Board of Trustees Meeting Minutes - 18 July 2014 [Archived]

Teleconference

Attendees:

• Vint Cerf, Chair

• Paul Andersen,Treasurer/ Vice Chair

• John Curran, President & CEO

• Timothy Denton, Secretary

• Aaron Hughes, Trustee

• Bill Sandiford, Trustee

• Bill Woodcock, Trustee

Note Taker:

• Thérèse Colosi

ARIN Staff:

• Nate Davis, COO

Counsel:

• Stephen Ryan, Esq

1. Welcome & Agenda Review

The Chair called the meeting to order at 2:01 p.m. EDT. The presence of quorum was noted.

2. Consent Agenda

The Chair reviewed the consent agenda with the Board. The Chair asked if the agenda was acceptable to the Board. There were no objections.

• Approval of ARIN Board Teleconference Minutes

• Board Appointment of 2014 ARIN Elections Vote Counter
  “Be it resolved that the ARIN Board of Trustees appoints Bill Sandiford to be the ‘Election Vote Counter’ for the 2014 ARIN Elections.”

• Update to Board Travel Guidelines

• ARIN Consultation & Suggestion Process Changes

It was moved by Aaron Hughes and seconded by John Curran, that:

“The ARIN Board of Trustees approves the Consent Agenda.”

The Chair called for any objections. The motion carried with no objections.

3. Ratification of ARIN Policies

a) Recommended Draft Policy ARIN-2013-7: NRPM 4 (IPv4) Policy Cleanup.

It was moved by John Curran and seconded by Paul Andersen, that:

“The ARIN Board of Trustees, based on the recommendation of the ARIN Advisory Council, and noting that the Policy Development Process has been followed, adopts Recommended Draft Policy ARIN-2013-7: NRPM 4 (IPv4) Policy Cleanup.”

The Chair called for discussion. The President stated that this policy was truly a clean up item, as there were lagging references in the Number Resource Policy Manual (NRPM) which were reviewed and addressed by the ARIN AC. He stated the policy had been very well received in the community; and, it had been presented at ARIN 33, NANOG 60 and 61. The President further noted that the Policy Development Process (PDP) had been followed and the AC recommended it for the Board to consider for ratification unanimously (13 members present) at their meeting on 19 June 2014. There were no concerns raised.

The motion carried unanimously via roll call vote.

b) Recommended Draft Policy ARIN-2013-8: Subsequent Allocations for New Multiple Discrete Networks.

It was moved by Tim Denton, and seconded by Paul Andersen, that:

“The ARIN Board of Trustees, based on the recommendation of the ARIN Advisory Council, and noting that the Policy Development Process has been followed, adopts Recommended Draft Policy ARIN-2013-8: Subsequent Allocations for New Multiple Discrete Networks.”

The Chair called for discussion. The President stated that the PDP had been followed. This policy adds clarity to an existent policy for allocations for discreet networks, and removes ambiguity for staff. It was considered at ARIN 33 and NANOG 61. The AC recommended it for the Board to consider for ratification with all in favor, (13 members present) at their meeting on 17 July 2014.

The motion carried unanimously via roll call vote.

c) Recommended Draft Policy ARIN-2014-5: Remove 7.2 Lame Delegations.

It was moved by John Curran and seconded by Paul Andersen, that:

“The ARIN Board of Trustees, based on the recommendation of the ARIN Advisory Council, and noting that the Policy Development Process has been followed, adopts ARIN Recommended Draft Policy ARIN-2014-5: Remove 7.2 Lame Delegations.”

The Chair called for discussion. The President stated that this policy removed non-operational language that had not been implemented. When staff researched removal of lame delegations, the question arose to what was ’lame’. The policy was suspended, as ARIN was not clear with regard to how to implement it safely. A policy proposal was developed by the community and presented at ARIN 33 and NANOG 61. The PDP was followed, and the AC recommended it for the Board to consider for ratification with all in favor (13 members present) at their meeting on 17 July 2014.

The motion carried unanimously via roll call vote.

d) Recommended Draft Policy ARIN-2014-12: Anti-Hijack Policy.

It was moved by Tim Denton, and seconded by John Curran, that:

“The ARIN Board of Trustees, based on the recommendation of the ARIN Advisory Council, and noting that the Policy Development Process has been followed, adopts ARIN Recommended Draft Policy ARIN-2014-12: Anti-Hijack Policy.”

