Minutes of the SC-cc on Friday, August 28th
participants:
Ken Stubbs (CORE)
Charles Smith (ISP/C)
Izumi Aizu (APIA)
Roberto Gaetano (ETSI)
Mikki Barry (DNRC)
Javier Sola (EuroInternet)
Mike Roberts (Educause)
Molly Shaffer (BCIS)
Ben Edelman (BCIS)
Jim Dixon (EuroISPA)
Karsten Schiefner (DENIC)
Christopher Ambler (ORSC)
Siegfried Langenbach (EuroInternet)
Amadeu Abril i Abril (FCR)
Jay Fenello (ORSC)
Patrick Greenwell (ISP/C)
Dan Steinberg (DNRC)
Michael Schneider (EuroISPA)
Anne-Kathrin Orth

joined later:
Barbara Dooley (CIX)

There was a short inquiry to the mails Roberto Gaetano has been forwarding to the SC; apparently, no one knows who John Hunt actually is and definitely no one has asked him to do any research for the IFWP.

There were no additions to the agenda as adopted from the last conference call:

a) the organization of a venue for the open wrap-up meeting

b) funding the wrap-up conference

c) publicizing the wrap-up conference

d) co-ordination with the Berkman Center

f) funding of the previous regional conferences

a) Molly Shaffer reported that Ira Magaziner has asked IANA and NSI to continue negotiating, which is a good sign for the compromise meeting, as a lot of negotiations have to have happened beforehand. The Berkman Center is prepared to help the SC with the logistics of the ratification meeting and could call around for venues if there is nothing available at Harvard itself.

As to the DATE of the conference, all agreed that the day immediately after the compromise meeting would be too close. It was decided that the weekend, namely the Saturday after, meaning September 19th, would be ideal, as the electronic voting would take until the end of the week anyhow and could then be closed in parallel with the physical meeting. The pressure would stay on those compromising, as Sunday evening on September 13th would still be their deadline and as most of the solution will have been negotiated in advance anyhow.

The question was brougt up whether the ratification should necessarily be in Boston, though this would be the most convenient. Other free venues are accessible as well, so there were several alternative suggestions made in case Harvard is not available for that day:

i) it could be moved to Barcelona (Amadeu would provide a free venue)

ii) there could be several meetings around the world (4 or 5) with high bandwidth connection for videoconferencing, though the problem would be to have them at the same time

iii) if Harvard failed it could be moved into the proximity of IANA in Southern California

Other suggestions can be made by email, the topic to be decided IF there is a negative reply from Harvard that they have no facilities available.

b) It was decided to follow up on the possibility of funding of the ratification meeting by foundations as mentioned by Tamar Frankel in Singapore. Harvard will send some suggestions of who to contact, though they would not feel comfortable doing this themselves, only for the compromise meeting. Jim Dixon will be contacting those foundations. Izumi Aizu reported that possibly, another 5 thousand ecu could be raised from within Asia-Pacific.

c) The announcement of the compromise meeting will be made along with a report on the status quo of the ratification meeting (see below) to avoid creating a sentiment of absolute exclusion. Possibly, some of the alternative suggestions could be mentioned as well to get the feedback of the rest of the Internet community. This announcement will be made to all relevant email lists, organisations like ISOC could also forward it to whomever they feel is important. It will also be posted to the IFWP website.

The status of the ratification meeting is by consensus so far:

i) there should be some sort of physical meeting (it will not yet be mentioned that there will be electronic voting as well)

ii) it will be held on the weekend following the compromise meeting, probably on Saturday, the 19th of September

iii) if Harvard is not available, Barcelona is another possible venue.

Michael Schneider will be sending out a proposed wording to the list for approval within the next few hours.

There were concerns expressed that the governments would not be able to react within a week but were necessary for the public to orientate themselves. However, as there are efforts being made to include them right now and in the compromise meeting, and as they have to be getting to some sort of closure themselves by the end of September anyhow, it was agreed that nothing more can be done and that, if they fail to ratify the proposal, we have done our best to enable them to do so.

e) The co-ordination with the Berkman Center will continue through Dan.

Jim Dixon will be sending a proposal to the list on how the electronic voting, especially the verification methods, could be organised. However, voting will take place via the IFWP website rather than by email.

f) There have been no changes in the financial situations of the Geneva and AP meetings; EuroISPA will be paying its 2000 ecu within the next few weeks.

It is being assumed that Marty Burack has invoiced at least some of the companies and organisations that made committments. As Jim Dixon has been collecting the money for UK, he will be getting in touch with Paul Stevens (Olswang), as they had originally proposed to do the collecting within the four UK law firms.

As for Reston, Mark McFadden will be posting the current status to the web. An effort will be made to collect the committments before September 30th, as any later date may prove to become increasingly difficult.

The next conference call is scheduled for Monday, August 31st, same time, details will again be sent out by Jay Fenello.