[ec-tf] EC-TF meeting minutes, DRAFT
Malcolm Hutty malcolm at linx.net
Mon Nov 5 14:30:38 CET 2007
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.
[ ec-tf Archives ]