APTLD
05
November 2004 /
|
Venue: |
Stirling Room, Parmelia
Hilton ( |
|
Chair: |
Peter Dengate Thrush (nz) |
|
Attended by: |
Muhammad Aslam (af) Brad Waugh (cx) Chan-ki Park (kr) Shariya Haniz Zulkifli (my) Stafford Guest (nu) Peter Macaulay, Debbie Monahan, Keith Davidson (nz) Lim Choon Sai, Chew Bee Lam (sg) John H’g, Champika Wijayatunga, Amante Alvaran (APNIC) |
|
Secretariat: |
Joanna Tso and Ian Chiang |
Meeting opened at 09:00am
1
The Chair, Peter, opened the meeting by greeting the
members to APTLD Meeting in
Updates from APTLD Committees
1
Membership/Sponsorship
Committee Report by Secretariat on behalf of
1.1 Peter welcomed Muhammad Aslam from AFGNIC to attend APTLD Meeting.
1.2 John H’g expressed sincere thanks to APTLD’s sponsorship to yesterday’s training, although was expecting a larger crow, but nevertheless it’s still a good start.
1.3 Chris suggested to be more active in approaching candidates and ask them if they need the sponsorship rather than passively awaiting for sponsorship applications.
1.4 Peter expressed that members could help to bring people to our meeting from neighbouring countries. He also recommended to continue working with APNIC on training as its cost effective outreach activities.
1.5 Secretariat Ian Chiang briefed about the APTLD presentation given at the APNIC training yesterday.
1.6 The Membership Committee has build up useful brochures and the Secretariat has prepared presentation, both are available on website, members are welcome to utilize the materials.
1.7 Regarding to Yumi’s proposal to invite Joanna and Ian to the Membership Committee, members agreed unanimously.
2 ICANN Relations Committee by Peter Dengate Thrush, major work on ICANN is ccNSO matters and related Bylaws, and Chris is invited to give an update on ccNSO
2.1 ccNSO Update by Chris.
The
first WG is on GAC Liaison. Liaisons to GAC were appointed according to the
bylaw.
The
second WG is on WSIS with the objective to put together a position, this is
lead by Peter.
The
third WG is on ccNSO Secretariat and Fees chaired by
The
fourth is on the Staggered Terms of ccNSO Councillors that has to work on some
staggered applications recommendations by
The
fifth is on ICANN Budget and ccTLD fee to ICANN, the work requires a long
process, hopefully there will be an update by
The
sixth is on Accountability Framework, the goal is a paper which ICANN and ccTLD
is to sign and state each party is accountable for certain responsibility. For
example, one of the accountability to the smooth operation of the IANA
functions.
2.2 Discussion on APTLD applying for designation as ccNSO Regional Organisation (RO)
2.3
2.4 ICANN and the ITU/WSIS
3
Technical Committee, due to Prof. Kanchana
Kanchanasut’s absence, Chanki,
as a member of Tech Com, briefed that Dr. Kanchana
had suggested holding the workshop in
3.1 Peter asked what it takes to make the workshop successful. Chanki replied that because there are some similar trainings for ccTLDs, so it’s hard to make it work. And Chris said we should define the role we want to take and how to make it successful.
3.2 Vincent pointed out that the original purpose was about technical matters such as DNS security and new operation technology. So, he proposed that we focus on technical issue such as DNS security, and technical issues encountered by members. Peter responded that is the expertise we all have on what the problem is and how it’s solved.
3.3 Chris said there is a training and there is the exchange of experience like technical forum. The forum news can be announced and shared by non-members too.
3.4 Joanna expressed on behalf of Yumi, Yumi has the same idea about how to organise the next workshop/training in APRICOT 2005. As Chan-ki pointed out that many similar trainings have been done, we need to make our training a unique one. That is the expertises our members have, and it is in the objectives of our statement that we should share experiences on what the problems are and how we solve the problems. In the past, we did not have sufficient time in the members meetings to share our experience. Maybe the workshop/forum will be the place where members can share their experiences on the technical problems and solutions.
3.5 Shariya said, depending on how often it’s held, maybe there could be a half day of technical meeting and a half day of member discussion.
4 Constitutional Committee Report (To be provided) by Shariya Haniz Zulkifli
4.1 There are some operating procedures need to be standardized according to the bylaw to set up a formal proxy procedure, and requested budget support for administration filling process and legal advice.
4.2 Peter requested the constitution to be provided in html format on line.
4.3 Shariya suggested setting a date or procedure to finalize the draft minutes. Joanna replied that we have a meeting working guideline and asked what working guideline does the Committee suggest to be published on website? It is decided that Shariya will look into all the current documents and working procedures and decide if all should be published.