The Chair called for discussion. The President stated that this policy clarified that ARIN should not give permission to parties to make use address space already allocated to other parties for purposes of testing. ARIN had done this with Merit for the purposes of ‘black hole testing’ – unused blocks of IPv6. Merit routed the entire prefix during their testing, which was unexpected and noted by the community as not being a good practice. ARIN should have issued an experimental block for this purpose with a specific time line. The President supported this policy, as did the community and the operational expectations are aligned. This policy was presented at NANOG 61 and ARIN 33. It was very well supported. The PDP was followed, and the AC recommended it for the Board to consider for ratification with all in favor (13 members present) at their meeting on 17 July 2014.

The motion carried unanimously via roll call vote.

e) Recommended Draft Policy ARIN-2014-13: Reduce All Minimum Allocation/Assignment Units to /24.

It was moved by John Curran and seconded by Paul Andersen, that:

“The ARIN Board of Trustees, based on the recommendation of the ARIN Advisory Council, and noting that the Policy Development Process has been followed, adopts ARIN Recommended Draft Policy ARIN-2014-13: Reduce All Minimum Allocation/Assignment Units to /24.”

The Chair called for discussion. The President stated this topic was proposed in April of this year, as it was noted that IPv4 run-out was occurring. Internet Service Providers (ISPs) were now more frugal in allocating numbers. Before receiving an allocation from ARIN, an ISP must contract with an upstream ISP and receive their initial allocation from them, as ARIN’s ISP allocation policies require that they can show significant address space in use from an upstream provider. Presently, there are varying minimum thresholds for existing ISP block utilization depending on multi-homing. The policy in question relaxes the minimum allocation size that must be in use down to just a single /24.

This policy went through an extended ’last call’ period. The PDP was followed, and the AC recommended it for the Board to consider for ratification with 12 members present at their meeting on 17 July 2014. There were 11 in favor and one against.

The motion carried unanimously via roll call vote.

4. Any Other Business

The Chair called for any other business items. The President requested two items for information:

1. NETmundial Update. The President provided an update on post Netmundial developments to the Board.
2. Department of Labor Query. The President stated that ARIN had received an inquiry from the U.S. Department of Labor (DoL) regarding a routine audit by the DOL on ARIN’s adherence to wage and hour standards. ARIN is responding to the questions asked and foresees no concerns.

The Chair called for any other business.

Tim Denton requested the Chair’s view of the NTIA to ICANN transition. The Chair stated that there continues to be activity on two issues: 1) the question of fulfilling the IANA function without the NTIA contract; and, 2) ICANN’s accountability.

The Chair stated these are open questions; by no means is it resolved with regard to what a post-NTIA framework would look like. The Chair noted that there have been actions taken in the US Congress to on this matter: a bill to require a study by the GAO before the NTIA can take action. The bill has passed in the House of Representatives. The Chair suggested Board members ask the President or Counsel the progress of the legislation.

The President stated that he attended the IGF USA conference in Washington DC this week. Representative Walden had spoken at the conference and indicated that it was true that there was a level of concern, however it is reasonable to want a better understanding about any plan put forth with regard to DNS administration before Congress could agree that it be turned over to the private sector, or other actors. Mr. Walden did not want the Internet community to think the Government did not want this to happen; rather the legislature wanted to do its due diligence when there is a plan, noting that once it is done, it cannot be reversed. Mr. Walden’s speech was well received. The President stated he did not know the status of the legislation in terms of reconciliation, but when the plan is produced there will be significant discussion. The Chair agreed. They cannot fail to perform due diligence. Congress is not saying ’no’, it is the right thing to so that constituents can be reassured.

The President stated that there were two plans needed:

1. Specifically, regarding IANA: accountability (there is a coordination steering group for helping assemble this – how to provide day-to-day oversight of the IANA function). He stated that contractual relationships would take care of this.
2. ICANN’s accountability: there is a separate working group within ICANN that will be working on this. The President noted that the Board would discuss these issues further at their upcoming workshop in August.

The Chair called for any other business.

Aaron Hughes, Chair of Nominations Committee (NomCom), asked if the Board needed to appoint the non-Board members of the NomCom. The President stated the NomCom Charter indicates that the Board appoint two Board members, and those two will appoint the members in good standing of the community. He did not believe it was a requirement of the Board to appoint those members. Paul Andersen suggested that the NomCom Chair notify the Board that the community members have been seated as a matter of record. The President agreed that a notice to Board would be preferred. Aaron Hughes agreed to do so shortly.

Counsel stated that he had no legal update at this time.

5. Adjournment

The Chair entertained a motion to adjourn at 2:36 p.m. EDT. Tim Denton moved to adjourn, seconded by John Curran. The meeting was adjourned with no objections.