IAOC Call Minutes 25 Oct 2012 IAOC Meeting 2012-10-25 -4 UTC / 10:30 EDT Bernard Aboba [ABSENT] Scott Bradner [PRESENT] Dave Crocker [PRESENT] Marshall Eubanks [ABSENT] Bob Hinden [PRESENT, Chair] Russ Housley [PRESENT] Ole Jacobsen [PRESENT] Ray Pelletier [PRESENT, IAD] Lynn St. Amour [PRESENT] David Kessens [GUEST] Jewellee Dalrymple [SCRIBE] IAOC Agenda =========== 1. Minutes 2012-08-01 2012-10-11 2. IAOC Vacancy E-Vote 3. Network Services RFP 4. Meeting Regions Targets 2016-2017 5. IETF 95 Date Change 6. IETF 93 Venue 7. IT Contracts Update 8. Atlanta Update 9. Performance Reviews 10. IETF Hosting Status 11. Subpoenas Update 12. AOB Bob Hinden called the meeting to order at 10:27 AM EDT. 1. Minutes =========== The following minutes are ready for adoption with modifications: 2012-08-01 and 2012-10-11. Scott moved, and Russ seconded a motion to approve the 2012-08-01 and 2012-10-11 minutes with modifications. Without objections, the minutes were approved. 2. IAOC Vacancy E-Vote ===================== Ray reported on the results of the e-vote for the record: The results of the E-Vote to Approve sending an email about the IAOC Vacancy to IETF Announce mailing list are: Ole Jacobsen [YES] October 17, 2012 11:30:31 PM GMT+02:00 Scott Bradner [YES] October 17, 2012 11:46:31 PM GMT+02:00 Russ Housley [YES] October 18, 2012 12:02:00 AM GMT+02:00 Bob Hinden [YES] October 18, 2012 6:18:34 AM GMT+02:00 Bernard Aboba [YES] October 18, 2012 7:22:48 PM GMT+02:00 Dave Crocker [YES] October 18, 2012 7:24:17 PM GMT+02:00 Lynn St. Amour [YES] October 19, 2012 6:55:06 PM EDT Marshall Eubanks [ ] The E-Vote passes. The results of the e-vote will be recorded in the minutes of the IAOC call being scheduled for 25 October 2012. The IOAC chair is authorized to send the attached email to the IETF announce list on Monday October 22, 2012. Bob Hinden IAOC Chair +++++++++++++ IAOC, This is an official IAOC E-Vote, to close on Monday 22 October 2012 at 10am EST. A minimum of a 3/4 majority of the IAOC voting Yes is required for the motion to pass. RESOLUTION The IAOC approves send a message to the IETF-Announce list asking the community to declare Marshall Eubanks position on the IAOC vacant. A draft of the email is attached to this E-Vote. Please let me know your vote by responding to this message to the full IAOC list. You may vote Yes (in favor approving the resolution), No (opposed), or you may formally abstain. Passing the resolution requires both a quorum and a 3/4 majority of the IAOC voting Yes. The motion will pass if this is reached on or before the closing date. The results of the E-Vote will be recorded into the minutes of the next IAOC meeting. Regards, Bob Hinden IAOC Chair +++++++++++++ The IAOC is requesting feedback from the community concerning a vacancy that the IAOC feels is not adequately covered by existing IETF rules. Marshall Eubanks has been a active IETF participant for many years and a member of the IAOC since 2009. However, he recently stopped participating in the IAOC and Trust. The IAOC has made extensive efforts to contact Marshall about this, but has not received any response. Given the size of the IAOC, a missing member makes it much harder to get a quorum. The specifics of his absence include: - Missed the IAOC calls on 11 October 2012, 10 September 2012, 6 September 2012, 23 August 2012 - No email received from Marshall since 1 August 2012 on the IAOC, IETF Trust, and related private lists. Marshall is subscribed to the IAOC and IETF Trust lists and consequently should have received email discussing this topic and other IAOC/Trust business. We have tried to contact Marshall over this time period using email 14 times, telephone 6 times (leaving messages), SMS messages seven times, Linkedin messages once, Facebook messages once, and registered postal mail twice. We have not received any response from Marshall. It is also our understanding that Marshall has stopped participating in other IETF lists and stopped working on IDs he authored. On 6 September 2012 the IAOC appointed a replacement liaison to the IETF NomCom after learning from the NomCom chair that Marshall had not responded to any emails from the NomCom chair. Based on all of this, the IAOC has concluded that Marshall's IAOC position is vacant. The IAOC