[sig-policy] Registration Required for APNIC 37 webcast

[Adam Gosling]

Dear Colleagues,

I hope you are all looking forward to APRICOT 2014 which will start next
week. The Workshops are from Tuesday, 18 to Saturday, 22 February 2014
and the Conference is from Monday, 24 to Friday, 28 February 2014.

The Policy SIG and Open Policy Meeting agenda will be published
shortly. Session times are also available at the program link below.

If you are unable to attend in person, you can still join the conference
remotely. Some of the conference sessions will be broadcasted live.
Please refer to the program for more information.

http://2014.apricot.net/program

Please note: Registration is now *mandatory* to watch the live webcast
and participate remotely. Registration is free and you can register now
to receive your login details

https://apnic.ungerboeck.com/prod/emc00/register.aspx?OrgCode=10&EvtID=5824&AppCode=REG

I hope to see you all in person or online at APRICOT 2014.

Regards
Adam Gosling

--
Adam Gosling
Senior Policy Specialist   email: a...@apnic.net
APNIC  sip:  a...@voip.apnic.net
http://www.apnic.net   phone:+61 7 3858 3100

 * Sent by email to save paper. Print only if necessary.
*  sig-policy:  APNIC SIG on resource management policy   *
___
sig-policy mailing list
sig-policy@lists.apnic.net
http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy

Re: [sig-policy] Registration Required for APNIC 37 webcast

[Adam Gosling]

Hi Skeeve

I’m not entirely sure why the system was sending a calendar  appointment at 
all! This has been disabled.

Thanks for letting us know.

Regards,

Adam

--
Adam Gosling
Senior Policy Specialist   email: a...@apnic.net
APNIC  sip:  a...@voip.apnic.net
http://www.apnic.net   phone:+61 7 3858 3100

 * Sent by email to save paper. Print only if necessary.

On 13/02/2014 3:32 pm, "Skeeve Stevens" 
mailto:ske...@eintellegonetworks.com>> wrote:

Almost smooth.

Except the calendar appointment it send you is:

Conference Remote Participation

Wed Jan 1 20:00 – Sat Mar 1, 2014 04:00 (EST)


That is a little too long for me ... and I'd be late already.


...Skeeve

Skeeve Stevens - eintellego Networks Pty Ltd
ske...@eintellegonetworks.com<mailto:ske...@eintellegonetworks.com> ; 
www.eintellegonetworks.com<http://www.eintellegonetworks.com/>

Phone: 1300 239 038; Cell +61 (0)414 753 383 ; skype://skeeve

facebook.com/eintellegonetworks<http://facebook.com/eintellegonetworks> ; 
<http://twitter.com/networkceoau> 
linkedin.com/in/skeeve<http://linkedin.com/in/skeeve>

twitter.com/theispguy<http://twitter.com/theispguy> ; blog: 
www.theispguy.com<http://www.theispguy.com/>

[http://eintellegonetworks.com/logos/ein09.png]

The Experts Who The Experts Call
Juniper - Cisco - Cloud - Consulting - IPv4 Brokering


On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 4:14 PM, Adam Gosling 
mailto:a...@apnic.net>> wrote:
Dear Colleagues,

I hope you are all looking forward to APRICOT 2014 which will start next
week. The Workshops are from Tuesday, 18 to Saturday, 22 February 2014
and the Conference is from Monday, 24 to Friday, 28 February 2014.

The Policy SIG and Open Policy Meeting agenda will be published
shortly. Session times are also available at the program link below.

If you are unable to attend in person, you can still join the conference
remotely. Some of the conference sessions will be broadcasted live.
Please refer to the program for more information.

http://2014.apricot.net/program

Please note: Registration is now *mandatory* to watch the live webcast
and participate remotely. Registration is free and you can register now
to receive your login details

https://apnic.ungerboeck.com/prod/emc00/register.aspx?OrgCode=10&EvtID=5824&AppCode=REG

I hope to see you all in person or online at APRICOT 2014.

Regards
Adam Gosling

--
Adam Gosling
Senior Policy Specialist   email: 
a...@apnic.net<mailto:a...@apnic.net>
APNIC  sip:  
a...@voip.apnic.net<mailto:a...@voip.apnic.net>
http://www.apnic.net   phone:+61 7 3858 3100

 * Sent by email to save paper. Print only if necessary.

*  sig-policy:  APNIC SIG on resource management policy   *
___
sig-policy mailing list
sig-policy@lists.apnic.net<mailto:sig-policy@lists.apnic.net>
http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy


*  sig-policy:  APNIC SIG on resource management policy   *
___
sig-policy mailing list
sig-policy@lists.apnic.net
http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy

Re: [sig-policy] Registration Required for APNIC 37 webcast

[Adam Gosling]

Hello Masato, Skeeve

APNIC would not intentionally take any action that would restrict people 
accessing the webcast, or participating in the Open Policy Meeting - whether it 
is in person, using the remote participation tools, or doing both.

The registration is simple, requiring a name and email address only. There is 
nothing to stop you being registered for both the physical meeting and the 
remote system.

Please don’t hesitate to contact 
confere...@apnic.net<mailto:confere...@apnic.net>, or me personally if you have 
any problems at all with this registration process.

Regards,

Adam

--
Adam Gosling
Senior Policy Specialist   email: a...@apnic.net
APNIC  sip:  a...@voip.apnic.net
http://www.apnic.net   phone:+61 7 3858 3100

 * Sent by email to save paper. Print only if necessary.

On 13/02/2014 4:12 pm, "Skeeve Stevens" 
mailto:ske...@eintellegonetworks.com>> wrote:

This is a good point.

While I am not at this event, sometimes I used to stay in my room and stream 
from there if I had other work to do.


...Skeeve

Skeeve Stevens - eintellego Networks Pty Ltd
ske...@eintellegonetworks.com<mailto:ske...@eintellegonetworks.com> ; 
www.eintellegonetworks.com<http://www.eintellegonetworks.com/>

Phone: 1300 239 038; Cell +61 (0)414 753 383 ; skype://skeeve

facebook.com/eintellegonetworks<http://facebook.com/eintellegonetworks> ; 
<http://twitter.com/networkceoau> 
linkedin.com/in/skeeve<http://linkedin.com/in/skeeve>

twitter.com/theispguy<http://twitter.com/theispguy> ; blog: 
www.theispguy.com<http://www.theispguy.com/>

[http://eintellegonetworks.com/logos/ein09.png]

The Experts Who The Experts Call
Juniper - Cisco - Cloud - Consulting - IPv4 Brokering


On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 4:57 PM, Masato Yamanishi 
mailto:myama...@japan-telecom.com>> wrote:
Hi Adam,

If a "physically attending" delegate in Petaling Jaya also want to participate 
remotely
from some reason (e.g. reading comments in chat room, transcript, or watching 
video for fun:-) ),
is she/he required to register for remote participation in addition to a 
registration for the conference?

Rgs,
Masato (Matt) Yamanishi

On 14/02/12 21:14, "Adam Gosling" mailto:a...@apnic.net>> wrote:

Dear Colleagues,

I hope you are all looking forward to APRICOT 2014 which will start next
week. The Workshops are from Tuesday, 18 to Saturday, 22 February 2014
and the Conference is from Monday, 24 to Friday, 28 February 2014.

The Policy SIG and Open Policy Meeting agenda will be published
shortly. Session times are also available at the program link below.

If you are unable to attend in person, you can still join the conference
remotely. Some of the conference sessions will be broadcasted live.
Please refer to the program for more information.

http://2014.apricot.net/program

Please note: Registration is now *mandatory* to watch the live webcast
and participate remotely. Registration is free and you can register now
to receive your login details

https://apnic.ungerboeck.com/prod/emc00/register.aspx?OrgCode=10&EvtID=5824&AppCode=REG

I hope to see you all in person or online at APRICOT 2014.

Regards
Adam Gosling

--
Adam Gosling
Senior Policy Specialist   email: 
a...@apnic.net<mailto:a...@apnic.net>
APNIC  sip:  
a...@voip.apnic.net<mailto:a...@voip.apnic.net>
http://www.apnic.net   phone:+61 7 3858 3100

 * Sent by email to save paper. Print only if necessary.
* sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management policy * 
___ sig-policy mailing list 
sig-policy@lists.apnic.net<mailto:sig-policy@lists.apnic.net>http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy

*  sig-policy:  APNIC SIG on resource management policy   *
___
sig-policy mailing list
sig-policy@lists.apnic.net<mailto:sig-policy@lists.apnic.net>
http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy


*  sig-policy:  APNIC SIG on resource management policy   *
___
sig-policy mailing list
sig-policy@lists.apnic.net
http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy

Re: [sig-policy] Registration Required for APNIC 37 webcast

[Adam Gosling]

Hi Skeeve

I think we will look at refining the process going forward. Hopefully we can 
tie the two processes together. This is all relevant to a topic I want to 
re-introduce to the mailing list and the SIG meeting.

The Secretariat had discussions recently with the provider of an Audience 
Response System that could be used to gather input to assist the SIG Chairs to 
gauge whether or not the community has reached consensus on policy proposals.

Such a system could also help remote participants, or participants at remote 
hubs, to indicate their support or objection to proposals.

The Secretariat and the Chairs have raised this idea before and there were some 
concerns, but overall a strong positive support for the idea. Before we could 
invest in something like this we would really need a clear understanding of the 
community’s expectations, particularly with regard to safeguarding against 
gaming the system. Registration of remote participants might be one way to deal 
with this.

I’d like to start a discussion about this on the mailing list prior to Petaling 
Jaya and the SIG Chairs have just agreed to allow me time for a community 
consultation about this at the face-to-face meeting.

I’ll post something more specific about this to the mailing list soon.

Regards,

Adam

--
Adam Gosling
Senior Policy Specialist   email: a...@apnic.net
APNIC  sip:  a...@voip.apnic.net
http://www.apnic.net   phone:+61 7 3858 3100

 * Sent by email to save paper. Print only if necessary.

On 13/02/2014 6:18 pm, "Skeeve Stevens" 
mailto:ske...@eintellegonetworks.com>> wrote:

All good... so you just register twice .


...Skeeve

Skeeve Stevens - eintellego Networks Pty Ltd
ske...@eintellegonetworks.com<mailto:ske...@eintellegonetworks.com> ; 
www.eintellegonetworks.com<http://www.eintellegonetworks.com/>

Phone: 1300 239 038; Cell +61 (0)414 753 383 ; skype://skeeve

facebook.com/eintellegonetworks<http://facebook.com/eintellegonetworks> ; 
<http://twitter.com/networkceoau> 
linkedin.com/in/skeeve<http://linkedin.com/in/skeeve>

twitter.com/theispguy<http://twitter.com/theispguy> ; blog: 
www.theispguy.com<http://www.theispguy.com/>

[http://eintellegonetworks.com/logos/ein09.png]

The Experts Who The Experts Call
Juniper - Cisco - Cloud - Consulting - IPv4 Brokering


On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 7:17 PM, Adam Gosling 
mailto:a...@apnic.net>> wrote:
Hello Masato, Skeeve

APNIC would not intentionally take any action that would restrict people 
accessing the webcast, or participating in the Open Policy Meeting - whether it 
is in person, using the remote participation tools, or doing both.

The registration is simple, requiring a name and email address only. There is 
nothing to stop you being registered for both the physical meeting and the 
remote system.

Please don’t hesitate to contact 
confere...@apnic.net<mailto:confere...@apnic.net>, or me personally if you have 
any problems at all with this registration process.

Regards,

Adam

--
Adam Gosling
Senior Policy Specialist   email: 
a...@apnic.net<mailto:a...@apnic.net>
APNIC  sip:  
a...@voip.apnic.net<mailto:a...@voip.apnic.net>
http://www.apnic.net   phone:+61 7 3858 3100

 * Sent by email to save paper. Print only if necessary.

On 13/02/2014 4:12 pm, "Skeeve Stevens" 
mailto:ske...@eintellegonetworks.com>> wrote:

This is a good point.

While I am not at this event, sometimes I used to stay in my room and stream 
from there if I had other work to do.


...Skeeve

Skeeve Stevens - eintellego Networks Pty Ltd
ske...@eintellegonetworks.com<mailto:ske...@eintellegonetworks.com> ; 
www.eintellegonetworks.com<http://www.eintellegonetworks.com/>

Phone: 1300 239 038; Cell +61 (0)414 753 383 ; skype://skeeve

facebook.com/eintellegonetworks<http://facebook.com/eintellegonetworks> ; 
<http://twitter.com/networkceoau> 
linkedin.com/in/skeeve<http://linkedin.com/in/skeeve>

twitter.com/theispguy<http://twitter.com/theispguy> ; blog: 
www.theispguy.com<http://www.theispguy.com/>

[http://eintellegonetworks.com/logos/ein09.png]

The Experts Who The Experts Call
Juniper - Cisco - Cloud - Consulting - IPv4 Brokering


On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 4:57 PM, Masato Yamanishi 
mailto:myama...@japan-telecom.com>> wrote:
Hi Adam,

If a "physically attending" delegate in Petaling Jaya also want to participate 
remotely
from some reason (e.g. reading comments in chat room, transcript, or watching 
video for fun:-) ),
is she/he required to register for remote participation in addition to a 
registration for the conference?

Rgs,
Masato (Matt) Yamanishi

On 14/02/1

[sig-policy] Policy documentation feedback requested

[Adam Gosling]

Dear Colleagues

Many of you may recall that the APNIC Secretariat has been working
toward a restructure of the policy documents that govern the management
of resources in the region.

Last March, I circulated a draft document that merged all seven policy
documents into one policy manual. The email containing the links to
those drafts is available here:

http://mailman.apnic.net/mailing-lists/sig-policy/archive/2013/03/msg2.html

Since then I have had some feedback that some may find a different
approach easier. Accordingly, I have identified below, a series of four
options. These range from no change - maintain the seven separate
documents, to keeping three or four documents.

To give a sense of what this might look like, I've pasted a likely Table
of Contents for each policy according to the structure of each option.

I can discuss this in more detail at APNIC 37, but the idea is to either
put all policies together in one policy manual, or to maintain separate
IPv4, IPv6, and AS number documents.

I look forward to feedback and opinions from community members, either
on this list, or at the meeting.

Kind Regards,

Adam


--
Adam Gosling
Senior Policy Specialist   email: a...@apnic.net
APNIC  sip:  a...@voip.apnic.net
http://www.apnic.net   phone:+61 7 3858 3100

 * Sent by email to save paper. Print only if necessary.



