[soac-newgtldapsup-wg] Meeting Notes JAS WG 16 August 2011

[Wendy Profit <wendy.profit@xxxxxxxxx>]

JAS WG Meeting Notes
16 August 2011

Please update SOI by sending to Gisella.  To navigate important pages are 27-28 
in the final draft report, the link is on the landing page of the wiki. 
Reminder for those in Adobe connect, comment on wiki pages for members about 
the section on the final report.  Please try to add your comment in the 
comments section, do not change the text. Makes it easy for Seth to draft.
New staff, ¼ calls left. Where is the staff?  Rob is on the call, Kurt, Wendy, 
Seth.
All new members can start contributing right away.   Karen Lentz will be very 
helpful with regard to keeping it consistent with the AG, with respect to needs 
of developing communities.
Several in Asia, several in Africa.
Most of the current gtld support rsps are there, change all to most and insert 
rsp serving gtlds for greater specificity and will avoid elaine's point that 
it's not all, and that we're looking for a way registries from dev econ not be 
bound to use an incumbent but have a chance to create in their own economies.
The term in Europe is highly developed economies.
Problem with the title. Capacity building is more about the service providers.  
In this section we are not talking about capacity building at all, we are 
talking about assistance.
That's a capacity that is missing and that's what we're talking about.
If there's going to be consensus you have to speak up or do round robin on the 
group.
We need another mechanism to get consensus.
Alan's point was you can ask people on adobe to check the agree/disagree 
button; and if you disagree just shout out.
My position is I don't think this is important I can live with this.
With changes on the fly it would be helpful to have them on the adobe connect.
By chat I mean adobe connect, same thing. Yes.
If you respond on the chat +1 to something that was said on the phone, you lose 
that because there is no context when you see the chat transcript later.
What's required in order to what's required in order to apply, in the wiki 
space, but off the time of my head you need a registry service provider,  ...., 
escrow, attorneys to help write policy, contract negotiations, ICANN 
registry/registrar agreement, and experts...

Pruis: registry service provider, DNS expert, escrow provider, accountant, 
attorney, consultant
We can see that consensus, ok, thanks for clarification Elaine.  That was the 
discussion on this part. We are in 30 minutes of this call.
Capacity can be defined in so many ways...in house registry is a stretch.
Just to clarify what exactly you are suggesting, trying to understand your 
point and figure out the rewording you are suggesting.
Does not help in creating local registry service in the region unless you have 
the capacity for it.
Is there a measure we're looking for to say the real capacity has been created. 
 Overly strong and maybe I'm missing what the end goal of that sentence is.
Merely talking in terms of capacity building, we have mild language and would 
be resistant to seeing it watered down.
Understand but trying to give substance to what real capacity meant.
To avri's point I'd like to give an example why I'm struggling with 'real 
capacity'.  When a current registry provider, like a ccTLD operator has access 
to training and installation of the hardware in order to train them, provider 
is giving them all this assistance, the only thing lacking is the physical 
server in their office. How do you define real capacity and what does that 
involve?
Not sure that's a good idea but maybe some text coming from something that you 
give or from avri can clarify what is the purpose of that recommendation.  Not 
enough for that just wondering about that because if we have those question in 
the WG what about people in icann community maybe if we can add text to clarify 
or reword the existing one.
Mode of operation that has worked well in other WGs. Ask staff do you think you 
understand or does this wording capture it? Drafting in a meeting like this is 
poor because everyone is not following along. Then the next sentence doesn't 
makes sense, let the staff do it.  Otherwise we're going to keep talking on and 
on on this point.
How can they help if they don't have comments or feedback, I'm trying to get 
feedback.
Typically we talk for a while and then ask staff do you have enough to go back 
and draft something.  Otherwise they should be putting up their hand.
Very helpful to question that, up to a minute ago I would have said yes alan 
thanks, but now there's 4 paragraphs that could be a 20 page paper itself.  Are 
you talking about building capacity for the registry or for the region where 
that applicant is located?  I think we can adjust it any way depending on which 
way you're looking at.
Reminder or the question that staff can go away with the text that the staff 
can go away with
Carlton and my meeting with some otfher for a follow up meeting for drafting 
only.. will cut directly to consensus.  Staff will go away and finesse.  If I'm 
wrong Carlton or Rafik let me know.
Are we looking to support the applicants or develop the regional facilities.  
Good question.  All we have is via the applicants.  If we are asking ICANN to 
help develop something in a region, separate from an applicant, then we should 
make it very clear if someone wants to provide a service in this region.  We're 
only talking about applicants who are eligible for support.
Elaine: Cloud may be the latest buzz word and a way to move people resources to 
developed regions.  We are talking about a cloud certered in developing regions.

