[Accountability-tf] Notes from Ninth Call

Dear task force members, 

Here are the notes from Monday’s call. Let me know if any corrections are required. 

Cheers

Antony



RIPE Accountability Task Force Meeting Notes

7 August 2017

Attendees:
Antony Gollan, Malcolm Hutty, Alexander Isavnin, Peter Koch, Francesca Merletti, Wim Rullens, Carsten Schiefner, Marco Schmidt, William Sylvester
 
1. Review of action items
2. Face to face meeting preparation
     -Logistics & Travel
     -Agenda for the meeting
     -Note: If TF members have any topics to discuss, the RIPE NCC can gather supporting information ahead of the F2F meeting
3. AOB


Francesca noted that she and her Europol colleagues would be unable to attend the face to face meeting. If there was a remote participation option available, someone from her team might be able to join.

1. Review of action items

20170703-1 RIPE NCC to look into whether TF members can book their own flights and bill the RIPE NCC.

Antony said they had mostly booked all of their flights and this could be closed. 

20170703-2: RIPE NCC to look for past statements/presentations that might be relevant to the TF’s work.

Antony said they hadn’t had time to get to this yet. They would try and look at this ahead of the face to face meeting. 

20170606-1: Malcolm to send some thoughts on what the group should discuss during the face-to-face meeting to the mailing list. 

Malcolm had send this just ahead of the call and this could be closed: (https://www.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/accountability-tf/2017-August/000131.html) 
 
20170509-1: TF Chairs to put together work plan after the meeting.

This was just a placeholder and could be kept open. 
 
20170509-2: RIPE NCC to look at arranging another (longer) face-to-face meeting for the task force.

This could be considered closed. 

20170306-1: RIPE NCC to further develop accountability mapping document with task force input.
   
20170306-2: Task force members to review and comment on accountability mapping document.
 
These were placeholders until the task force decided it wanted to do anything further with the document. 

2. Face to face meeting preparation

William asked if anyone still needed to arrange their travel. 

Carsten said he was still looking at what kind of flight he could take. For the time being, he preferred to book this himself and invoice the RIPE NCC. 

Antony said everyone's hotel rooms had been booked. 
 
William said to reach out to Antony if anyone had any issues regarding logistics. 

William asked if anyone had comments on the draft agenda:

F2F Agenda *DRAFT*
 
1. Goals for the task force
2. Identify issues, strengths, weaknesses relating to RIPE accountability
3. Stakeholder relationships - RIPE, the RIPE NCC and others
4. Grading/reporting mechanism for RIPE accountability
5. Deliverables
6. Preparation for RIPE 75 and next steps (including recommendations if any)

Malcolm said they should start with a discussion on values, as this would come before everything else. He thought this should be a separate item that came first on the agenda. 

William agreed and said this made sense. He asked if what they had there seemed right to everyone, or if they needed something else. 

Peter supported Malcolm’s suggestion. He also thought there should also be some discussion about the accountability model they were using. He thought they should reverse items 3. and 4.

William asked if the schedule worked for the group. He said they would build this out so it was a little more formalised as they got closer to the meeting. 

Draft Schedule
 
9.00-9.30:            Arrival/coffee
9:30-12.30:         Meeting Agenda (break as needed)
12.30-1.30:          Working Lunch
1:30-5.30:            Meeting Agenda (break as needed)
5.30                       Finish

Carsten said he probably couldn't do the whole day on the Thursday as he had a family engagement that evening. He might have to leave directly after lunch. 

William said they would try and keep the substantive issues towards the front of the agenda as much as possible. 

William asked if Malcolm wanted to walk them through the mind map he sent around. 

Malcolm said on their last call they'd been talking about what accountability was for. That meant understanding what were some of the things that they were aiming for. He took process values and substantive issues. They had to ask who they were doing this for, and who was the root of the community’s authority. And sometimes they needed to think about “we” and who was the RIPE community – and whether it was different from the stakeholders that it needed to work with. He said there were also issues around the scope of the RIPE NCC. Regarding the root of authority – it was unclear if this was the RIPE Plenary, the RIPE Chair, or the RIPE Mailing List that was really in charge. When the RIPE Chair approved a WG, were they doing this from their own power, or were they merely acting in a sort of clerical capacity and approving the wish of the community? 

When it came to stakeholders – what was the role of governments and other participants within this? When they thought of the companies that employed people who attended RIPE Meetings – were these companies also members of the RIPE community? 

William asked if there was any feedback for Malcolm. From his perspective, the question around the source of authority was a good one for the RIPE NCC to look at. Who had the power – was it the community or the RIPE Chair? Once the Chair was selected, did they now have the power or did this remain with the community? 

Malcolm gave an example of a new working group or task force – if the community thought one thing and the RIPE Chair thought another – could the Chair act on their own volition against the wishes of the community if they thought it was in the best interest of the community? 

William said this was an interesting question, especially the interaction between the community and the RIPE NCC. The RIPE NCC often said it was doing what the community wanted, but clearly it sometimes took its own decisions, for example around a policy implementation following the outcome of a legal review. He thought it would be good to find some clarity around this. 

3. AOB

There were none. 

William encouraged anyone to share their thoughts on the list. 

He reminded the group that the RIPE NCC could do additional work or research ahead of the face to face meeting. He asked anyone who had an issue to let him know so they could make the meeting more productive. 

Wim mentioned that it would be good to bring in people from the RIPE NCC to speak about values. 
 

Action Items

20170703-2: RIPE NCC to look for past statements/presentations that might be relevant to the TF’s work.
 
20170509-1: TF Chairs to put together work plan after the meeting.

20170306-1: RIPE NCC to further develop accountability mapping document with task force input.
 
20170306-2: Task force members to review and comment on accountability mapping document.


Closed Action Items

20170703-1 RIPE NCC to look into whether TF members can book their own flights and bill the RIPE NCC.

20170606-1: Malcolm to send some thoughts on what the group should discuss during the face-to-face meeting to the mailing list.

20170509-2: RIPE NCC to look at arranging another (longer) face-to-face meeting for the task force.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: </ripe/mail/archives/accountability-tf/attachments/20170809/3219f02a/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 2609 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: </ripe/mail/archives/accountability-tf/attachments/20170809/3219f02a/attachment.p7s>