---
OPTION 1: No Change
---

Policy Environment
IPv4 Policy
IPv6 Policy
Experimental Policy
ASN Policy
Transfers Policy
Historical Resource Policy



OPTION 2: One Policy

1. Introduction
   Scope of Policy
   Distribution Hierarchy
2. Definitions
   All definitions
3. Policy framework
   Goals & Principles
4. Resource License
   Validity, renewal, recovery
5. Resource Management
   APNIC pool management
   Historical resources
   LIR responsibilities
6. Resource requests
   General requirements for requests
   Criteria for initial IPv4 delegations
   Criteria for initial IPv6 delegations
   Criteria for subsequent IPv4 delegations
   Criteria for subsequent IPv6 allocations
   Criteria for initial IPv6 assignments
   Criteria for subsequent IPv6 assignments
   Criteria for ASN delegations
   Experimental allocations
7. Resource Transfers
   Intra-Regional transfers IPv4 & ASNs
   Inter-RIR transfers IPv4 & ASNs
   Historical resources
   Mergers, acquisitions
8. Appendix A : HD-Ratio



OPTION 3: Three Policy Documents


IPv4 Policy
---
1. Introduction
   Scope of Policy
   Distribution Hierarchy
2. Definitions
   Relevant definitions only
3. Policy framework
   Goals & Principles
4. Resource License
   Validity, renewal, recovery
5. Resource Management
   APNIC pool management
   Historical resources
   LIR responsibilities
6. Resource requests
   General requirements for requests
   Criteria for initial IPv4 delegations
   Criteria for subsequent IPv4 delegations
   Experimental allocations
7. Resource Transfers
   Intra-Regional IPv4 transfers
   Inter-RIR IPv4 transfers
   Historical resources
   Mergers, acquisitions


IPv6 Policy
---
1. Introduction
   Scope of Policy
   Distribution Hierarchy
2. Definitions
   Relevant definitions only
3. Policy framework
   Goals & Principles
4. Resource License
   Validity, renewal, recovery
5. Resource Management
   APNIC pool management
   LIR responsibilities
6. Resource requests
   General requirements for requests
   Criteria for initial IPv6 delegations
   Criteria for subsequent IPv6 allocations
   Criteria for initial IPv6 assignments
   Criteria for subsequent IPv6 assignments
   Experimental allocations
7. Resource Transfers
   Mergers, acquisitions
8. Appendix A : HD-Ratio


ASN Policy
--
1. Introduction
   Scope of Policy & Distribution Hierarchy
2. Definitions
   Relevant definitions only
3. Policy framework
   Goals & Principles
4. Resource License
   Validity, renewal, recovery
5. Resource Management
   APNIC pool management
   Historical resources
   LIR responsibilities
6. Resource requests
   General requirements for requests
   Criteria for ASN delegations
   Experimental allocations
7. Resource Transfers
   Intra-Regional ASN transfers
   Inter-RIR ASN transfers
   Mergers, acquisitions


---
OPTION 4: Four Policy Documents
---

Policy Environment
--
1. Introduction
   Scope of Policy
   Distribution Hierarchy
2. Definitions
   All definitions
3. Policy framework
   Goals & Principles
4. Resource License
   Validity, renewal, recovery
5. Resource Management
   APNIC pool management
   Historical resources
   LIR responsibilities
6. Resource Transfers
   Intra-Regional transfers IPv4 & ASNs
   Inter-RIR tran

Re: [sig-policy] Policy documentation feedback requested

[Adam Gosling]

Hello Owen

That makes me think of another option I haven’t listed.

We could take the structure outlined in option 4 and put them all in one 
document. That way we would have all the definitions, goals, and principles 
information at the beginning of the document and then have three sections IPv4, 
IPv6, and ASNs.

One of the concerns with option 2 was the way Section 6 swaps back and forth 
between the three resource types.

So I present Option 5 structure below. It would achieve the goal of one policy 
document with all its advantages, but keep the various resource policy criteria 
quite distinct.


---
OPTION 5: One Policy Document
---

Section 1: Policy Environment
-
1.1. Introduction
 Scope of Policy
 Distribution Hierarchy
1.2. Definitions
 All definitions
1.3. Policy framework
 Goals & Principles
1.4. Resource License
 Validity, renewal, recovery
1.5. Resource Management
 APNIC pool management
 Historical resources
 LIR responsibilities
1.6. General requirements for requests
1.7. Resource Transfers
 Intra-Regional transfers IPv4 & ASNs
 Inter-RIR transfers IPv4 & ASNs
 Historical resources
 Mergers, acquisitions
1.8. Experimental allocations


Section 2: IPv4 Policy
--
2.1. IPv4 Resource requests
 Criteria for initial IPv4 delegations
 Criteria for subsequent IPv4 delegations
2.2. Resource Transfers
 Intra-Regional IPv4 transfers
 Inter-RIR IPv4 transfers
 Historical resources
 Mergers, acquisitions


Section 3: IPv6 Policy
--
3.1. IPv6 Resource requests
 Criteria for initial IPv6 delegations
 Criteria for subsequent IPv6 allocations
 Criteria for initial IPv6 assignments
 Criteria for subsequent IPv6 assignments
3.2. Resource Transfers
 Mergers, acquisitions
3.3. Appendix A : HD-Ratio


Section 4: ASN Policy
-
4.1. ASN Resource requests
 Criteria for ASN delegations
4.2. Resource Transfers
 Intra-Regional ASN transfers
 Inter-RIR ASN transfers
 Mergers, acquisitions






--
Adam Gosling
Senior Policy Specialist   email: a...@apnic.net
APNIC  sip:  a...@voip.apnic.net
http://www.apnic.net   phone:+61 7 3858 3100

 * Sent by email to save paper. Print only if necessary.

On 18/02/2014 12:26 am, "Owen DeLong" mailto:o...@delong.com>> 
wrote:

I support option 2.

It is hard enough trying to follow the regional policy differences as an 
international network.
At least being able to find each regions policies in a single document would be 
a monumental
improvement.

Owen

On Feb 16, 2014, at 21:33 , Adam Gosling 
mailto:a...@apnic.net>> wrote:

Dear Colleagues

Many of you may recall that the APNIC Secretariat has been working
toward a restructure of the policy documents that govern the management
of resources in the region.

Last March, I circulated a draft document that merged all seven policy
documents into one policy manual. The email containing the links to
those drafts is available here:

http://mailman.apnic.net/mailing-lists/sig-policy/archive/2013/03/msg2.html

Since then I have had some feedback that some may find a different
approach easier. Accordingly, I have identified below, a series of four
options. These range from no change - maintain the seven separate
documents, to keeping three or four documents.

To give a sense of what this might look like, I've pasted a likely Table
of Contents for each policy according to the structure of each option.

I can discuss this in more detail at APNIC 37, but the idea is to either
put all policies together in one policy manual, or to maintain separate
IPv4, IPv6, and AS number documents.

I look forward to feedback and opinions from community members, either
on this list, or at the meeting.

Kind Regards,

Adam


--
Adam Gosling
Senior Policy Specialist   email: 
a...@apnic.net<mailto:a...@apnic.net>
APNIC  sip:  
a...@voip.apnic.net<mailto:a...@voip.apnic.net>
http://www.apnic.net   phone:+61 7 3858 3100

 * Sent by email to save paper. Print only if necessary.



---
OPTION 1: No Change
---

Policy Environment
IPv4 Policy
IPv6 Policy
Experimental Policy
ASN Policy
Transfers Policy
Historical Resource Policy



OPTION 2: One Policy

1. Introduction
   Scope of Policy
   Distribution Hierarchy
2. Definitions
   All definitions
3. Policy framework
   Goals & Principles
4. Resource License
   Validity, renewal, recovery
5. Resource Management
   APNIC pool management
   Historical resources

[sig-policy] APNIC policy implementation advisory

[Adam Gosling]

___

APNIC policy implementation advisory
___

Today, 19 February 2014, APNIC implemented one policy proposal that
reached consensus at APNIC 36 in Xi'an, China in August 2013.

Two other policy proposals also reaching consensus at that meeting will
be implemented as described below.



prop-108 Suggested changes to the APNIC Policy Development Process
--

  This proposal optimizes the APNIC Policy Development Process to
  reduce the Comment Period to 4 weeks. This may be extended to 8
  weeks at the discretion of the Policy SIG Chair.

  http://www.apnic.net/policy/proposals/prop-108

Implementation:
  To permit the APNIC Policy SIG to conduct its APNIC 37 policy
  discussions in accordance with this policy change, this proposal
  was implemented today, 19 February 2014.

  https://www.apnic.net/policy/policy-development



prop-107 AS number transfer policy proposal
---

  This policy permits the transfer of Autonomous System Numbers
  (ASNs) within the APNIC region and between regions with compatible
  inter-regional ASN transfer policies.

  http://www.apnic.net/policy/proposals/prop-107

Implementation:
  This policy will be implemented on Wednesday, 16 April 2014.

  - ASN market transfers will only be available between APNIC
account holders unless implemented by the relevant NIR.

  - At this time, no other RIR has a compatible inter-regional ASN
transfer policy. If another RIR implements such a policy, APNIC
will announce the availability of such transfers at the
appropriate time.



prop-105 Distribution of returned IPv4 address
--

  This policy provides a mechanism for the distribution of IPv4
  addresses received by APNIC that fall outside the 'final /8' block
  (103/8). These addresses may be delegated to eligible requestors
  that have already received addresses under prop-088 (the final /8
  policy).

  http://www.apnic.net/policy/proposals/prop-105

Implementation:
  This policy can only be implemented once the IANA delegates
  additional resources to APNIC according to the 'Global policy for
  post exhaustion allocations by the IANA'.

  That global policy is triggered when the first RIR reaches a /9 in
  its free pool of IPv4 addresses.

  APNIC will implement prop-105 once this policy is triggered and
  APNIC receives the resources from the IANA.

  Separate announcements relating to the implementation of this
  policy will be made at the appropriate time.


These policy changes required edits to four documents. The comment
period for the draft documents incorporating these policies ended on 10
February 2014.

Links to these drafts are available on the status page for each
proposal.

http://www.apnic.net/community/policy/proposals

Regards

Adam


--
Adam Gosling
Senior Policy Specialist   email: 
a...@apnic.net<mailto:a...@apnic.net>
APNIC  sip:  
a...@voip.apnic.net<mailto:a...@voip.apnic.net>
http://www.apnic.net   phone:+61 7 3858 3100

 * Sent by email to save paper. Print only if necessary.

*  sig-policy:  APNIC SIG on resource management policy   *
___
sig-policy mailing list
sig-policy@lists.apnic.net
http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy

Re: [sig-policy] Inquiry about abuse

[Adam Gosling]

Hello Sun

The APNIC Helpdesk will respond to your enquiry.

Adam

--
Adam Gosling
Internet Policy Development Consultant email:a...@apnic.net
APNIC  sip: 
   a...@voip.apnic.net
http://www.apnic.net   phone: +61 7 3858 
3100

 * Sent by email to save paper. Print only if necessary.

On 3/04/2014 4:17 am, "chao aun" 
mailto:chaoauncc...@outlook.com>> wrote:


hello,


ips within 172.197.0.0/16 has been used to keep sending out the spam emails.

however, i cannot find how to reach its  abuse contact via APNIC whois.


can anyone help on this and pass me its abuse contact info?


thanks,

sun

*  sig-policy:  APNIC SIG on resource management policy   *
___
sig-policy mailing list
sig-policy@lists.apnic.net
http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy

[sig-policy] Implementation of prop-107: AS number transfer policy proposal

[Adam Gosling]

_

Transfer of AS Numbers now possible with new APNIC policy
_

Today, 16 April 2014, APNIC implemented a change in Autonomous System
Numbers policy which will permit the transfer of AS Numbers between
APNIC account holders. The proposal reached consensus during APNIC 36 in
Xi'An, China in August 2013.

The policy proposal implemented is:

- prop-107: AS number transfer policy proposal

  This policy would permit the transfer of Autonomous System Numbers
  (ASNs) within the APNIC region and between regions with compatible
  inter-regional ASN transfer policies.

  http://www.apnic.net/policy/proposals/prop-107

No other Regional Internet Registry currently has an inter-RIR ASN
transfer policy that would permit the transfer of ASNs between regions.

The policy change required edits to two documents. The comment period
for the draft documents incorporating these policies ended on 10 January
2014. The following updated documents are now officially active:

- Policies for Autonomous System number management in the Asia
  Pacific region
- APNIC transfer, merger, acquisition, and takeover policy

For more information on the history of APNIC policy proposals, see the
Policy Proposals page.

http://www.apnic.net/community/policy/proposals

Regards

--
Adam Gosling
Internet Policy Development Consultant email:
a...@apnic.net<mailto:a...@apnic.net>
APNIC  sip: 
   a...@voip.apnic.net<mailto:a...@voip.apnic.net>
http://www.apnic.net   phone: +61 7 3858 
3100

 * Sent by email to save paper. Print only if necessary.
*  sig-policy:  APNIC SIG on resource management policy   *
___
sig-policy mailing list
sig-policy@lists.apnic.net
http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy

[sig-policy] Implementation of prop-109

[Adam Gosling]

_

Implementation of prop-109
_


Today, 7 May 2014, APNIC has completed implementation of prop-109:
Allocate 1.0.0.0/24 and 1.1.1.0/24 to APNIC Labs as Research Prefixes.

The objective of this proposal is to acknowledge that the IPv4 address
blocks 1.0.0.0/24 and 1.1.1.0/24 are not suitable for global unicast
use and to define a long term approach to their management as research
prefixes for use by APNIC Research & Development.

The policy proposal implemented is:

- prop-109: Allocate 1.0.0.0/24 and 1.1.1.0/24 to APNIC Labs as
  Research Prefixes

  http://www.apnic.net/policy/proposals/prop-109

The proposal reached consensus at APNIC 37 Petaling Jaya, Malaysia in
February 2014 and was endorsed by the APNIC Executive Council via
electronic vote.

The policy change did not require any edits to policy documents and the
required action delegating the blocks was performed by the APNIC
Secretariat.

For more information on the history of APNIC policy proposals, see the
Policy Proposals page.

http://www.apnic.net/community/policy/proposals

Regards,

--
Adam Gosling
Internet Policy Development Consultant email:a...@apnic.net
APNIC  sip: 
   a...@voip.apnic.net
http://www.apnic.net   phone: +61 7 3858 
3100

 * Sent by email to save paper. Print only if necessary.
*  sig-policy:  APNIC SIG on resource management policy   *
___
sig-policy mailing list
sig-policy@lists.apnic.net
http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy

[sig-policy] Implementation of prop-105

[Adam Gosling]

_

Implementation of prop-105
_


Today, 27 May 2014, APNIC will implement prop-105: Distribution of
returned IPv4 address blocks.

