mailing list are being regarded as
prospective members, and will be contacted at later date.