has reviewed BCP101 and concludes it does not handle this case very well. BCP101 says that if "an IAOC member abrogates his or her duties" the recall process in BCP10/RFC3777 may be used. The specific text is: IAOC members are subject to recall in the event that an IAOC member abrogates his or her duties or acts against the best interests of the IETF community. Any appointed IAOC member, including any appointed by the IAB, IESG, or ISOC Board of Trustees, may be recalled using the recall procedure defined in RFC 3777 [RFC3777]. IAOC members are not, however, subject to recall by the bodies that appointed them. If a vacancy occurs among the appointed members, this is filled by the appointing body for that position according to its procedures. The conditions for determining that a vacancy exist are not well-defined. BCP10/RFC3777 (Section 7) defines a process where a recall petition is signed by 20 NomCom qualified IETFers, the petition is sent to the ISOC President, the ISOC President appoints a recall committee chair, the chair follows normal NomCom procedures to select 20 committee members (this includes a public call for volunteers, max of two per organization, random selection of volunteers, etc.), recall committee investigates, recall committee votes and requires a 3/4 majority to pass the recall. We think this process was not intended to be used when a sitting IAOC, IESG, or IAB member vacates his/her position. We believe that the intended use of this process was for determining whether a member should leave a position who is unwilling to leave and who has harmed the IETF. That is clearly not the case in this situation, to the contrary, we would have preferred Marshall to continue. It doesn't seem appropriate in this case, or when an member is unable to participate due to illness or death. The IAOC believes that it is reasonable to declare Marshall's IAOC position vacant and, therefore, to ask NomCom to fill his position for the remainder of his term (~15 months.) The IAOC is requesting feedback from the community whether it is reasonable to declare Marshall's IAOC position vacant. Responses are solicited by no later than 5 November 2012. If there is not community support for this approach, the IAOC will pursue the BCP10/RFC3777 recall petition path because having a missing member for 15 months significantly effects the operation of the IAOC and IETF Trust. Please send your comments to . The IAOC and IETF chairs will review the community feedback and make a determination if there is support for declaring the position vacant. I would add that we all feel very badly for Marshall given his many years of service to the IETF. We really don't understand why he is not responding and are concerned about it. Unfortunately, we don't know what else to do given his lack of response to our many attempts to contact him. Bob Hinden IAOC Chair p.s. A draft is in progress that proposes an update to BCP10/RFC3777 similar to what we propose here to handle how cases of vacancy be handled. The issue applies to the IAB, IESG, and the IAOC. An announcement will be sent when that is available. 3. Network Services RFP ==================== Ray reported on the status of a proposed Network Services RFP The IAOC decided earlier this year that it wants to issue a Network Services RFP during the current on-year extension that VeriLan is working under to see whether we can identify other qualified providers, provide for a backup for VeriLan, and maybe introduce some competition and competitive prices for these services. After some discussion the IAOC decided to send the RFP for community review for a 2-week review period and the Committee will take up the resolution after that time. Ray or Bob will contact VeriLan before the posting to let them know the Committee isn't unhappy, just looking for a longer contract. Scott moved, and Bob seconded a motion to send an announcement with RFP for the Community to review. Scott Bradner [YES] Dave Crocker [YES] Bob Hinden [YES] Russ Housley [YES] Ole Jacobsen [YES] Lynn St. Amour [YES] The motion passed. 