This policy proposes to define a separate distribution policy for all
non-103 IPv4 address blocks in the APNIC pool, to start the
distributions once "Global policy for post exhaustion IPv4 allocation
mechanisms by the IANA" is activated.

The policy proposal implemented is:

- prop-105: Distribution of returned IPv4 address blocks
  (Modification of prop-088)

  http://www.apnic.net/policy/proposals/prop-105

The proposal reached consensus at APNIC 36 Xi'an, China in
August 2013 and was endorsed by the APNIC Executive Council in November
2013. This policy is implemented following the activation of the
Recovered IPv4 Pool under the Global Policy for Post Exhaustion IPv4
Allocation Mechanisms by the IANA.

https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/allocation-ipv4-post-exhaustion-2012-05-08-en

The policy required edits to the APNIC Policies for IPv4 address space
management in the Asia Pacific region at Section 3.

For more information on the history of APNIC policy proposals, see the
Policy Proposals page.

http://www.apnic.net/community/policy/proposals

Regards,

--
Adam Gosling
Internet Policy Development Consultant email:
a...@apnic.net<mailto:a...@apnic.net>
APNIC  sip: 
   a...@voip.apnic.net<mailto:a...@voip.apnic.net>
http://www.apnic.net   phone: +61 7 3858 
3100

 * Sent by email to save paper. Print only if necessary.
*  sig-policy:  APNIC SIG on resource management policy   *
___
sig-policy mailing list
sig-policy@lists.apnic.net
http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy

[sig-policy] Nominations now open for Number Resource Organization Number Council

[Adam Gosling]

Nominations now open for Number Resource Organization Number Council



The nomination period for the Number Resource Organization Number
Council (NRO NC) opened, 16 June 2014. The NRO NC performs the role
of the Address Supporting Organization Address Council (ASO AC).

The term of Naresh Ajwani will end on 31 December 2014. One
individual from the Asia Pacific Internet community will be elected to
fill this vacant seat on the NRO NC for two years from 1 January 2015 to
31 December 2016.


How to nominate
---

Any individual is eligible for nomination, except Regional Internet
Registry (RIR) staff members. Self-nominations are permitted.

To nominate yourself or someone else as a candidate for the position,
please submit your nominations using our online form by 17:30 (UTC +10)
on 15 August 2014.

 http://conference.apnic.net/38/elections/nominate


More information


For more information about the role and the NRO NC, please see:

 http://www.apnic.net/about-the-nro

For more on the current members of the NRO NC, please see:

 http://aso.icann.org/people/address-council/address-council-members

If you have any questions, please contact:

  helpd...@apnic.net




APNIC Secretariat 
secretar...@apnic.net
Asia Pacific Network Information Centre (APNIC)   Tel: +61 7 3858 3100
PO Box 3646 South Brisbane, QLD 4101 AustraliaFax: +61 7 3858 3199
6 Cordelia Street, South Brisbane, QLD
http://www.apnic.net

* Sent by email to save paper. Print only if necessary.


*  sig-policy:  APNIC SIG on resource management policy   *
___
sig-policy mailing list
sig-policy@lists.apnic.net
http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy

[sig-policy] Just over one week to be heard - APNIC Survey 2014

[Adam Gosling]

Just over one week to be heard - APNIC Survey 2014



Help guide the future direction of APNIC by completing the APNIC Survey
2014 before it closes next Friday, 11 July.

https://survey.apnic.net

Complete the Survey and you go into the draw to win a Samsung Galaxy
TabPRO 10.1 (16GB, 4G) or an Apple iPad Mini (Retina 16GB, 4G).

And, if you share the following text on Twitter or Facebook, you go into
the exclusive social media draw to win an additional prize.

"I’ve just completed the 2014 #apnicsurvey – visit survey.apnic.net
 to provide your thoughts. You could win a prize!"

Will you be lucky like our two winners, Md Moinul Hossain from
Bangladesh and Nitin Janardan Dalvi from India, and win a new tablet?
Take the APNIC Survey 2014 now!

https://survey.apnic.net


  -

APNIC runs the Survey every two years to help ensure we are meeting the
needs and wishes of our Members and those using APNIC services. The
Singapore Internet Research Center (SIRC) is conducting the Survey and
will provide an analysis of the data and a survey report to the APNIC
community. The survey is anonymous, and no identifying information will
be made available to APNIC. APNIC is grateful for feedback provided by
Survey participants.

   




APNIC Secretariat 
secretar...@apnic.net
Asia Pacific Network Information Centre (APNIC)   Tel: +61 7 3858 3100
PO Box 3646 South Brisbane, QLD 4101 Australia
6 Cordelia Street, South Brisbane, QLD
http://www.apnic.net


*  sig-policy:  APNIC SIG on resource management policy   *
___
sig-policy mailing list
sig-policy@lists.apnic.net
http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy

[sig-policy] Call for Co-Chair Nominations

[Adam Gosling]

APNIC is seeking volunteers to serve as APNIC Policy SIG Co-Chair.

The term of APNIC Policy SIG Co-Chair, Masato Yamanishi, will end at the
APNIC 38 Open Policy Meeting in Brisbane, Australia. An election for
this position will be held as the first Agenda item of the Policy SIG
Meeting on Thursday, 19 September 2014.

The deadline for nominations is 24:00 (UTC +10) on Monday, 8 September
2014.

Nominees must confirm they are willing and able to commit to the
responsibilities associated with the Co-Chair position. Details of these
responsibilities are outlined in Section 2.5 of the APNIC SIG
Guidelines.

  http://www.apnic.net/community/sigs/sig-guidelines#co-responsibilities

Nominations and self-nominations may be submitted using the nomination
form. Nominees are required to provide a nominee statement and indicate
they are willing and able to perform the requirements of the role.

More information on the election and the APNIC 38 Open Policy Meeting
(OPM) is available here:

  http://conference.apnic.net/38/policy

Nominations and self-nominations may be submitted using the form
available here:

  http://conference.apnic.net/38/policy/nominate

All SIG Chairs undertake this work on a voluntary basis. The APNIC
Secretariat speaks on behalf of the community in saying we are very
appreciative of the work done by Chairs and Co-Chairs.

Regards

Adam

--
Adam Gosling
Internet Policy Development Consultant   email:a...@apnic.net
APNIC  sip:a...@voip.apnic.net
http://www.apnic.net phone: +617 3858 3100

* Sent by email to save paper. Print only if necessary.
*  sig-policy:  APNIC SIG on resource management policy   *
___
sig-policy mailing list
sig-policy@lists.apnic.net
http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy

[sig-policy] REMINDER: Policy SIG Co-Chair Nominations

[Adam Gosling]

Dear Colleagues,

Please note that the Call for Nominations period for the position of APNIC
Policy SIG Co-Chair will end in one week from today.

The deadline for nominations is:
24:00 (UTC +10) on Monday, 8 September 2014.

An election to appoint the Co-Chair will be held as the first Agenda item of
the Policy SIG Meeting at APNIC 38 in Brisbane, Australia on Thursday, 19
September 2014.

Nominees must confirm they are willing and able to commit to the
responsibilities associated with the Co-Chair position. Details of these
responsibilities are outlined in Section 2.5 of the APNIC SIG
Guidelines.

  http://www.apnic.net/community/sigs/sig-guidelines#co-responsibilities

Nominations and self-nominations may be submitted using the nomination
form. Nominees are required to provide a nominee statement and indicate
they are willing and able to perform the requirements of the role.

More information on the election and the APNIC 38 Open Policy Meeting
(OPM) is available here:

  http://conference.apnic.net/38/policy

Nominations and self-nominations may be submitted using the form
available here:

  http://conference.apnic.net/38/policy/nominate

All SIG Chairs undertake this work on a voluntary basis. The APNIC
Secretariat speaks on behalf of the community in saying we are very
appreciative of the work done by Chairs and Co-Chairs.

Regards

Adam

--
Adam Gosling
Internet Policy Development Consultant   email:
a...@apnic.net<mailto:a...@apnic.net>
APNIC  sip:
a...@voip.apnic.net<mailto:a...@voip.apnic.net>
http://www.apnic.net phone: +617 3858 3100

* Sent by email to save paper. Print only if necessary.
*  sig-policy:  APNIC SIG on resource management policy   *
___
sig-policy mailing list
sig-policy@lists.apnic.net
http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy

[sig-policy] Pilot: proposed electronic consensus tool

[Adam Gosling]

Dear SIG Members

There will be a pilot of a new electronic consensus system for remote
participants during the APNIC 38 Policy SIG meeting in Brisbane, Australia.

The new tool is designed to make it easier to participate in the Consensus
Call (show-of-hands).

As part of the trial, people attending the meeting in person will also use
the browser-based system.

We would like to encourage community members to participate and provide
feedback in the trial of this new tool.

A background to the pilot program is available on the APNIC blog

http://blog.apnic.net/2014/09/11/reducing-participation-barriers-in-the-apn
ic-policy-sig/

Regards,

Adam

___
Adam Gosling
Internet Policy Development Consultant, APNIC
e: a...@apnic.net
p: +61 7 3858 3142
m: +61 421 456 243
www.apnic.net
___

Join the conversation:   https://blog.apnic.net/
___

*  sig-policy:  APNIC SIG on resource management policy   *
___
sig-policy mailing list
sig-policy@lists.apnic.net
http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy

Re: [sig-policy] Pilot: proposed electronic consensus tool

[Adam Gosling]

Hi Skeeve

AFAIK there’s no app at the moment. If we go ahead with this as a regular thing 
I’ll ask the developers if they can create an app as an option.

It seems to work well in the browser of my Apple handhelds. I better just check 
with the Tech team before I start posting the URL. I should be able to do that 
on Monday.

Regards,

Adam

___
Adam Gosling
Internet Policy Development Consultant, APNIC
e: a...@apnic.net
p: +61 7 3858 3142
m: +61 421 456 243
www.apnic.net
___

Join the conversation:   https://blog.apnic.net/
___


On 14/09/2014 15:01, "Skeeve Stevens" 
mailto:ske...@v4now.com>> wrote:

Is it web based or do we have an app as well?

If we don't I'd suggest we consider it... makes it a lot easier instead of 
having to having to have laptops out.. most do, but for those who don't.


...Skeeve

Skeeve Stevens - Senior IP Broker
v4Now - an eintellego Networks service
ske...@v4now.com<mailto:ske...@v4now.com> ; www.v4now.com<http://www.v4now.com/>

Phone: 1300 239 038; Cell +61 (0)414 753 383 ; skype://skeeve

facebook.com/v4now<http://facebook.com/v4now> ; 
<http://twitter.com/networkceoau> 
linkedin.com/in/skeeve<http://linkedin.com/in/skeeve>

twitter.com/theispguy<http://twitter.com/theispguy> ; blog: 
www.theispguy.com<http://www.theispguy.com/>

[http://eintellegonetworks.com/logos/v4now-web05.png]

IP Address Brokering - Introducing sellers and buyers

On 14 September 2014 14:29, Adam Gosling 
mailto:a...@apnic.net>> wrote:
Dear SIG Members

There will be a pilot of a new electronic consensus system for remote
participants during the APNIC 38 Policy SIG meeting in Brisbane, Australia.

The new tool is designed to make it easier to participate in the Consensus
Call (show-of-hands).

As part of the trial, people attending the meeting in person will also use
the browser-based system.

We would like to encourage community members to participate and provide
feedback in the trial of this new tool.

A background to the pilot program is available on the APNIC blog

http://blog.apnic.net/2014/09/11/reducing-participation-barriers-in-the-apn
ic-policy-sig/

Regards,

Adam

___
Adam Gosling
Internet Policy Development Consultant, APNIC
e: a...@apnic.net<mailto:a...@apnic.net>
p: +61 7 3858 3142
m: +61 421 456 243
www.apnic.net<http://www.apnic.net>
___

Join the conversation:   https://blog.apnic.net/
___

*  sig-policy:  APNIC SIG on resource management policy   *
___
sig-policy mailing list
sig-policy@lists.apnic.net<mailto:sig-policy@lists.apnic.net>
http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy

*  sig-policy:  APNIC SIG on resource management policy   *
___
sig-policy mailing list
sig-policy@lists.apnic.net
http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy

[sig-policy] CONFER consensus measurement

[Adam Gosling]

Dear SIG members,

There will be a pilot of a new consensus measurement tool this week during the 
APNIC 38 Conference in Brisbane, Australia.

The CONFER system is available for community members to pre-register and to 
familiarize themselves with the user interface. The system is very simple to 
use. A simple introduction is available here.

http://conference.apnic.net/38/policy/using-confer

To access CONFER, please point your browser to this URL:

http://consensus.apnic.net/

The trial of the pilot system will decide future use and development plans for 
the system. We encourage everybody to participate in the trials this week and 
to provide your feedback and suggestions on the tool.

Kind regards,

Adam

___
Adam Gosling
Internet Policy Development Consultant, APNIC
e: a...@apnic.net
p: +61 7 3858 3142
m: +61 421 456 243
www.apnic.net
___

Join the conversation:   https://blog.apnic.net/
___

*  sig-policy:  APNIC SIG on resource management policy   *
___
sig-policy mailing list
sig-policy@lists.apnic.net
http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy

[sig-policy] Editorial comment period for draft policy manual

[Adam Gosling]

___

Editorial comment period for draft policy manual
___

APNIC seeks editorial comments on the following draft document:

- APNIC Internet Number Resource Policies

This is the second draft of a policy manual that combines the following
policy documents.

  - Policy environment for Internet number resource distribution in the Asia 
Pacific
  - Policies for IPv4 address space management in the Asia Pacific region
  - IPv6 address allocation and assignment policy
  - Experimental allocations policy
  - Policies for Autonomous System number management in the Asia Pacific region
  - APNIC transfer, merger, acquisition, and takeover policy
  - Policies for historical Internet resources in the APNIC Whois Database

Nature of the document review
-

This is an editorial review only.

Therefore, during the comment period, interested parties may:

- Object to the wording provided by the Secretariat
- Suggest improvements of any aspect of the document
- Request that an additional call for comment be made if substantial
  revisions are required

To view this draft document, please see:
http://www.apnic.net/community/policy/draft


Deadline for comments
---

Your comments are requested by 22 October 2014. Please send your
comments to: pol...@apnic.net

Regards

Adam

___
Adam Gosling
Internet Policy Development Consultant, APNIC
e: a...@apnic.net
p: +61 7 3858 3142
m: +61 421 456 243
www.apnic.net
___

Join the conversation:   https://blog.apnic.net/
___

*  sig-policy:  APNIC SIG on resource management policy   *
___
sig-policy mailing list
sig-policy@lists.apnic.net
http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy

[sig-policy] Appointment of Acting Chair

[Adam Gosling]

Dear colleagues

On behalf of the Secretariat and the community, I would like to thank
Andy Linton for his contribution and service as APNIC Policy SIG Chair.