avri: Local information should be kept locally, just like IXPs needed to be in 
developing eregions so that all traffic and information did not need to make a 
hair pin journet back to the developed country that owned the resources.
I certainly see the objective that is in the candidate, what I'm looking for is 
a sense of how we might call it, it's been discussed that last few weeks.
You're question is valid but complicated because it talks about applicants.  
Support approved candidates in their own registries.
That is much more the focus here.  Language like creating real capacity, we can 
adjust the text to be more...improving the capacity of the applicant in terms 
of what ICANN can do for support.
Elaine Pruis: one of the AGB requirments is "geographical diversity" in the RSP 
and the DNS--again for stability
Alan Greenberg: To be clear, I was not speaking to whether developing capacity 
is within OUR scope. I was saying that if we do want to support a group 
separate from applicants to develop capacity, we need to say it explicitly.
Maybe Eric could reply but he's not on this call.
To be clear I wasn't making a statement whether this was in the scop of our WG 
in terms of what it takes to be viable for applicants to come from other parts 
of the world, if we meant to support outside of applicants, we can't allude to 
it we must say it clearly, otherwise we are just talking about supporting 
applicants.
Explain the creation of (inaudible) the call where that was defined.  Point two 
I must have missed the call where that was designed.
Free and open source.
I thought Elaine was around when we talked about needing to maike sure software 
was available.  That is available was clearly delineated, people were given 
sources and I believe that Elaine was part of that desicussion surprised it 
wasn't recognized
I wasn't sure, that's why I was asking.

Olivier Crepin-Leblond: for any question about what this group needs to do or 
not do: https://community.icann.org/display/jaswg/Charter
Some clarification or feedback maybe I would like toask them to do it now.
Text check, we're in good shape up to the list and Elaine has done a great job 
with some examples we can add to the list 'among the resources that might be 
provided" a selection of options potentially for the reader to consider.
The public statement by providers of such capabilities, not clear to me as a 
text drafting supporter of tyour work what you mean to say here. What it 
appears to say is you're creating a laundry list if applicant says I need help 
on items 5-8.  Providing an opportunity for providers to match capacity with 
applicants who need it.  Piece that's missing is sort of the timing or when 
that takes place, application phase or once application is approved.
Staff set up a page with needs of applicant and provider.  Karla is on vacation.
Some way the offerers of software resources etc and the statement of the 
applicant saying that it will be taken care of by the providers.
Website has been designed but our latest is to develop a wiki for it.  Needs 
executive reviews and writing language around launching.  Using the language 
we're developing here as part of that website and I think this language should 
be integrated to that website.
[relevant chat]
Rafik: @ocl charter = do or not do, cool summary :)
Elaine Pruis: acronyms a not my specialty
Dev Anand Teelucksingh: ? regarding the text "Currently all available RSPs are 
located in Europe and in North America." - there are no RSPs in Asia Pacific ?
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Dev: this has already been discussed. Pass.
Dev Anand Teelucksingh: np
Elaine Pruis: dev, there are. .asia for instance
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: new text replacing existing one already drafted.
Alan Greenberg: Charter is one relevant, but if we have identified some 
critical issue that we feel absolutely needs to be addressed to properly meet 
the end-target of our WG, then we need to identify it. Even if not in our 
charter.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: At this point in time, Alan, ONLY if it does not 
side-track the group
Alan Greenberg: Yup
Alan Greenberg: To belabour the point, we should not allow failure of our 
overall mission because the charter drafters ignored some important issue. In a 
normal time-frame, we would go back to the chartering groups and ask for a 
revised charter. In our current world, we would need to simply do the work and 
hope that it is blessed by the charterers after the  fact.
Carlton Samuels: Good catch, rob!  Here's what should happen.  Staff will 
collect needs and offers for assistance for a website.  This will deliver info 
on needs and offers of support.  The web dat will be used to match needs to 
kinds of assistance..

