IAOC Committee Call at 10:34 AM EST, Thursday, 17 September, 2009 Participants: Lynn St. Amour [Present] Fred Baker [Present] Marshall Eubanks [Present, Acting Chair] Bob Hinden [Not Present] Russ Housley [Present] Ole Jacobsen [Present] Olaf Kolkman [Present] Ray Pelletier [Present] Henk Uijterwaal [Present] Karen O’Donoghue [Scribe] Jewellee Dalrymple [Guest] ----------------------------------------------------------------------- IAOC Agenda 1. Minutes 2. IETF 79 3. RFC Editor Contracts Update 4. 2010 Budget Update a. Revenue & Expense b. IT Infrastructure Investment c. RFC Services d. Legal ----------------------------------------------------------------------- IAOC Agenda 1. Minutes Not available for review. 2. IETF 79 There is a contract clause that hotels must put in contracts since 2008 per state requirement that says something to the effect that group activities will not contain defamation against the Government of the People's Republic of China, or show any disrespect to the Chinese culture, or violate any laws of the People's Republic of China or feature any topics regarding human rights or religion without prior approval. Moreover, the Hotel reserves the right to terminate the event on the spot and/or ask the person(s) who initiates or participates in any or all of the above actions to leave the Hotel premises immediately The IAOC has alternative actions: a. If the IAOC agrees that the clause doesn’t interfere with the success of the meeting, and contract otherwise acceptable, then approve the contract (1 Oct), announce the Meeting and with it a summary of the Clause to inform community, OR b. Inform the community today/tomorrow that China venue contract contains (summary of clause), but that IAOC believes that Clause would not interfere with success of Meeting, and if contract otherwise acceptable, IAOC intends to approve the venue in October. OR c. Tell the community today/tomorrow that China venue contract contains (summary of clause), the IAOC believes that Clause would not interfere with success of Meeting, however the IAOC wants to hear from the Community before deciding whether to approve the Venue if the contract otherwise acceptable. IAOC intends to consider all responses prior to reaching its decision on or about 1 October. OR d. c above plus: We are conducting a survey on whether you would attend the meeting with the clause. The survey can be found at: Ole didn’t agree with any of these approaches. His concern is how does the IAOC gauge consensus for comments on the survey? Options 1-2 IAOC exercising judgment – options 3-4 we believe meeting can be successful but we are asking your opinion. It was asked under what conditions venue will not be acceptable. APNIC met there, and if they had any issues, attendees didn’t know about it. This is just informing us what the state law is: protecting the hotel from the consequences of the state law. We are talking about options 3 or 4. This is pretty serious in terms of principles. We need to ask the community via input in any form: comment or survey. What we want to know is “will you come.” It was asked if this is a consensus call. A few Committee members commented that it feels like a DOS. The IAOC may be asked to make the results of the survey public. Lynn said she’s fine with that. Ray made it clear that this is not a consensus call as the IAOC is looking for Community input. Ray will create the survey with a draft going to the Committee via email by morning. A motion to have a note and a survey - and the note be included in the survey (“would you attend the meeting under these circumstances and why” – with an option for additional comments) – was made by Marshall. The motion was seconded by Russ. The motion was put to a roll call vote. Lynn St. Amour [YES] Fred Baker [YES] Marshall Eubanks [YES] Russ Housley [YES] Ole Jacobsen [YES] Olaf Kolkman [YES] Henk Uijterwaal [YES] The motion carried. 3. RFC Editor Contracts Update The IAOC is in the last stages of negotiations with the vendor for the RFC Production Center and RFC publisher contracts and everything looks good. A summary and the contracts will be on the wiki and to the IAOC by Monday. The activities and timeline call for approval by 1–7 October in the hope that the IAB will not object to the vendor as the RFC Production Center. On 13 October the transition will begin onsite at ISI. Ray sent under separate email the considerations that John Klensin would like the IAOC to consider. Basically he’s said that an incoming RSE might want to have some approval or review of the contracts and may also want some changes so that the person has some direct management responsibilities. The direction that we are executing is coming from the IAB and the model, on a timeline to permit an effective transition. There will be a serious problem if we don’t close the contract in a timely manner. 4. 2010 Budget Update Preliminary information about the draft 2010 budget. Revenues - registration fees stay at $635 for the 3rd year in a row, hotel revenue is down, new revenue is down (cut from $350k to $150K). Expenses – RFC services expenses aren’t clear yet. Secretariat labor is steady in 2010, managed meeting cost is still being evaluated, the contingency fund has been eliminated (currency conversion risk, attendance shortfall). IT Infrastructure Investment RFC Services - Expect tools investment will be needed to support each function of the new model Life Cycle Tracker - A multi-year project with a PM, studies, contractor(s) and support for Vols. Contains 3 Pieces - IESG tracker, Auth/WG Tracker, RFC & IANA data support. Current proposal is underfunded, but being reviewed by Russ Marshall said there was an email message from Henrik that a volunteer was no longer able to do the updates and requesting help. He asked if the IAOC was going to have to hire someone in the long term and what is being done in the short term. Ray responded that the plan is to transition long term to operations and maintenance by Secretariat. Greg said that the IAOC is going to the ISOC Board with a higher budget for 2010. We need to make sure that when we come into these projects that we think about support long term. The second question is how to fund the projects. We need to keep an eye on long term cost. RFC Services Marshall asked if, at the end of the current RFC Editor contract, there are going to be any budget adjustment items. Ray responded that in his experience, typically for 1-3 months afterward they’re closing their books and we typically have to catch up on items they weren’t able to catch up on but it will be 2009 money. Greg said that there needs to be follow up to make sure all those adjustment items get in. Ray noted that the IAOC contract says they’d pay them for services performed, but he would work with ISI and Greg to see if the he couldn’t get it done sooner than later. Closing the books on the contract might be a little different but we’ll get it done. Meeting was adjourned at 11:30 am.