Andy was first elected to the position of Policy SIG Co-Chair at APNIC
31 in February 2011 and became Acting Chair in May 2011 before being
elected to the position of Chair at APNIC 32 in August 2011.

During that time he helped guide 25 policy proposals through the PDP.

Follow Andy's resignation as Chair, APNIC Policy SIG Co-Chair, Masato
Yamanishi, has agreed to fulfil the responsibilities of Policy SIG Chair
until an election can be held at APNIC 39.

A call for nominees for the position will be issued closer to that date.

Kind regards,

Adam

___
Adam Gosling
Internet Policy Development Consultant, APNIC
e: a...@apnic.net
p: +61 7 3858 3142
m: +61 421 456 243
www.apnic.net
___

Join the conversation:   https://blog.apnic.net/
___

*  sig-policy:  APNIC SIG on resource management policy   *
___
sig-policy mailing list
sig-policy@lists.apnic.net
http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy

[sig-policy] Update on RIPE Inter-RIR transfer proposal

[Adam Gosling]

Dear Policy SIG Members,

During APNIC 38 I conducted a community consultation regarding the potential 
effect the inter-RIR transfer proposal under discussion in the RIPE NCC region 
could have on our transfer relationship with ARIN. You can find out more at the 
following URL.

http://conference.apnic.net/38/program#policy%20sig%202

Further to that, a new draft version of the proposal and the Secretariat Impact 
Assessment has been posted and the proposal is under discussion until 11 
November 2014.

 
http://www.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/address-policy-wg/2014-October/009202.html

Kind regards,

Adam

___
Adam Gosling
Internet Policy Development Consultant, APNIC
e: a...@apnic.net<mailto:a...@apnic.net>
p: +61 7 3858 3142
m: +61 421 456 243
www.apnic.net
___

Join the conversation:   https://blog.apnic.net/
___

*  sig-policy:  APNIC SIG on resource management policy   *
___
sig-policy mailing list
sig-policy@lists.apnic.net
http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy

[sig-policy] ARIN community abandons Inter-RIR ASN transfer proposal

[Adam Gosling]

Dear SIG Members

Following ARIN 34 in Baltimore, Maryland, the ARIN Advisory Council (AC)
has advised that it will again abandon a proposal to allow Inter-RIR
Autonomous System Number transfers. It¹s reasons are explained in the
announcement below.

Of the 10 proposals under discussion, the AC has progressed one. Four
Draft Policies were abandoned and a total of five remain under discussion.

Regards,


Adam
___
Adam Gosling
Internet Policy Development Consultant, APNIC
e: a...@apnic.net
p: +61 7 3858 3142
m: +61 421 456 243
www.apnic.net
___

Join the conversation:   https://blog.apnic.net/
___





On 16/10/2014 5:00, "ARIN"  wrote:

>In accordance with the ARIN Policy Development Process (PDP), the ARIN
>Advisory Council (AC) met on 10 October 2014.
>
>The AC moved the following to last call:
>
>Recommended Draft Policy ARIN-2014-9: Resolve Conflict Between RSA and
>8.2 Utilization Requirements
>
>The AC abandoned the following:
>
>   Draft Policy ARIN-2014-15: Allow Inter-RIR ASN Transfers
>   Draft Policy ARIN-2014-16: Section 4.10 Austerity Policy Update
>   Draft Policy ARIN-2014-18: Simplifying Minimum Allocations and
>Assignments
>   Draft Policy ARIN-2014-20: Transfer Policy Slow Start and Simplified
>Needs Verification
>
>The AC provided the following explanations for abandoning the Draft
>Policies.
>
>Regarding 2014-15:
>
>"The following substantive issues were noted by the AC in considering
>this draft policy.
>
>-There is outstanding technical work which must be done prior to
>implementation which would allow RPKI functionality for inter-RIR ASN
>transfers
>-There would be a significant time delay on the full implementation of
>this policy
>-The implementation of 2014-15 requires agreement from all 5 RIRs on a
>method to implement inter-RIR ASN transfers
>-Cleanup of the 2-byte ASN registry at IANA is required before this
>policy could be fully implemented
>-There is significant work which must be done to implement this policy
>amongst all 5 RIRs with limited perceived overall benefit to the
>community, especially when weighed against other competing priorities
>
>While the AC believes that the limited corner case illuminated during
>discussion of this draft policy is valid, it was noted that a valid
>workaround, obtaining a new ASN in an appropriate RIR, is available for
>all members of the community."
>
>Regarding 2014-16:
>
>"The Advisory Council decided to abandon 2014-16: Section 4.10 Austerity
>policy update due to a general lack of support. The feedback at ARIN 34,
>and on PPML clarified there is a desire to retain the existing
>transition mechanism as it is. It also became clear there was a lack of
>agreement on how to supply the austerity pool."
>
>Regarding 2014-18:
>
>"Comments on the mailing list and at the microphone were generally
>negative and there appears to be community consensus against this
>proposal.  Points raised included:
>
>* Removal of needs-basis for a narrowly constructed set of constituents
>seemed like a special interest pet project
>
>* There are other proposals in process for needs-basis adjustment that
>appear to have more support.
>
>* A recent adjustment to allocation policy makes the minimum allocation
>prefix length a /24 across the board.  This has the side effect of opening
>up direct allocations and assignments from ARIN to organizations which
>were previously regarded as too small.
>
>* Concern was raised over the "this section shall be controlling"
>verbiage."
>
>Regarding 2014-20:
>
>"While the overall policy did not receive support from the community, a
>number of specific issues were raised that the Advisory Council believes
>could be addressed in more focused policies. We recommend that the
>authors investigate individual policies specific to rapid growth in
>transfer requests and alternatives to the 24 month calculation."
>
>
>The AC abandoned several Draft Policies. Anyone dissatisfied with these
>decisions may initiate a petition. The deadline to begin a petition will
>be five business days after the AC's draft meeting minutes are
>published. For more information on starting and participating in
>petitions, see PDP Petitions at:
>https://www.arin.net/policy/pdp_petitions.html
>
>The AC is continuing to work on the following:
>
>   Draft Policy ARIN-2014-1: Out of Region Use
>   Draft Policy ARIN-2014-6: Remove 7.1 [Maintaining IN-ADDRs]
>   Draft Policy ARIN-2014-14: Removing Needs Test from Small IPv4
>Transfers
>   Draft Policy ARIN-2014-17

[sig-policy] Policy Outcomes from LACNIC 22

[Adam Gosling]

Dear SIG Members

In its recent LACNIC 22 meeting, from 27-31 October in Santiago Chile, the 
LACNIC community considered two policy proposals.

The first, a proposal to change the LACNIC PDP, failed to reach consensus and 
was returned to the list. The rationale for the proposal is to respond to 
"Non-compliances with the policy development process as it is now defined have 
been observed, particularly in regard to the specified dates/timeline". It also 
seeks to implement an appeals process in case a member of the community feels 
affected by decisions made during the policy development and adoption process.

https://politicas.lacnic.net/politicas/detail/id/LAC-2014-3/language/en


The second is LAC-2014-2: Modification to the text describing ASN distribution 
requirements reached consensus and is now in a final comment period.

The proposal changes the ASN delegation criteria in such a way that the 
multi-homing requirement is no longer a requirement. If passed, the policy 
would require only that an network operator needs to interconnect with one 
other network ASN that has a different routing policy to its own.

https://politicas.lacnic.net/politicas/detail/id/LAC-2014-2/language/en


Regards,


___
Adam Gosling
Internet Policy Development Consultant, APNIC
e: a...@apnic.net<mailto:a...@apnic.net>
p: +61 7 3858 3142
m: +61 421 456 243
www.apnic.net
___

Join the conversation:   https://blog.apnic.net/
___

*  sig-policy:  APNIC SIG on resource management policy   *
___
sig-policy mailing list
sig-policy@lists.apnic.net
http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy

[sig-policy] APNIC 2015 Activity Plan and Budget

[Adam Gosling]

Dear SIG Members,

My apologies to anybody getting duplicates of this email.

Regards,

Adam



2015 Activity Plan and Budget


The APNIC 2015 Activity Plan and Budget is now available to view:

   http://www.apnic.net/2015-activity-plan-and-budget

The 2015 Activity Plan and Budget was approved by the APNIC EC at its
November 2014 meeting. The document describes the work the Secretariat
will undertake in 2015 and the budget required to successfully complete
the planned activities.

The 2015 Activity Plan and Budget takes into account the feedback
provided by Members and the APNIC community in the 2014 APNIC Survey.
This document, combined with the APNIC Five Year Strategy, provides
Members and the community with visibility of APNIC's long- and
short-term strategy, goals, activities, and budget.  The current Five
Year Strategy document is available here:

   http://www.apnic.net/apnic-five-year-strategy

If you have any feedback on either of these documents, please contact
the APNIC EC using the EC submission form in MyAPNIC, via email
exec-...@apnic.net, or at the APNIC Member Meeting.

___

APNIC Secretariat secretar...@apnic.net
Asia Pacific Network Information Centre (APNIC)   Tel:  61 7 3858 3100
PO Box 3646 South Brisbane, QLD 4101 AustraliaFax:  61 7 3858 3199
6 Cordelia Street, South Brisbane, QLDhttp://www.apnic.net
___


*  sig-policy:  APNIC SIG on resource management policy   *
___
sig-policy mailing list
sig-policy@lists.apnic.net
http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy

[sig-policy] Chair election at APNIC Policy SIG Meeting in Fukuoka

[Adam Gosling]

Dear Community Members

The Secretariat would like to thank Policy SIG Co-Chair, Masato
Yamanishi, for assuming the role of Acting Chair of the APNIC Policy SIG
following the resignation and Andy Linton.

We would also like to thank him for Chairing the APNIC 38 Open Policy
Meeting.

Masato Yamanishi was re-elected as Co-Chair at that meeting for a
further two year term.

According to the SIG Guidelines there will be an election for the
position of Chair of the APNIC Policy SIG as the first Agenda item at
the SIG meeting during APNIC 39 at APRICOT in Fukuoka, Japan.

The Secretariat will make a Call for Nominations next week. The
nomination period will be from 4 February 2015 until 4 March 2015 (one
month as required by the SIG Guidelines).

The APNIC SIG Guidelines say that, "More than one Co-Chair may be
appointed, at the discretion of the Chair. The decision to hold an
election for more than one Co-Chair is also at the Chair's discretion."

Accordingly, the Secretariat shall issue a Call for Nominations for both
Chair and Co-Chair positions, so that the newly elected Chair can chose
to hold an election for a second Co-Chair.

Kind regards,

Adam



_______
Adam Gosling
Internet Policy Development Consultant, APNIC
e: a...@apnic.net
p: +61 7 3858 3142
m: +61 421 456 243
www.apnic.net
___

Join the conversation:   https://blog.apnic.net/
___

*  sig-policy:  APNIC SIG on resource management policy   *
___
sig-policy mailing list
sig-policy@lists.apnic.net
http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy

[sig-policy] Call for Nominations: APNIC Policy SIG Chair/Co-Chair

[Adam Gosling]

Dear community members

Due to the resignation of the Policy SIG Chair in September 2014, APNIC
is now seeking volunteers to serve as Chair and Co-Chair of the
APNIC Policy SIG.

The responsibilities are outlined in Sections 23, 24, and 25 of the
APNIC SIG Guidelines.

www.apnic.net/sig-guidelines

Nominations will be accepted only by using the following form:

https://conference.apnic.net/39/policy/nominate

The nomination deadline is 23:59 (UTC+9) on Wednesday, 4 March 2015.

Nominees will be asked to provide a short biography and description of
their interest in the role(s).

The election will be the first agenda item of the APNIC Policy SIG
meeting at APNIC 39, at approximately 11:00 (UTC+9) on Thursday,
5 March, 2015.

All SIG Chairs undertake this work on a voluntary basis. The APNIC
Secretariat speaks on behalf of the community in saying we are very
appreciative of the work done by Masato Yamanishi as Acting Chair.

Regards

Adam Gosling
___

Adam Gosling
Internet Policy Development Consultant, APNIC
e: a...@apnic.net
p: +61 7 3858 3142
m: +61 421 456 243
www.apnic.net
___

Join the conversation:   https://blog.apnic.net/
___



*  sig-policy:  APNIC SIG on resource management policy   *
___
sig-policy mailing list
sig-policy@lists.apnic.net
http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy

[sig-policy] Deadline Reminder: APNIC Policy SIG Chair Nominations

[Adam Gosling]

Dear community members

This is a reminder that the deadline for nominations for the position
of Policy SIG Chair and Co-Chair is less than two weeks away.

The election will be the first agenda item of the APNIC Policy SIG
meeting at APNIC 39, at approximately 11:00 (UTC+9) on Thursday,
5 March, 2015.

The nomination deadline is 23:59 (UTC+9) on Wednesday, 4 March 2015.

Nominations will be accepted only by using the following form:

https://conference.apnic.net/39/policy/nominate

The election and participation in the APNIC Policy SIG is open to
all individuals. Join the Policy SIG by subscribing to the mailing

list at the following address.

   http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy

Nominees must be present to participate in the election and will
be given time to make an address to the SIG members.



Regards

Adam Gosling
___

Adam Gosling
Internet Policy Development Consultant, APNIC
e: a...@apnic.net
p: +61 7 3858 3142
m: +61 421 456 243
www.apnic.net
___

Join the conversation:   https://blog.apnic.net/
___




*  sig-policy:  APNIC SIG on resource management policy   *
___
sig-policy mailing list
sig-policy@lists.apnic.net
http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy

[sig-policy] New single policy document

[Adam Gosling]

Dear Community members

Please note that APNIC has today, implemented the single policy document,
apnic-127: APNIC Internet Number Resource Policies.

  - http://www.apnic.net/policy/resources

This document obsoletes seven individual resource policy documents as
listed below.

  - apnic-089-v012: IPv6 address allocation and assignment policy

  - apnic-094-v007: Policies for Autonomous System number management
   in the Asia Pacific region

  - apnic-109-v002: Experimental allocations policy

  - apnic-116-v004: Policies for historical Internet resources in
   the APNIC Whois Database

  - apnic-123-v005: APNIC transfer, merger, acquisition and takeover
   policy

  - apnic-124-v002: Policies for IPv4 address space management in the
   Asia Pacific region

  - apnic-125-v001: Policy environment for Internet number resource
   distribution in the Asia Pacific

The intention of this change is to provide greater accessibility and
conformity across APNIC resource policy documents.