4. Meeting Regions Targets 2016-2017 ===================================== Ray reported that the Meeting Committee recommends setting the IETF Meeting Regional Targets for the years 2016 and 2017. Targets being objectives subject to change by IAOC. The recommended proposed Targets for 2016 & 2017: 2016 95 Europe 96 Americas 97 Asia 2017 98 Americas 99 Europe 100 Asia The IAOC decided to accept the targets for 2016 but was sending 2017 back to the Meetings Committee to consider scheduling IETF 100 somewhere symbolic, possibly San Diego since that was where the first meeting was held. Without objections the Regional Targets for 2016 will be posted. 5. IETF 95 Date Change ======================= Ray reported on the proposal to change the date of IETF 95. Currently IETF 95 is scheduled for 27 March to 1 April 2016. 27 March is Easter. After considering community feedback on a proposed change to 20 - 25 March 2016, the IAOC proposed 3 - 8 April 2016 to avoid the impact on travel and attendance during the 20 - 25 March period (Easter weekend). Feedback suggested 3 - 8 April was moving that meeting too close to the July's IETF 96 meeting. Typically, IETF meetings are 16 - 17 weeks apart, and moving to 3 - 8 April would make the meetings 14 weeks apart. The Meetings Committee recommends moving to 3 - 8 April 2016. RESOLUTION: The IAOC approves moving the IETF 95 dates to 3 - 8 April 2016 from 27 March to 1 April 2016. Ole moved, and Scott seconded a motion to approve moving the IETF 95 dates to 3 - 8 April 2016 from 27 March to 1 April 2016. Scott Bradner [YES] Dave Crocker [YES] Bob Hinden [YES] Russ Housley [YES] Ole Jacobsen [YES] Lynn St. Amour [YES] The motion passed. 6. IETF 93 Venue ================= Ray reported on the progress with the selection of a venue for IETF 93 in July 2015. Nine venues have been considered for IETF 93. Two venues remain. The IAOC requested the Internet Society to engage in negotiations leading to an agreement for a specific venue. 7. IT Contracts Update ======================= Ray gave an update on IT contracts. The NomCom Tools Work Order has been executed. The Agenda Tools Contract is awaiting ISOC execution. The Mail Archive award went to AMS. The TMC is clarifying details, which included a visit on 10 Oct. AMS and TMC to meet Tuesday in Atlanta to review the user interface. Th Tools Management Committee is reviewing version -08 of the Remote Participation Specifications for acceptance and next steps. Other projects in work include Charter Milestone Management Development by IOLA, and the Back End Development work by IOLA. 8. Atlanta Update ================== Ray reported on the numbers for IETF 85 in Atlanta. Registration is trending below budget expectations. The Budget is 1,140 paid attendees for a revenue of $717,250. To date registration is 1,041, but Paid is just 684. Comcast is contributing Circuits Arrangement are being worked out with AT&T and Hilton for Guest rooms. There will be a lounge available Monday - Thursday, which is the same space for Bits-N-Bites. There is a new sponsorship category of Refreshment Sponsor and VeriSign is the first. There will be Bottles of water with the Verisign logo. The Bits-N-Bites has 7 paid tables, including: 1) IPSO Alliance 2) Huawei/China Telecom/Tsinghua 3) ICANN 4) ISOC - two tables 5) A10 Networks 6) CableLabs The food and beverage cost estimate is $38,000. 9. Performance Reviews ======================= The IAD is working on performance reviews. 10. IETF Hosting Status ======================== Bob reported on the current status. Russ, Ray and Bob had a meeting at AMS wherein Glen presented a new approach for what they're doing for their other customers where they're moving to a new architecture regarding their service center. The problem has changed so now discussions are about how this will come about due to changes on AMS's side. Bob is working on slides outlining what the requirements are and an example way this can be implemented. 11. Subpoenas Update ===================== There are two subpoenas under review by the legal committee and will hopefully be resolved very soon. 1. BT v. CoxCom and Cable One subpoena delivered 4 October. Wants docs produced, authenticated and testimony. Has to do with IP Differential QoS 2. inNOVA Patent Licensing LLC v. Alcatel-Lucent Holdings subpoena delivered 6 October. Has to do with the DKIM standard. 12. AOB ========= There were no additional public matters. Bob adjourned the IAOC meeting at 11:04 am EDT.