4.4 Peter mentioned that in 2005 he will look at if there’s constitution amendment required, and file the changes together in 2006.
4.5 Regarding the proxy, there’s difference in membership proxy and Board’s proxy. Through the discussion, it’s decided that a paper should be prepared to look into details of the proxy requirement.
4.6 Members agreed to the budget asked by the Committee and accepted the report.
5
Meeting Committee Report by
5.1 Peter asked if there’s any condition as to which item should be bared by the local host. Chris replied that there’s no description on this so far, and we should star discussing on the details. And the committee needs to further discuss the details with the Secretariat.
5.2 Peter raised another issue about the registration fee charged to attend the meeting.
5.3 Choon-sai suggested incorporating in the Meeting Manual some guidelines for a host who seeks sponsors (eg registrars) to contribute towards the hosting of meeting.
5.4 Vincent suggested that meeting takes place at city of member’s office location, and the member host the meeting. Chris responded that we should keep allowing members to volunteer to host the meeting.
(Morning Break at 10:35)
5.5 Peter asked about the proper frequency of current APTLD meeting. Shariya suggested reducing to 2 meetings a year, with the option of a 3rd meeting if necessary. Chris agreed too.
5.6 Shariya asked whether we tight the second meeting with another meeting/forum.
5.7 Peter suggested keeping the discussion on the future meeting schedule going, keep the current format for 2005, and make alternatives for 2006.
5.8
Stafford, agree that the number of meeting can be cut
down, and have one in
5.9 It is moved that it’s not necessary to meet one month prior to ICANN meeting due to the fact there’s not urgent issues for us to form a position before the ICANN meeting. Rather we focus on outreach to locations. Calling for comment regarding the frequency of meetings we have.
5.10 Chris proposed to have a session to talk to members regarding ccNSO issues during APRICOT 2005. Joanna reported on the current status of APTLD reservation for meeting rooms. Additionally, she mentioned about there are more restrictions on attending APRIOCT. So it’s proposed and decided to ask the availability of meeting room on Feb 20-22 (or Feb 19-21) for 3 days (two and half days for meeting and a half day for technical workshop).
5.11 Chris
mentioned that SGNIC proposed to host the 2005 June meeting and proposed to
accept the proposal. It is resolved that we conditionally accept SGNIC’s proposal, and allow the Meeting Committee to
discuss the details of date and venue. Chris continued that there’s also a
meeting scheduled for Nov, and propose to send out a note to members asking for
volunteer to host the meeting. Also there is a consideration that since WSIS
will be in
5.12 Peter thanked to Chris for the report.
6
Audit Committee Report by
6.1 Chan-ki briefed that 2003 audit report was done and the 2004 audit report will be done in January 2005.
6.2 Since there’s going to be a secretariat transition, Chan-ki suggested the audition be performed by InternetNZ. PDT asked if there’s any requirement as to whom is qualify to do the auditing? Currently the auditor hired by the Secretariat is one of the top 5 auditor. The new secretariat will make a decision closer to the end of year 2005.
Secretariat Report
1 Working Report by Ian
1.1 Peter appreciated the list of ccTLDs present at the APTLD KL meeting.
1.2
Shariya asked if there’s any ccTLD operator present at
the
2 Financial Report by Ian for the period from 16 July to 30 October 2004
2.1 Peter commented that the surplus is growing, meaning that we are not spending enough on our goals and activities. Chris agreed and wished APTLD to support more candidates to our meeting.
2.2 Peter asked if the fee bands are satisfactory, Joanna replied that according to current procedure, and that the fees collected are sufficient for current operation, the Secretariat saw not reason to ask members to re-evaluate the fee band.
3 Upcoming Work Plan by Ian
3.1 It is moved to agree unanimously that the work report and financial report be accepted.
Report on APTLD Secretariat Appointment 2005~2006
1 Report on the Election by Ian
1.1 The report was accepted unanimously.
2 Secretariat Transition Plan by Joanna
2.1 Shariya asked about the administrative contact of APTLD web site. She suggested that the admin contact should be the Chair of APTLD (as a role) and the tech contact will be secretariat. Contact details will be secretariat or register office of APTLD. We need to set up an email account for the Chair for this purpose. PDT suggested letting the transition team to check the preference.
2.2 Joanna reported that the transition team has held a preliminary meeting of on 4th Nov, and decided that 5th January 2005 will be the date for operational transition (official date for transition remains on 1st January 2005 for the record). It is because the 1st and 2nd January will be holidays, but the current and new secretariats will look into the details and make sure nothing goes wrong.
