Election procedure for ICANN ASO Address Council in APNIC Region

Election procedure for ICANN ASO Address Council in APNIC Region Sept. 5, 2002 ASO Meeting The 14th APNIC Open Policy Meeting APNIC Executive Council

How AC is elected? Three members from each RIR region Annual election of one member with threeyear office term In APNIC region, any participants in the ASO meeting can vote in EC election – Same in RIPE NCC and ARIN regions

ICANN ASO MoU reads (2) Composition and Action of Address Council a) Selection. Each RIR signatory of the MOU will select three [3] individuals to the Address Council using the following process: (v) Selection of the RIR's members of the Address C ouncil will be made via an open and transparent pr ocedure. The individuals selected for the Address Council must not be staff members of any RIR.

Discussions in the last AMM http://www.apnic.net/meetings/13/minutes/amm20020307.html#14 Clear consensus to change the process, but no clear consensus on how Two options had roughly equal support: – Voted by people who have attended APNIC Meetings before and/or APNIC members – Vote restricted to APNIC members including newly introduced at-large membership at low cost

EC’s consideration Recognise desire for change, and major c oncerns expressed Voting system adjusted to allow APNIC m embers to vote by proxy (one vote per me mber only) – To allow more representative voting – Consistent with AC election in ARIN region

Two options supported in the last AMM Attendance Before – Voting by people who have attended APNIC Meetings before and/or APNIC members Membership individual membership – Voting by APNIC members, including newly introduced at-large membership at low cost

Attendance Before Pros – Can avoid votes by instant local participants Cons – Administering voting rights may be troublesome, and may lead to dispute How many attendances needed? One or Two? Only latest attendances?

Membership individual membership Pros – Eligibility is very clear – enables concerned personnel to vote Cons – Affect APNIC’s fee structure – New administrative burden and cost – at-large membership may look like revenue raising. Need to be restricted to just a cost recovery – At-large membership is just for AC election

Discussion in EC Cons of two supported options are both ve ry significant Either of these options may introduce a big burden into APNIC’s operations The third option for AC election is propose d from the EC – Only current membership

Why Only Current Membership? Doesn’t introduce an additional burden in yet another APNIC voting process Allows those entities with a direct and demonstrated interest in address policies to nominate and elect individuals to represent their interests on the Address Council Prevents various forms of distortion of the election process (meeting stacking, etc) Intended to produce a stable form of representation of the interests of the APNIC community

Summary Three possible solutions after one added – Attendance Before – Membership Individual Membership – Only Current Membership Requires more discussion by community – This presentation has been prepared to assist discussion

Comments? Support for either of three? How we should move it forward? Any consensus to be made?

Thank you! Election procedure for ICANN ASO Address Council in APNIC Region Sept. 5, 2002 The 14th APNIC Open Policy Meeting APNIC Executive Council