There are no changes in policy or APNIC delegation practices or
evaluation criteria as a result of this change.

If you have any comments or feedback regarding this change in
documentation, please contact the APNIC Secretariat at pol...@apnic.net.

Kind regards,

Adam Gosling


___
Adam Gosling
Internet Policy Development Consultant, APNIC
e: a...@apnic.net
p: +61 7 3858 3142
m: +61 421 456 243
www.apnic.net
___

Join the conversation:   https://blog.apnic.net/
___

*  sig-policy:  APNIC SIG on resource management policy   *
___
sig-policy mailing list
sig-policy@lists.apnic.net
http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy

[sig-policy] Nominations now open for Number Resource Organization Number Council

[Adam Gosling]

Nominations now open for Number Resource Organization Number Council



The nomination period for the Number Resource Organization Number
Council (NRO NC) opens today, 10 June 2015. The NRO NC performs the role
of the Address Supporting Organization Address Council (ASO AC).

The term of Tomohiro Fujisaki will end on 31 December 2015. One
individual from the Asia Pacific Internet community will be elected to
fill this vacant seat on the NRO NC for two years from 1 January 2016 to
31 December 2017.


How to nominate
---

Any individual is eligible for nomination, except Regional Internet
Registry (RIR) staff members. Self-nominations are permitted.

To nominate yourself or someone else as a candidate for the position,
please submit your nominations using our online form by 17:30 (UTC +10)
on 5 August 2015.

 https://conference.apnic.net/40/nominate


More information


For more information about the role and the NRO NC, please see:

 http://www.apnic.net/about-the-nro

For more on the current members of the NRO NC, please see:

 http://aso.icann.org/people/address-council/address-council-members

If you have any questions, please contact:

  helpd...@apnic.net




APNIC Secretariat secretar...@apnic.net
Asia Pacific Network Information Centre (APNIC)   Tel: +61 7 3858 3100
PO Box 3646 South Brisbane, QLD 4101 AustraliaFax: +61 7 3858 3199
6 Cordelia Street, South Brisbane, QLDhttp://www.apnic.net





smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
*  sig-policy:  APNIC SIG on resource management policy   *
___
sig-policy mailing list
sig-policy@lists.apnic.net
http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy

[sig-policy] Policy SIG Co-Chair Nominations now open

[Adam Gosling]

Dear community members

The APNIC Secretariat is now seeking volunteers to serve as Co-Chair of
the APNIC Policy SIG.

The responsibilities are outlined in Section 2.5. of the APNIC SIG
Guidelines.

https://www.apnic.net/sig-guidelines

Nominations will be accepted only by using the following form:

https://conference.apnic.net/40/policy/nominate


The nomination deadline is 23:59 (UTC +10) on Friday, 4 September 2015.

Nominees will be asked to provide a short biography and description of
their interest in the role.

The election will be the first agenda item of the APNIC Policy SIG
meeting at APNIC 40, at approximately 09:30 (UTC +7) on Thursday, 10
September 2015.

All SIG Chairs undertake this work on a voluntary basis. The APNIC
Secretariat speaks on behalf of the community in saying we are very
appreciative of the work done by Chairs and Co-Chairs.


Regards

Adam Gosling



___
Adam Gosling
Internet Policy Development Consultant, APNIC
e: a...@apnic.net
p: +61 7 3858 3142
m: +61 421 456 243
t: @boutpolicy
___

Join the conversation:   https://blog.apnic.net/
___




*  sig-policy:  APNIC SIG on resource management policy   *
___
sig-policy mailing list
sig-policy@lists.apnic.net
http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy

[sig-policy] REMINDER: Policy SIG Co-Chair Nomination Deadline Friday, 4 September

[Adam Gosling]

Dear community members

The APNIC Secretariat is now seeking volunteers to serve as Co-Chair of
the APNIC Policy SIG.

The deadline for nominations is:
--
23:59 (UTC +10)
Friday, 4 September 2015


The responsibilities are outlined in Section 2.5. of the APNIC SIG
Guidelines.

https://www.apnic.net/sig-guidelines

Nominations will be accepted only by using the following form:

https://conference.apnic.net/40/policy/nominate

The election will be the first agenda item of the APNIC Policy SIG
meeting on Thursday, 10 September 2015.


Regards

Adam Gosling

___
Adam Gosling
Internet Policy Development Consultant, APNIC
e: a...@apnic.net
p: +61 7 3858 3142
m: +61 421 456 243
t: @boutpolicy
___

Join the conversation:   https://blog.apnic.net/
___





*  sig-policy:  APNIC SIG on resource management policy   *
___
sig-policy mailing list
sig-policy@lists.apnic.net
http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy

[sig-policy] Draft document to review

[Adam Gosling]

Dear community members

A new version (apnic-127-v002.txt) of the APNIC Internet Number Resource
Policies document is available for editorial review.

The purpose of the editorial review is to provide feedback on a series
of changes to the policy document.

The changes clarify conflicts and reduce duplication introduced when
previously separate policies were merged.

For more information and to review the changes, please visit the APNIC
website at the following URL.

https://www.apnic.net/drafts

Please submit any feedback by email to pol...@apnic.net by 10 October 2015.

Kind regards,

Adam



___
Adam Gosling
Internet Policy Development Consultant, APNIC
e: a...@apnic.net
p: +61 7 3858 3142
m: +61 421 456 243
t: @boutpolicy
___

Join the conversation:   https://blog.apnic.net/
___


*  sig-policy:  APNIC SIG on resource management policy   *
___
sig-policy mailing list
sig-policy@lists.apnic.net
http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy

[sig-policy] Participate in the APNIC Open Policy Meeting

[Adam Gosling]

Dear community members

The APNIC 40 Open Policy Meeting begins with the opening of on-site
voting for the NRO NC election today at 09:00 (UTC +7).

The agenda includes three policy proposals and several interesting
informational presentations and discussions.

For more details on the agenda and to access remote participation
facilities please visit

https://conference.apnic.net/40/policy

If you wish to participate in the consensus call for the policy
proposals, please register for Confer before the SIG meeting.

Confer (CONsensus FEedback in Realtime) is an electronic system being
introduced to facilitate remote participation in the consensus calls.

For instructions on how to register and use the Confer consensus system
please visit

https://www.apnic.net/using_confer

Kind regards,

Adam


___
Adam Gosling
Internet Policy Development Consultant, APNIC
e: a...@apnic.net
p: +61 7 3858 3142
m: +61 421 456 243
t: @boutpolicy
___

Join the conversation:   https://blog.apnic.net/
___


*  sig-policy:  APNIC SIG on resource management policy   *
___
sig-policy mailing list
sig-policy@lists.apnic.net
http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy

Re: [sig-policy] Discussion before vs after asking consensus

[Adam Gosling]

Hello Masato,

I think you mean (one opposition for prop-114 and one support for prop-115)

Not 104 and 105.

Adam




On 14/09/2015 18:28, "sig-policy-boun...@lists.apnic.net on behalf of Masato
Yamanishi"  wrote:

> Dear Colleagues, 
> 
> While now I'm seeing a lot of comments on the list and it is good thing,
> let me ask you to state these comments before asking consensus in OPM.
> 
> While I have announced three proposal discussed in Jakarta, only two comments
> (one opposition for prop-104 and one support for prop-105) were made on the
> list.
> http://mailman.apnic.net/mailing-lists/sig-policy/archive/2015/08/
> Even in the meeting, the discussion was not so active compared to previous
> meetings.
> 
> Without enough comments and discussions before asking consensus, authors
> cannot
> improve their proposals in timely manner. Also, few discussion makes difficult
> for Chairs
> to gauging community's opinion. As a result, proposals may need more meetings
> to
> reach consensus or fail. Certainly, "no interest" is one of possible opinions,
> but it is not easy to distinguish them from "not yet been interested" or "just
> hesitate".
> 
> IMO, current situation is not bottom-up discussion and rather it looks like a
> voting
> for the agenda which were provided by somebody.
> 
> So, please express your opinion and have productive discussion before asking
> consensus
> in Auckland and future meetings.
> 
> Thank you for your understanding.
> 
> Regards,
> Masato Yamanishi
> APNIC Policy SIG Chair
> 
> 
> 




smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
*  sig-policy:  APNIC SIG on resource management policy   *
___
sig-policy mailing list
sig-policy@lists.apnic.net
http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy

[sig-policy] Notice: New Version of Policy Document

[Adam Gosling]

Dear community members

Please note that APNIC has today, published a new version of the
APNIC Internet Number Resource Policies document. The document is
available at the following URL.

- https://www.apnic.net/community/policy/current

This document is the final phase of the process to combine multiple
policy documents into a single policy manual. This version reduces
duplication and contradictions that were introduced as a result of the
merging of separately maintained documents.

The draft version of this document was introduced at the APNIC 40 Policy
SIG meeting in Jakarta, Indonesia.

In accordance with APNIC Editorial Policy, the draft was published for
community review on 10 September 2015.

There are no changes in policy, delegation practices, or evaluation
criteria as a result of this new document.

As part of these changes, APNIC has introduced a Policy Document Change
Log. This is also accessible from the above link.

If you have any suggestions or feedback regarding these changes, please
contact the APNIC Secretariat at pol...@apnic.net.

Please note: The new text versions will update when the cron job runs.

Kind regards,


Adam Gosling



___
Adam Gosling
Internet Policy Development Consultant, APNIC
e: a...@apnic.net
p: +61 7 3858 3142
m: +61 421 456 243
t: @bout_policy
___

Join the conversation:   https://blog.apnic.net/
___



smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
*  sig-policy:  APNIC SIG on resource management policy   *
___
sig-policy mailing list
sig-policy@lists.apnic.net
http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy

[sig-policy] APNIC EC endorses policy decisions from APNIC 40

[Adam Gosling]

APNIC EC endorses policy decisions from APNIC 40



The APNIC Executive Council (EC) has endorsed the consensus policy
decisions reached at the APNIC 40 Open Policy Meeting in Jakarta,
Indonesia.

The proposals endorsed by the EC are listed below:

- prop-113 - Modification in the IPv4 eligibility criteria
  http://www.apnic.net/policy/proposals/prop-113

- prop-114 - Modification in the ASN eligibility criteria
  http://www.apnic.net/policy/proposals/prop-114

Implementation
-

The Secretariat has scheduled the work for implementation of these
proposals and expects to be in a position to implement them prior to the
next APNIC Conference in Auckland, New Zealand in February 2016.

The estimated implementation date is Wednesday, 10 February 2016. We
hope to confirm this date in the New Year prior to implementation.


Regards,

Adam Gosling


___
Adam Gosling
Internet Policy Development Consultant, APNIC
e: a...@apnic.net
p: +61 7 3858 3142
m: +61 421 456 243
t: @bout_policy
___

Join the conversation:   https://blog.apnic.net/
___


*  sig-policy:  APNIC SIG on resource management policy   *
___
sig-policy mailing list
sig-policy@lists.apnic.net
http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy

[sig-policy] Final editorial comments on draft document

[Adam Gosling]

___

Final editorial comments on draft document
___

APNIC seeks final editorial comments on the following draft changes to the
APNIC Internet Number Resource Policies document.

The document has been updated to implement two policy proposals reaching
consensus at APNIC 40 in Jakarta, Indonesia during September 2015.

The two proposals are:
   - prop-113: Modification in the IPv4 eligibility criteria
   - prop-114: Modification in the ASN eligibility criteria
  
  
Nature of the document review

This is an editorial review only. Consensus has already been reached on
these policy changes.

Therefore, during the comment period, interested parties may:
- Object to the wording provided by the Secretariat
- Suggest improvements to any aspect of the document
- Request that an additional call for comment be made if substantial
  revisions are required

To view all draft documents, please see:

http://www.apnic.net/community/policy/draft


Implementation date
--
Following the editorial comment period, the new policies will be
implemented on 10 February 2016.


Deadline for comments
-
Your comments are requested before 8 February 2016.
Please send your comments to: pol...@apnic.net

Kind regards,

Adam

___
Adam Gosling
Internet Policy Development Consultant, APNIC
e: a...@apnic.net
p: +61 7 3858 3142
m: +61 421 456 243
t: @bout_policy
___

Join the conversation:   https://blog.apnic.net/
___



*  sig-policy:  APNIC SIG on resource management policy   *
___
sig-policy mailing list
sig-policy@lists.apnic.net
http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy

Re: [sig-policy] Prop-115 revised.

[Adam Gosling]

Hello Masato, all

Sorry for the delay, I was at home sick yesterday and as I was not expecting
this new version, I hadn’t made any arrangements. So I did not see this
email until this morning.