2.3 Introduction of next Secretariat by Pete Macaulay by Peter. Pete appreciated the opportunity and wished to provide quality service to APTLD. Most of administration support will be provided by the current teams and will be interviewing a new staff, nearly everything that needs to be done are underway. We can ensure the transition details will take place and the transition will be a smooth one.
2.4
Peter suggested that Joanna and Ian go to
Update from Members
1 Presentation on implementation of 2nd level domain names by Choon-sai of SGNIC
1.1 Questions about whether there will be a decrease in the 3rd level DN registration. SGNIC didn’t see current registrant to change from 3rd level to 2nd level names. It seems that corporations are like to register both depending on the cost.
1.2 Shariya asked about the price difference between 2nd and 3rd level domain name. Choon-sai replied currently the price for 2nd level is the same as 3rd level, but general public receive feedbacks that the SG price is high, and SG will review the possibility of lower the price under the condition that SGNIC can be self-support forits operations.
1.2 Question from Peter regarding the indecent content of the domain name. Choon-sai replied currently SGNIC is responsible for deciding and reviewing whether the names are accepted. Shariya further asked about the name checking mechanism, and Choon-sai replied it depends on the agreement with registrar. SGNIC has agreement with registrar that SGNIC has the final authority to delete names. According to the agreement, the domain name is not a property, rather the registrants have the right to use it, not own it.
1.3 Question from Peter about the ownership of SGNIC. Choon-sai replied that SGNIC is own by the telecom regulatory organisation when the founder, a Computer Society, merged with the regulatory body.
2 Edmon updated on the progress of .asia application, currently still under clarification process, and awaiting for ICANN to inform how long the clarification will take and move into evaluation process.
2.1
Question from Vincent: what’s the major issue that
ICANN seek clarification?
2.2 Tony asked about the support of ccTLDs in AP. Peter replied that according to the vote taken at APTLD KL Meeting, .th and .hk were against, and others were supporting.
(Lunch Break at 12:30)
3 Presentation on AFGNIC (.af ccTLD) by Muhammad Aslam
3.1
Peter asked about the lives in
3.2 PDT asked about the “coca” system, and Muhammad explained that the registration system is open-source software and .af is willing to help anyone wish to use that software.
3.3 Questions from Shariya regarding other policies for domain names. Muhammad replied there is DRP for .af domain names. It’s still in comment period.
3.4 Elspeth asked about the price and number of AFGNIC staff. Muhammad replied the price is too much, and is reviewing the pricing. Currently, there are four staffs including technical staff.
3.5 Vincent welcomed .af to APTLD, and asked about the AFNIC structure. Muhammad replied that .af is delegated to MOC, and MOC commissioned the registry operation to AFNIC, which is a non-profit organization.
4
Stafford was invited to give an update on
4.1
Strategic plan for 2005
1 Discussion on Action Plan of Each Committee
1.1 Membership Committee will continue the sponsoring program. In response to the inquiry from Chris, USD 6,000 was spent for sponsorship in 2004. It is suggested USD 20,000 to be allocated for sponsorship in 2005. There might be fees required to bring instructors to the scheduled workshop at APRICOT 2005. Chris said the sponsorship program should not be solely meant for recruiting new members, but also to help the development in the regions.
1.2 Agreed to allocate USD 5,000 for Technical Committee in 2005.
1.3 Agreed to allocated USD 2,000 for Audit Committee for auditing 2005 finance report.
1.4 Agreed to allocated USD 1,000 for Constitutional Committee in 2005.
2 Event Schedule
2.1 Peter suggested to gather information on events happening in the region which the APTLD meeting can consider to collocate its meeting with, such as APNIC meeting.
2.2 Chris expressed that we should consider if we want to exchange meeting with CENTR, and whether we want to consider WSIS. Shariya asked does APTLD want to reach out the ccTLDs face to face instead of waiting for ccTLD to come to us.
2.3 Chris added maybe we can consider hiring a membership staff, who does not necessarily have to be the secretariat staff. It’s all about presence and that’s important. InternetNZ responded that if it is decided to do so, InternetNZ certainly has the capacity within the current staff to carry out such task if it’s required.
2.4
In addition to the membership office appointment,
Shariya said there are ways to do the outreach, for example if APTLD can write
to few ccTLDs (for example, Cambodia and Laos) to
apply for APRICOT fellowship and come to the Kyoto meeting, then there’s no
travel cost required. We can also see how the status of Arabic Nations by June
(to have meeting in KL), and the opportunity in November (to have meeting in
2.5 Chris explained that to hire someone to do the job, meaning that we have someone to look after the works, and things can be carried with a string line, not just rushing into things before meetings.
Other Business
1
Peter would like to thank
Meeting adjourned at 14:45