Our wiki structure doesn't allow for comments on the whole report, just 
sections, how can we do that.
Strikes me tht the wiki has been useful up until now, might be useful at this 
point now that there's a pdf document.
About the wiki we use it a lot so maybe updating the structure or clarifying 
the structure can help it's becoming complicated to navigate.
Two things...we kinda lurched into the truth.  There is at the end some part of 
the session where we will look at part of the document but that doesn't 
alleviate the need for member to comment on parts of the document.  It would be 
useful to add comments.  We have tried many ways to accommodate many styles.  
If any member has comments that they wish to make and it's substansive to this 
process, it would really help if you have those comments that you try to make 
them here on the call while we're talking about it, we are trying to elicit 
consensus and I don't want to get to final day while we're reading report in 
full have someone then jump in with substanstive comments.   Rafik noted we 
need to clean up the wiki because lord knows we've been trying to use it.
I asked how do you want it, wiling to do whatever, if you want me to go back to 
a wiki page we used weeks ago. If you want me to comment on a document or a 
wiki then give us tools to do it, specifically a pdf or word with line items.  
Whatever you want we'll do I'll do but tell us exactly how in a practical way.
Disagree that wiki is there and no one is g oing to learn how to use it and the 
ones who have will have trouble finding the new stuff.  The wiki on its 
sections served it's purpose but please let's not regorganize it.
Ask to clarify about the structure.
What Karla and I have done without restructuring it have added to landing page 
two areas, one in red, one in black contain links to the main things you'll use 
at this point, red various sections that can be commented on, above that a link 
to a page various up to current draft final report if you don't want to 
navigate, just use the top two links.
They've tried valiantly to help us and sometimes you just need to read it.
Discuss process itself encourage people t make comments now if they have any 
quiesitons then we can move ahead otherwise if I don't hear any objections 
otherwise we can finish this call.
One, smaller group is going to have editing discussions immediately after this 
call and what the focus of the next call, Friday?  Evaluation Process?
Yes, the schedule is posted on the wike and has been for more than 3 weeks and 
we are going to stick rigidly to the schedule.
Comments?  Any other business?
I just looked at agenda and says the last meeting we'll go over faq, final 
review and based on my experience that isnot going to happen in a single 
meeting. We can go ahead with that schedule and be surprised it's not going to 
work. Suggest more time on the f inal report.
The intent of these calls is that we'd use these calls to get all those 
substantive items resolved.  I hear you that we probably won't have enough time 
to do that stuff. The reason they did the final drafting report and put in al, 
l the terminology, so there's very little people will be aruguing about because 
it's been.
More time to tie it all together make sure not just half hour on the last call.
I leave it to the chairs to determine the schedule just saying I see it as a 
problem.
Dial in is in Adobe notes.
Who is on the call?
Original drafting team, alan, Olivier, CLO
Apologies I have another commitment.
How was this team selected.
So that we help them make the call, the consensus much easier, I invited CLO 
and alan and Olivier for support that was my call/our call rather.
It was discussed at last meeting
Yes and we agreed to it.
Seth when you dial in to the other call, I have asked Adigo to call out to you 
Rafik but it maight take a few minutes. They have not been informed before, 
don't think we've forgotten you please.


Wendy Profit
Executive Assistant to Kurt Pritz
ICANN
4676 Admiralty Way | Ste 330
Marina del Rey, CA 90292 USA
tel +1 310 578 8695 | http://icann.org<http://icann.org/>
One World. One Internet.