I have posted the new version to the proposal status page.
https://www.apnic.net/policy/proposals/prop-115

Kind regards,

Adam

___
Adam Gosling
Internet Policy Development Consultant, APNIC
e: a...@apnic.net
p: +61 7 3858 3142
m: +61 421 456 243
t: @bout_policy
___

Join the conversation:   https://blog.apnic.net/
___

On 10/02/2016, 02:37, "sig-policy-boun...@lists.apnic.net on behalf of
Masato Yamanishi"  wrote:

> Then, I cannot receive it from the Secretariat and post it until tomorrow
> morning will come to Brisbane.
> Please be patient.
> 
> Masato@iPhone
> 
> 
> On Feb 9, 2016, at 22:25, 藤崎智宏  wrote:
> 
>> Hi Skeeve,
>> 
>> Thank you for your comment.
>> 
>> Sure, and I'm sorry for confusion.
>> 
>> We just informed submission of revised text, and main modification
>> points where we would like to ask community comments and discussion
>> here and in next meeting (Of course, any comments will be gratefully
>> appreciated.).
>> 
>> Our revised text will be appeared on the web soon.
>> 
>> Yours Sincerely,
>> ---
>> Tomohiro Fujisaki
>> 
>> 
>> 2016-02-09 21:51 GMT+09:00 Skeeve Stevens :
>>> >
>>> > Hi Tomohiro-san,
>>> >
>>> > With all respect, discussions are for the mailing list.  The policy-sig at
>>> APNIC isn't to think up policy, but to present a policy, discuss and tweak
>>> if necessary.
>>> >
>>> > You really should present your ideas here, and let us all discuss.  Yes,
>>> sometimes there is not much discussion, but you should at least try.
>>> >
>>> > I hope to see what your suggestions are.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > ...Skeeve
>>> >
>>> > Skeeve Stevens - Senior IP Broker
>>> > v4Now - an eintellego Networks service
>>> > ske...@v4now.com ; www.v4now.com <http://www.v4now.com>
>>> >
>>> > Phone: 1300 239 038; Cell +61 (0)414 753 383
>>>   ; skype://skeeve
>>> >
>>> > facebook.com/v4now <http://facebook.com/v4now>  ; linkedin.com/in/skeeve
>>> <http://linkedin.com/in/skeeve>
>>> >
>>> > twitter.com/theispguy <http://twitter.com/theispguy>  ; blog:
>>> www.theispguy.com <http://www.theispguy.com>  ; Keybase:
>>> https://keybase.io/skeeve
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > IP Address Brokering - Introducing sellers and buyers
>>> >
>>> > On Tue, Feb 9, 2016 at 11:34 PM, 藤崎智宏  wrote:
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Dear all,
>>>> >>
>>>> >> We've posted new version of prop-115, and it will appear on the web
>>>> soon.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Main modification points are:
>>>> >>  - remove IPv4 text
>>>> >>  - propose several methods to register and distribute IPv6 assignment
>>>> >>information  (thank you for your suggestion in the previous sig
>>>> meeting)
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Authors discussed about methods, but could not reach a decision which to
>>>> >> be used.  At this time, in the next sig meeting, we would like to
>>>> discuss more
>>>> >> about the methods and find a conclusion.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> We appreciate if you give us any comments or suggestions.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Yours Sincerely,
>>>> >> --
>>>> >> Ruri Hiromi
>>>> >> Tomohiro Fujisaki
>>>> >> *  sig-policy:  APNIC SIG on resource management policy
*
>>>> >> ___
>>>> >> sig-policy mailing list
>>>> >> sig-policy@lists.apnic.net
>>>> >> http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy
>>> >
>>> >
>> *  sig-policy:  APNIC SIG on resource management policy
>> *
>> ___
>> sig-policy mailing list
>> sig-policy@lists.apnic.net
>> http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy




smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
*  sig-policy:  APNIC SIG on resource management policy   *
___
sig-policy mailing list
sig-policy@lists.apnic.net
http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy

[sig-policy] Implementation of prop-113 and prop-114

[Adam Gosling]

_

Implementation of prop-113 & prop-114
_


Today, 10 February 2016, the APNIC Secretariat has completed the
implementation of two policy proposals that reached consensus at the
APNIC 40 Policy SIG meeting in Jakarta, Indonesia in September 2015.

- https://conference.apnic.net/40

The APNIC Executive Council (EC) endorsed the consensus decisions at its
December meeting and instructed the Secretariat to implement the changes.

prop-113: Modification in the IPv4 eligibility criteria

This proposal extends the criteria for end-site IPv4 delegation
(provider independent assignment) so that an organization is
eligible if it is currently multihomed, is currently using at
least a /24 from its upstream provider and intends to be
multihomed, or intends to be multihomed and advertise the
prefixes within 6 months

You can see more about the history of this proposal at the
proposal status page:

https://www.apnic.net/policy/proposals/prop-113


prop-114: Modification in the ASN eligibility criteria

This proposal removes the absolute requirement for the network to
have a "single, clearly defined routing policy that is different
from its providers' routing policy" from the criteria for ASN
delegation. 
Organizations will now be eligible if they are currently
multihomed, or if they already hold provider independent address
space and intend to multihome in the future.

You can see more about the history of this proposal at the
proposal status page:

https://www.apnic.net/policy/proposals/prop-114

Regards,

Adam


_______
Adam Gosling
Internet Policy Development Consultant, APNIC
e: a...@apnic.net
p: +61 7 3858 3142
m: +61 421 456 243
t: @bout_policy
___

Join the conversation:   https://blog.apnic.net/
___



*  sig-policy:  APNIC SIG on resource management policy   *
___
sig-policy mailing list
sig-policy@lists.apnic.net
http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy

Re: [sig-policy] APNIC Whois Database Accuracy

[Adam Gosling]

Hello SIG members,

APNIC published a blog post about this discussion last week. You can find it
here:

https://blog.apnic.net/2016/05/19/join-discussion-whois-data-quality/

I hope you have time to read it and comment on the post.

Regards,

Adam

___
Adam Gosling
Internet Policy Development Consultant, APNIC
e: a...@apnic.net
p: +61 7 3858 3142
m: +61 421 456 243
t: @bout_policy
___

Join the conversation:   https://blog.apnic.net/
___

On 18/05/2016, 23:10, "sig-policy-boun...@lists.apnic.net on behalf of Sumon
Ahmed Sabir"  wrote:

> Dear Colleagues,
> 
> The Policy SIG meeting at APNIC 41 included a session about incorrect
> contact information registered in the APNIC Whois Database.
> 
> The Secretariat has prepared a summary of the discussion. You can read
> it at the following URL.
> https://www.apnic.net/community/policy/policy-sig/whois-data-quality
> 
> After the session, it was agreed we should continue discussing the
> problem and encourage others to suggest ways the accuracy of this data
> can be improved.
> 
> Please read the summary and share your thoughts on this mailing list.
> 
> Thank you
> 
> Sumon and Masato
> APNIC Policy SIG Chairs




smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
*  sig-policy:  APNIC SIG on resource management policy   *
___
sig-policy mailing list
sig-policy@lists.apnic.net
https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy

[sig-policy] APNIC 42 Fellowships now open

[Adam Gosling]

apologies for duplicates

Adam


___

APNIC 42 Fellowships now open
___

As part of our commitment to supporting Internet growth in developing
Asia Pacific economies, APNIC’s Fellowship program supports members of
the Internet technical community from these economies to attend,
participate and contribute to APNIC Conferences free of charge.

Fellowship applications for APNIC 42 to be held in Dhaka, Bangladesh,
are now open.

Benefits of APNIC Fellowships
-

- Acquire hands-on experience in technologies such as IPv6, DNSSEC,
and Network Security
- Attend all workshops and tutorials at the APNIC 42 Conference
- Participate in policy discussions that will affect how your
organization accesses Internet number resources
- Network and meet members of the Internet technical community from
around the world

There are two Fellowship categories: professional and youth. For more
information about the Fellowship program, criteria, terms, and
application, please visit the APNIC 42 website:

https://conference.apnic.net/42/fellowship

APNIC strives for gender, organizational and geographical diversity in
Fellowship selection.

Deadline


The deadline for Fellowship applications is Friday, 08 July 2016 at
23:59 (UTC +10).



___
Adam Gosling
Internet Policy Development Consultant, APNIC
e: a...@apnic.net
p: +61 7 3858 3142
m: +61 421 456 243
t: @bout_policy
___

Join the conversation:   https://blog.apnic.net/
___




smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
*  sig-policy:  APNIC SIG on resource management policy   *
___
sig-policy mailing list
sig-policy@lists.apnic.net
https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy

Re: [sig-policy] APNIC Whois Database Accuracy

[Adam Gosling]

Hello Aftab, 

We will pull together some statistics and post them to this list as soon as
possible.

Kind regards,

Adam

___
Adam Gosling
Internet Policy Development Consultant, APNIC
e: a...@apnic.net
p: +61 7 3858 3142
m: +61 421 456 243
t: @bout_policy
___

Join the conversation:   https://blog.apnic.net/
___

On 27/06/2016, 18:43, "sig-policy-boun...@lists.apnic.net on behalf of Aftab
Siddiqui"  wrote:

> Hi Adam/Secretariat,
> 
> Just to get more information.
> 
> Can you please share the following stats.
> 
> - how many request APNIC received in last 12 months to correct the whois
> record?
> - how many active myapnic accounts we have as compare to total numbers of
> active APNIC members. Assuming 1 myapnic account = 1 member?
> - how many members have not created IRT object yet?
> - how many emails bounce back from billing contacts (just an average per
> month)?
> 
> On Tue, 21 Jun 2016 at 16:53 Jahangir Hossain  wrote:
>> Thanks Aftab for your comments and information .
>> 
>> We already know the importance of  Whois database accuracy specially the
>> exchange of information for cyber security mitigation . if community have
>> mixed comments then we can execute this as pilot project specially on IRT
>> object or single country .
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Regards / Jahangir
>> 
>> 
>> On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 12:21 PM, Aftab Siddiqui 
>> wrote:
>>>> I also support Gaurab’s idea to tag the authoritative of account holder.
>>>> Besides i would like to add one point with Gaurab's idea ; Can we send
>>>> verification message through mail to account holder's corporate and
>>>> technical contact person by quarterly/half a year/yearly basis?
>>>> 
>>>> if one of the contact person is not verify this information then account
>>>> accessibility will be disable . Other wise it's really hard to make more
>>>> reliable and accurate whois database that we are thinking .
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> +0.5
>>> 
>>> I've been proposing this for years now (earlier in Network abuse BoF) and
>>> recently did it in policy-sig and there was very mixed response. ARIN has
>>> this policy but as per Leslie Noble (ARIN) it is not very successful in
>>> their region but she also mentioned that they are planning to make few
>>> changes in the process (need to reach out to her again for the update).
>>> 
>>> For those who were not present there.. here is the transcript link
>>> https://conference.apnic.net/data/41/20160225-Policy-SIG-2.txt
>>> (hint: search my name)
>>> 
>>> -- 
>>> Best Wishes, 
>>> 
>>> Aftab A. Siddiqui
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> -- 
>> 
> -- 
> Best Wishes, 
> 
> Aftab A. Siddiqui




smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
*  sig-policy:  APNIC SIG on resource management policy   *
___
sig-policy mailing list
sig-policy@lists.apnic.net
https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy

Re: [sig-policy] APNIC Whois Database Accuracy

[Adam Gosling]

Hello Aftab, all

The Services and Finance teams have helped us out with the following data as
you requested. I’ll reply in-line.


On 27/06/2016, 18:43, "sig-policy-boun...@lists.apnic.net on behalf of Aftab
Siddiqui"  wrote:

> Hi Adam/Secretariat,
> 
> Just to get more information.
> 
> Can you please share the following stats.


> 
> - how many request APNIC received in last 12 months to correct the whois
> record?

In the last 12 months we have received 1,329 reports of invalid Whois
contacts.


 
> - how many active myapnic accounts we have as compare to total numbers of
> active APNIC members. Assuming 1 myapnic account = 1 member?

We have a total of 6401 active Member and Non-Member accounts. Of them 5839
have MyAPNIC access. This would not include NIR accounts.



> - how many members have not created IRT object yet?

At APNIC 38 we reported that 87% of accounts had registered an IRT contact
object. Following that we did some work as part of the Whois Data Quality
Improvement project and can now report that 96% of accounts now have IRT
objects. This leaves about 260 without and we will look into why that is.

These numbers are based on MyAPNIC activity. Some may have registered via
email – that would be a small number, if any.



> - how many emails bounce back from billing contacts (just an average per
> month)?

Finance Department reports that on average we get around 100 to 110 bounces
each month from billing contacts.



I hope this data helps. Please feel comfortable to ask for any other
information you need. We will do our best to provide what you need.

Regards

Adam


_______
Adam Gosling
Internet Policy Development Consultant, APNIC
e: a...@apnic.net
p: +61 7 3858 3142
m: +61 421 456 243
t: @bout_policy
___

Join the conversation:   https://blog.apnic.net/
___


> 
> On Tue, 21 Jun 2016 at 16:53 Jahangir Hossain  wrote:
>> Thanks Aftab for your comments and information .
>> 
>> We already know the importance of  Whois database accuracy specially the
>> exchange of information for cyber security mitigation . if community have
>> mixed comments then we can execute this as pilot project specially on IRT
>> object or single country .
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Regards / Jahangir
>> 
>> 
>> On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 12:21 PM, Aftab Siddiqui 
>> wrote:
>>>> I also support Gaurab’s idea to tag the authoritative of account holder.
>>>> Besides i would like to add one point with Gaurab's idea ; Can we send
>>>> verification message through mail to account holder's corporate and
>>>> technical contact person by quarterly/half a year/yearly basis?
>>>> 
>>>> if one of the contact person is not verify this information then account
>>>> accessibility will be disable . Other wise it's really hard to make more
>>>> reliable and accurate whois database that we are thinking .
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> +0.5
>>> 
>>> I've been proposing this for years now (earlier in Network abuse BoF) and
>>> recently did it in policy-sig and there was very mixed response. ARIN has
>>> this policy but as per Leslie Noble (ARIN) it is not very successful in
>>> their region but she also mentioned that they are planning to make few
>>> changes in the process (need to reach out to her again for the update).
>>> 
>>> For those who were not present there.. here is the transcript link
>>> https://conference.apnic.net/data/41/20160225-Policy-SIG-2.txt
>>> (hint: search my name)
>>> 
>>> -- 
>>> Best Wishes, 
>>> 
>>> Aftab A. Siddiqui
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> -- 
>> 
> -- 
> Best Wishes, 
> 
> Aftab A. Siddiqui




smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
*  sig-policy:  APNIC SIG on resource management policy   *
___
sig-policy mailing list
sig-policy@lists.apnic.net
https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy

[sig-policy] Nominations now open for Number Resource Organization Number Council

[Adam Gosling]

Nominations now open for Number Resource Organization Number Council



The nomination period for the Number Resource Organization Number
Council (NRO NC) opens today, 5 July 2016. The NRO NC performs the role
of the Address Supporting Organization Address Council (ASO AC).

The term of Dr Ajay Kumar will end on 31 December 2016. One
individual from the Asia Pacific Internet community will be elected to
fill this vacant seat on the NRO NC for two years from 1 January 2017 to
31 December 2018.


How to nominate
---

Any individual is eligible for nomination, except Regional Internet
Registry (RIR) staff members. Self-nominations are permitted.

To nominate yourself or someone else as a candidate for the position,
please submit your nominations using our online form by 17:30 (UTC +10)
on 1 September 2016.

 https://conference.apnic.net/42/elections#nominations


More information


For more information about the role and the NRO NC, please see:

 http://www.apnic.net/about-the-nro

For more on the current members of the NRO NC, please see:

 http://aso.icann.org/people/address-council/address-council-members

If you have any questions, please contact:

  helpd...@apnic.net




APNIC Secretariat secretar...@apnic.net
Asia Pacific Network Information Centre (APNIC)   Tel: +61 7 3858 3100
PO Box 3646 South Brisbane, QLD 4101 AustraliaFax: +61 7 3858 3199
6 Cordelia Street, South Brisbane, QLDhttp://www.apnic.net



smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
*  sig-policy:  APNIC SIG on resource management policy   *
___
sig-policy mailing list
sig-policy@lists.apnic.net
https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy

[sig-policy] APNIC 42 to be relocated from Dhaka

[Adam Gosling]

APNIC 42 to be relocated from Dhaka



In the past week, the escalation of violence in Bangladesh has caused
concerns in the APNIC community about the safety of attending APNIC 42
in Dhaka.  Travel advisories for Bangladesh from various governments
around the region have become stricter, making it difficult or
impossible for many APNIC community members and guests to attend the
meeting.

The APNIC Executive Council (EC) met yesterday to discuss these
concerns, and made the very difficult decision to relocate APNIC 42.
The new location, final dates and venue for the meeting will be
announced shortly.

The decision was made after deep consideration, and consultation with
our Bangladesh hosts ISPAB and BDNOG.  Both organizations have been
exemplary hosts and the APNIC EC and Secretariat wish to sincerely thank
ISPAB and BDNOG for their steadfast support.  They responded very
quickly to recent events in an effort to demonstrate and guarantee
security, and we greatly appreciate that effort.  Like ISPAB and BDNOG,
APNIC is deeply disappointed that the decision to relocate had to be
made.

We are working to ensure the conference can remain in the South Asia
region, and to announce the new arrangements as soon as possible, within
the next week.

We do also apologize for any inconvenience this change in location will
cause for APNIC 42 delegates, including those from Bangladesh. All
registrations already made by delegates for Dhaka will of course remain
valid for APNIC 42.

A Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) page regarding the relocation is now
available on the APNIC 42 website:

  https://conference.apnic.net/42/faqs

The APNIC 42 website and this FAQ will be updated regularly with new
information on the event.  Please check the conference website, the
APNIC Blog and APNIC social media for updates; and thank you in advance
for your patience as we confirm the new arrangements.

Paul Wilson
Director General




APNIC Secretariat secretar...@apnic.net
Asia Pacific Network Information Centre (APNIC)   Tel: 61 7 3858 3100
PO Box 3646 South Brisbane, QLD 4101 AustraliaFax: 61 7 3858 3199
6 Cordelia Street, South Brisbane, QLDhttp://www.apnic.net


*  sig-policy:  APNIC SIG on resource management policy   *
___
sig-policy mailing list
sig-policy@lists.apnic.net
https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy

[sig-policy] APNIC 42 to be held in Colombo, Sri Lanka

[Adam Gosling]

APNIC 42 to be held in Colombo, Sri Lanka



Following last week's announcement that APNIC 42 is relocating from
Dhaka, Bangladesh, APNIC can now confirm APNIC 42 will be held in
Colombo, Sri Lanka.

As a result, the dates for APNIC 42 have changed slightly to 28
September to 5 October. The workshops will run from 28 September to 2
October, and the conference will run from 3 to 5 October.

All registrations already made by delegates for Dhaka will of course
remain valid for APNIC 42 in Colombo.  We apologize for any
inconvenience that the change in location will cause for APNIC 42
delegates.

A Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) page regarding the relocation to
Colombo is available on the APNIC 42 website:

https://conference.apnic.net/42/faqs

Also as a result of the relocation, APNIC 42 fellowships will reopen for
one more week to provide an opportunity for community members, including
those from Bangladesh, to apply for a fellowship for the new location.

Fellowships are now reopened, and applications will close on Monday, 18
July 2016 at 23:59 (UTC +10). You can make a fellowship application 
here:

https://conference.apnic.net/42/fellowship

The APNIC 42 website will be updated regularly with new information on
the event as it is confirmed.  Please check the conference website, the
APNIC Blog and APNIC social media for updates; and thank you in advance
for your patience as we confirm the new arrangements.

APNIC would again like to thank IPSAB and bdNOG for their understanding
and support.

If you have any additional questions or concerns, please contact the
conference team at:

conference-registrat...@apnic.net

We look forward to welcoming you to APNIC 42 in Colombo.



APNIC Secretariat secretar...@apnic.net
Asia Pacific Network Information Centre (APNIC)   Tel: 61 7 3858 3100
PO Box 3646 South Brisbane, QLD 4101 AustraliaFax: 61 7 3858 3199
6 Cordelia Street, South Brisbane, QLDhttp://www.apnic.net




*  sig-policy:  APNIC SIG on resource management policy   *
___
sig-policy mailing list
sig-policy@lists.apnic.net
https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy

[sig-policy] FYI New ARIN policy implementation

[Adam Gosling]

Dear Community Members

Our colleagues in the ARIN region recently implemented some changes to
their resource policies.

The ARIN Board of Trustees has adopted the following three proposals,

ARIN-2015-5: Out of region use
https://www.arin.net/policy/proposals/2015_5.html

ARIN-2015-11: Remove transfer language which only applied pre-exhaustion
of IPv4 pool
https://www.arin.net/policy/proposals/2015_11.html

ARIN-2015-3: Remove 30 day utilization requirement in end-user IPv4
policy
https://www.arin.net/policy/proposals/2015_3.html

A new version of the  NRPM (Number Resource Policy Manual) is available:
https://www.arin.net/policy/nrpm.html

Regards,

Adam



___
Adam Gosling
Internet Policy Development Consultant, APNIC
e: a...@apnic.net<mailto:a...@apnic.net>
p: +61 7 3858 3142
m: +61 421 456 243
t: @bout_policy
___

Join the conversation:   https://blog.apnic.net/
___

*  sig-policy:  APNIC SIG on resource management policy   *
___
sig-policy mailing list
sig-policy@lists.apnic.net
https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy

[sig-policy] APNIC Policy Proposal Deadline is Friday, 26 August 2016

[Adam Gosling]

Dear Community Members,

This is a reminder that the APNIC Policy SIG Chairs have previously 
announced (see below) that new proposals to be considered at the 
APNIC 42 Policy SIG must be submitted before the deadline.

Proposal Deadline
---
Friday, 26 August @ 23:59 (UTC+10)

Submissions

Please use the online form at 
   http://www.apnic.net/community/policy/proposals/submit

Assistance
--
If you need help please contact me at
pol...@apnic.net


Kind Regards,

Adam
___
Adam Gosling
Internet Policy Development Consultant, APNIC
e: a...@apnic.net
p: +61 7 3858 3142
m: +61 421 456 243
t: @bout_policy
___

Join the conversation:   https://blog.apnic.net/
___


 

On 25/07/2016, 15:10, "sig-policy-boun...@lists.apnic.net on behalf of Masato 
Yamanishi"  
wrote:

Dear Colleagues,

The APNIC 42 Policy SIG session and Open Policy Meeting will be held in 
Colombo, Sri Lanka on Wednesday, 5 October 2016.

    http://conference.apnic.net/42/policy

If you have any ideas to improve policy, or wish to make an informational 
presentation about an aspect of resource management, please follow the 
instructions below.

The submission deadline for APNIC 42 is 26 August 2016.

Submit a Policy Proposal
--
Complete the online form at:
   http://www.apnic.net/community/policy/proposals/submit

Proposal a presentation

Send your synopsis to:
    pol...@apnic.net


We look forward to and encourage your participation in the APNIC 42 OPM.

Kind regards

Masato and Sumon
APNIC Policy SIG Chairs



*  sig-policy:  APNIC SIG on resource management policy   *
___
sig-policy mailing list
sig-policy@lists.apnic.net
https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy

[sig-policy] APNIC receives a /18 of IPv4 from IANA

[Adam Gosling]

APNIC receives a /18 of IPv4 from IANA 



Dear Colleagues,

The information in this announcement is to enable the Internet community
to update network configurations, such as routing filters, where
required.

APNIC received the following recovered IPv4 address blocks (total of a
/18) from IANA in September 2016.

  160.19.48.0 - 160.19.55.255 (/21)
  160.20.40.0 - 160.20.47.255 (/21)
  160.202.8.0 - 160.202.15.255 (/21)
  162.12.240.0 - 162.12.247.255 (/21)
  192.144.80.0 - 192.144.95.255 (/20)
  216.250.96.0 - 216.250.111.255 (/20)

To view the resource ranges allocated by APNIC, please see:

http://www.apnic.net/resources

If you have any questions, please contact:

helpd...@apnic.net


Kind regards,


APNIC Secretariat secretar...@apnic.net
Asia Pacific Network Information Centre (APNIC)   Tel: +61 7 3858 3100
PO Box 3646 South Brisbane, QLD 4101 AustraliaFax: +61 7 3858 3199
6 Cordelia Street, South Brisbane, QLDhttp://www.apnic.net




*  sig-policy:  APNIC SIG on resource management policy   *
___
sig-policy mailing list
sig-policy@lists.apnic.net
https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy

[sig-policy] Proposal to revise SIG guidelines

[Adam Gosling]

Dear SIG members

A proposal to modify the APNIC SIG Guidelines relating to the election
of SIG Chairs and Co-Chairs has been submitted for consideration at
APNIC 42 im Colombo, Sri Lanka.

https://www.apnic.net/sig-chair-elections/proposed-revision.txt

If agreed. these changes will affect all APNIC SIGs from APNIC 43 in Ho
Chi Minh City, Vietnam.

Discussion and call for consensus will take place in the Policy SIG.

https://www.apnic.net/mailinglists

If successful in the Policy SIG, a consensus call will be made at the
APNIC Member Meeting. There will be no final Comment Period.

To ensure those not travelling to APNIC 42 are able to participate in
the discussion, you are invited to comment on the Policy SIG Mailing
List before the conference.

More background to this proposal is available at:

https://www.apnic.net/community/participate/sigs/chair-elections

Regards

Adam


---

Revising eligible voters of Chair election and Chair's term

---

Proposer:   Masato Yamanishi
myama...@gmail.com


1. Problem statement


1. Eligible voters in SIG Chair election
In current SIG guidelines, we have no rule or guideline about eligible
voters in SIG Chair election and we have two issues by the lack of such
rule.

Firstly, we need to have clear guideline whether remote participants
have voting rights for SIG Chair election since current practice is
different in each election.

Secondary, it can be used by fraud, like hijacking the position of Chair
agaist the Community by inviting many persons who never attend the
community discussion.

2. SIG Chair's term of service
While SIG guidelines says "Elections occur yearly. Chair elections and
Co-Chair elections occur in alternate years.", both elections were held
at same meeting in many cases, in particular when a current Co-Chair
stand for the position of Chair. With this current practice having both
elections at same meeting, we are not seeing any significant issues for
long time.

In addition, there is no alternative condition for the successor's term
if current Chair/Co-Chair resigned or was removed though such
alternative condition is necessary to maintain staggered term as
requested by SIG guideline. (a.k.a. the successor's term of service is
same as remaining term of resigned or removed Chair)


2. Objective of policy change
-

The objective is preventing confusions related to remote participant as
well as mitigating possible frauds in SIG Chair election by setting
clear rule for eligible voters.

In addition, we can also expect aligning SIG guideline with current
practice as well as resolving unclearness of the successor's term when
current Chair/Co-Chair resigned or was removed by revising SIG Chair's
term of service.


3. Situation in other regions
-----

Please refer following page made by Adam Gosling

Comparison of RIR SIG/WG Chair Election Processes
https://www.apnic.net/sig-guidelines/chair-elections/other-rirs


4. Proposed policy solution
---

1. Eligible voters in SIG Chair election
I would like to propose limiting eligible voters of SIG Chair election
to registered participants of APNIC Conference where the election is
held.

In this context, registered participants include remote participants who
register to Confer, or its successor in future.

2. SIG Chair's term of service
I would like to propose aligning Chair' term with Co-Chair's term, which
means that Chair and all Co-Chair will serve for same two years.
To keep this alighment, I would like to propose limiting the successor's
term to remaining term of current Chair/Co-Chair if current
Chair/Co-Chair resigned or was removed.



5. Advantages / Disadvantages
-

Advantages:
By setting clear rule for eligible voters,

  - we can avoid confusion whether remote participant cast vote for SIG
Chair election or not
  - we can mitigate frauds in SIG Chair election

By revising SIG Chair's term of service
  - we can resolve a conflict between SIG guideline and current practice
  - we can resolve unclearness of the successor's term when current
Chair/Co-Chair resigned or was removed



Disadvantages:
APNIC staff may need to spend some additional time to confirm whether
each voter is registered participants.

There is no disadvantage by revising SIG Chair's term of service.


6. Impact on resource holders
-

No direct impact


7. References
-

Chair Election Procedure Review by Adam Gosling
https://www.apnic.net/community/participate/sigs/chair-elections

Comparison of RIR SIG/WG Chair Election Processes
https://www.apnic.net/sig-guidelines/chair-elections/other-rirs

APNIC SIG Guidelines
https://www.apnic.net/community/participa

Re: [sig-policy] Proposal to revise SIG guidelines

[Adam Gosling]

Hi Randy


 On 5/09/2016, 20:52, "Randy Bush"  wrote:

>> [ this is address policy? ]

No this is not address policy. The SIG Guidelines are the rules of procedure 
for all SIGs. The proposal was also sent to the other SIG mailing lists, but 
will be discussed in the Policy SIG as there is more agenda time there.
  
>> Secondary, it can be used by fraud, like hijacking the position of
>> Chair agaist the Community by inviting many persons who never attend
>> the community discussion.
>> ...
>> I would like to propose limiting eligible voters of SIG Chair election
>> to registered participants of APNIC Conference where the election is
>> held.
>> 
>> In this context, registered participants include remote participants
>> who register to Confer, or its successor in future.

is there an unstated assumption that many persons could attend the
meeting who are not registered locally or remotely?  does that
assumption hold?

The Secretariat doesn’t physically check registrations at the door to the 
Policy SIG sessions, I guess a bunch of extra people could wander in without 
badges. I’m not sure if we would notice.

At present remote participation (using the CONFER tool) only requires a simple 
registration with unique email address. We tried more stringent registration 
procedures with the Webcasting (like ARIN) and got a lot of negative feedback.


> I would like to propose aligning Chair' term with Co-Chair's term,
> which means that Chair and all Co-Chair will serve for same two years.

could make for a tough transition if both are replaced at the same time.


randy


*  sig-policy:  APNIC SIG on resource management policy   *
___
sig-policy mailing list
sig-policy@lists.apnic.net
https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy

Re: [sig-policy] Proposal to revise SIG guidelines

[Adam Gosling]

Hi Skeeve

I’m sure you wouldn’t do that, though. The Secretariat could add more stringent 
registration requirements into Confer, or use an off-the-shelf or online 
election platform. The question would always be convenience versus validity.

I internally raised the potential for somebody to game the system purely to 
take advantage of the new travel support for SIG Chairs and so, at APNIC 41 
Paul Wilson suggested the community might want to review the procedures to make 
sure they are comfortable with the new situation.

Just to be clear, the Secretariat has no preference, opinion, or objective in 
the outcome of this discussion. So don’t take anything I say to be an 
endorsement of any outcome.

Adam


>>>> On 6/09/2016, 10:18, "Skeeve Stevens" 
>>>> mailto:ske...@v4now.com>> wrote:

This is worrying re Confer as I am quite sure I could register 100,000 people 
with unique addresses.

We've entered a new era of bots - this would not be hard.


...Skeeve

Skeeve Stevens - Senior IP Broker
v4Now - an eintellego Networks service
ske...@v4now.com<mailto:ske...@v4now.com> ; www.v4now.com<http://www.v4now.com/>

Phone: 1300 239 038; Cell +61 (0)414 753 383 ; skype://skeeve

facebook.com/v4now<http://facebook.com/v4now> ; 
linkedin.com/in/skeeve<http://linkedin.com/in/skeeve>

twitter.com/theispguy<http://twitter.com/theispguy> ; blog: 
www.theispguy.com<http://www.theispguy.com/> ; Keybase: 
https://keybase.io/skeeve

[mage removed by sender.]
IP Address Brokering - Introducing sellers and buyers

On Tue, Sep 6, 2016 at 9:14 AM, Adam Gosling 
mailto:a...@apnic.net>> wrote:
Hi Randy


>>>> On 5/09/2016, 20:52, "Randy Bush" mailto:ra...@psg.com>> 
>>>> wrote:

>> [ this is address policy? ]

No this is not address policy. The SIG Guidelines are the rules of procedure 
for all SIGs. The proposal was also sent to the other SIG mailing lists, but 
will be discussed in the Policy SIG as there is more agenda time there.

>> Secondary, it can be used by fraud, like hijacking the position of
>> Chair agaist the Community by inviting many persons who never attend
>> the community discussion.
>> ...
>> I would like to propose limiting eligible voters of SIG Chair election
>> to registered participants of APNIC Conference where the election is
>> held.
>>
>> In this context, registered participants include remote participants
>> who register to Confer, or its successor in future.

is there an unstated assumption that many persons could attend the
meeting who are not registered locally or remotely?  does that
assumption hold?

The Secretariat doesn’t physically check registrations at the door to the 
Policy SIG sessions, I guess a bunch of extra people could wander in without 
badges. I’m not sure if we would notice.

At present remote participation (using the CONFER tool) only requires a simple 
registration with unique email address. We tried more stringent registration 
procedures with the Webcasting (like ARIN) and got a lot of negative feedback.


> I would like to propose aligning Chair' term with Co-Chair's term,
> which means that Chair and all Co-Chair will serve for same two years.

could make for a tough transition if both are replaced at the same time.


randy


*  sig-policy:  APNIC SIG on resource management policy   *
___
sig-policy mailing list
sig-policy@lists.apnic.net<mailto:sig-policy@lists.apnic.net>
https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy

*  sig-policy:  APNIC SIG on resource management policy   *
___
sig-policy mailing list
sig-policy@lists.apnic.net
https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy

Re: [sig-policy] Proposal to revise SIG guidelines

[Adam Gosling]

Hi Randy

Just a couple of references - inline

 On 6/09/2016, 10:35, "Randy Bush"  wrote:

hi:

this kludge is not very well thought out.

not that i am advocating, but an ietfish approach would be a requirement
to have attended n previous meetings.  makes more sense to me than this
proposal.  but ...
   
The NRO NC election process a similar requirement. 
Individuals who are on site and are registered for either the current 
APNIC Conference they are attending, or have been registered for at least one 
previous APNIC Conference since APNIC 10, are entitled to one vote.
https://www.apnic.net/community/participate/elections/nro-elections/nro-election-process

Voting in EC elections is restricted to Members.
 https://www.apnic.net/community/participate/elections/ec/voting/who-can-vote

personally, i am not sure there is a real problem.  so what if the old
guard gets thrown out and some new unknown folk get elected.  it might
be a breath of fresh air.  what actual damage could some fresh blood do?
some radical change in apnic across the board just might benefit the
internet.

[ historical note: this descends from the first taipei meeting, where
  there were no voting restrictions.  a bunch of folk showed up just for
  the ec election and voted in an outsider, shock and horror!  of
  course, all sorts of rules and restrictions to protect the old guard
  were immediately put in place. ]

randy


*  sig-policy:  APNIC SIG on resource management policy   *
___
sig-policy mailing list
sig-policy@lists.apnic.net
https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy

[sig-policy] Policy SIG @ APNIC 42

[Adam Gosling]

Dear Community Members

The details for the APNIC 42 Policy SIG meeting are available on the
Conference website (and below).

The three sessions of the Policy SIG will be held over two days.

Remote Participation

Facilities are available for remote participants.
https://conference.apnic.net/42/remote


Policy SIG (1)
--
https://conference.apnic.net/42/program#/schedule/day/7/policy-sig-1---whois-session

Venue
-
16:00 to 17:30 (UTC +05:30)
Tuesday, 4 October 2016
Ballroom 1 Ground Floor
Hilton Hotel, Colombo

Agenda
--
- Masato Yamanishi (Santen Pharmaceutical) - Policy SIG Administration
- George Kuo (APNIC) - Improving Whois Data Quality
- Dhammika Priyantha - Public Safety and Accuracy of IP Address WHOIS
- Discussion (Led by SIG Chairs)



Policy SIG (2)
--
https://conference.apnic.net/42/program#/schedule/day/8/policy-sig-2

Venue
-
09:00 to 10:30 (UTC +05:30)
Wednesday, 5 October 2016
Ballroom 1 Ground Floor
Hilton Hotel, Colombo

Agenda
--
- Adam Gosling (APNIC) - NRO NC Election Procedures
- Election Chair TBC - NRO NC Election Candidate speeches
- Guangliang Pan (APNIC) - NRO Number Resource Status Report
- Guangliang Pan (APNIC) - IPv4 final /8 delegation report
- Tuan Nguyen - IPv4 Transfer Report



Policy SIG (3)
--
https://conference.apnic.net/42/program#/schedule/day/8/policy-sig-3

Venue
-
11:00 to 12:30 (UTC +05:30)
Wednesday, 5 October 2016
Ballroom 1 Ground Floor
Hilton Hotel, Colombo

Agenda
--
- Smarter Purchasing of IPv4 Addresses From The Market - David
  Huberman
- prop-116-v001: Prohibit to transfer IPv4 addresses in the final /8
  block - Tomohiro Fujisaki
- Joint SIG Session

Joint SIG Sitting
-
A joint sitting of all SIGs will take place as the last item on the
Policy SIG Agenda. The joint session will discuss a proposal to clarify
aspects of the SIG Chair Election Procedures.

- Revising eligible voters of Chair election and Chair's term
   https://www.apnic.net/sig-chair-elections/proposed-revision.txt


I hope you are available to participate in these activities.

Kind Regards,

Adam




___
Adam Gosling
Senior Internet Policy Analyst,
APNIC
e: a...@apnic.net<mailto:a...@apnic.net>
p: +61 7 3858 3142
m: +61 421 456 243
t: @bout_policy
___

Join the conversation:   https://blog.apnic.net/
___

*  sig-policy:  APNIC SIG on resource management policy   *
___
sig-policy mailing list
sig-policy@lists.apnic.net
https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy

[sig-policy] Version 2 of proposal to revise SIG guidelines

[Adam Gosling]

Dear SIG members

A new version of the proposal to modify the APNIC SIG Guidelines
relating to the election of SIG Chairs and Co-Chairs has been submitted
for consideration at APNIC 42 in Colombo, Sri Lanka.

https://www.apnic.net/sig-chair-elections/proposed-revision.txt

If agreed, these changes will affect all APNIC SIGs from APNIC 43 in Ho
Chi Minh City, Vietnam.

Discussion and call for consensus will take place in a Joint Sitting of
all three SIGs during the Policy SIG (3) session of APNIC 42.

https://conference.apnic.net/42/program#/schedule/day/8/policy-sig-3

If successful in the Policy SIG, a consensus call will be made at the
APNIC Member Meeting. There will be no final Comment Period.

To ensure those not travelling to APNIC 42 are able to participate in
the discussion, you are invited to comment on the Policy SIG Mailing
List before the conference.

Remote Participation is available using the following link:

https://conference.apnic.net/42/remote

More background to this proposal is available at:

https://www.apnic.net/community/participate/sigs/chair-elections

Regards

Adam

---

Revising eligible voters of Chair election and Chair's term

---

Proposer:   Masato Yamanishi
myama...@gmail.com

1. Problem statement


1. Eligible voters in SIG Chair election
In current SIG guidelines, we have no rule or guideline about eligible
voters in SIG Chair election and we have two issues by the lack of such
rule.

Firstly, we need to have clear guideline whether remote participants
have voting rights for SIG Chair election since current practice is
different in each election.

Secondary, it can be used by fraud, like hijacking the position of Chair
agaist the Community by inviting many persons who never attend the
community discussion.

2. SIG Chair's term of service
While SIG guidelines says "Elections occur yearly. Chair elections and
Co-Chair elections occur in alternate years.", both elections were held
at same meeting in several cases, in particular when a current Co-Chair
stands for the position of Chair, and Chair election and Co-Chair
election occur in same year after that.

From the continuity of Chair-ship, it is more preferable to stagger
Chair's and Co-Chair's term.

In addition, there is no alternative condition for the successor's term
if current Chair/Co-Chair resigned or was removed though such
alternative condition is necessary to maintain staggered term as
requested by SIG guideline. (a.k.a. the successor's term of service is
same as remaining term of resigned or removed Chair)


2. Objective of policy change
-
The objective is preventing confusions related to remote participant as
well as mitigating possible frauds in SIG Chair election by setting
clear rule for eligible voters.

In addition, we can also expect aligning SIG guideline with current
practice as well as resolving unclearness of the successor's term when
current Chair/Co-Chair resigned or was removed by revising SIG Chair's
term of service.


3. Situation in other regions
-----
Please refer following page made by Adam Gosling

Comparison of RIR SIG/WG Chair Election Processes
https://www.apnic.net/sig-guidelines/chair-elections/other-rirs


4. Proposed policy solution
---

1. Eligible voters in SIG Chair election
I would like to propose limiting eligible voters of SIG Chair election
to registered participants of APNIC Conference where the election is
held. In this context, registered participants include remote
participants who register to Confer, or its successor in future.

2. SIG Chair's term of service
I would like to propose revising SIG Chair's term of service as follows.
- Elections occur yearly. Chair elections and Co-Chair elections
  occur in alternate years (same as current SIG guideline)

- If current Chair/Co-Chair resigned or was removed, the succesor's
  term should be remaining term of current Chair/Co-Chair

- If Chair election and Co-Chair election are happen in same year
  from other reasons than resignation or removal shown in above,
  Co-Chair's (or Co-Chairs') term of service should be one year as
  Chair's and Co-Chairs' term of service are staggered

5. Advantages / Disadvantages
-

Advantages:
By setting clear rule for eligible voters,
- we can avoid confusion whether remote participant cast vote for
  SIG Chair election or not

- we can mitigate frauds in SIG Chair election By revising SIG
  Chair's term of service

- we can resolve a conflict between SIG guideline and current
  practice

- we can resolve unclearness of the successor's term when current
  Chair/Co-Chai

[sig-policy] Proposal to revise SIG Guidelines returned to author

[Adam Gosling]

Dear SIG members

A proposal to modify the APNIC SIG Guidelines relating to the election
of SIG Chairs and Co-Chairs was discussed at a joint sitting of all SIGs
during APNIC 42 in Colombo, Sri Lanka.

https://www.apnic.net/sig-chair-elections/proposed-revision.txt

The proposal did not reach consensus and the joint Chairs returned the 
proposal to the author for amendment after consideration of the 
community feedback.

An archive of the joint sitting is available at the following link.

https://conference.apnic.net/42/program#/schedule/day/8/policy-sig-3

More background to this proposal is available at:

https://www.apnic.net/community/participate/sigs/chair-elections

Regards

Adam

---
Revising eligible voters of Chair election and Chair's term
---

Proposer:   Masato Yamanishi
myama...@gmail.com


1. Problem statement

1. Eligible voters in SIG Chair election
In current SIG guidelines, we have no rule or guideline about eligible
voters in SIG Chair election and we have two issues by the lack of such
rule.

Firstly, we need to have clear guideline whether remote participants
have voting rights for SIG Chair election since current practice is
different in each election.

Secondary, it can be used by fraud, like hijacking the position of Chair
agaist the Community by inviting many persons who never attend the
community discussion.

2. SIG Chair's term of service
While SIG guidelines says "Elections occur yearly. Chair elections and
Co-Chair elections occur in alternate years.", both elections were held
at same meeting in several cases, in particular when a current Co-Chair
stands for the position of Chair, and Chair election and Co-Chair
election occur in same year after that.

>From the continuity of Chair-ship, it is more preferable to stagger
Chair's and Co-Chair's term.

In addition, there is no alternative condition for the successor's term
if current Chair/Co-Chair resigned or was removed though such
alternative condition is necessary to maintain staggered term as
requested by SIG guideline. (a.k.a. the successor's term of service is
same as remaining term of resigned or removed Chair)


2. Objective of policy change
-
The objective is preventing confusions related to remote participant as
well as mitigating possible frauds in SIG Chair election by setting
clear rule for eligible voters.

In addition, we can also expect aligning SIG guideline with current
practice as well as resolving unclearness of the successor's term when
current Chair/Co-Chair resigned or was removed by revising SIG Chair's
term of service.


3. Situation in other regions
-----
Please refer following page made by Adam Gosling

Comparison of RIR SIG/WG Chair Election Processes
https://www.apnic.net/sig-guidelines/chair-elections/other-rirs


4. Proposed policy solution
---

1. Eligible voters in SIG Chair election
I would like to propose limiting eligible voters of SIG Chair election
to registered participants of APNIC Conference where the election is
held. In this context, registered participants include remote
participants who register to Confer, or its successor in future.

2. SIG Chair's term of service
I would like to propose revising SIG Chair's term of service as follows.
- Elections occur yearly. Chair elections and Co-Chair elections
  occur in alternate years (same as current SIG guideline)

- If current Chair/Co-Chair resigned or was removed, the succesor's
  term should be remaining term of current Chair/Co-Chair

- If Chair election and Co-Chair election are happen in same year
  from other reasons than resignation or removal shown in above,
  Co-Chair's (or Co-Chairs') term of service should be one year as
  Chair's and Co-Chairs' term of service are staggered

5. Advantages / Disadvantages
-
Advantages:
By setting clear rule for eligible voters,
- we can avoid confusion whether remote participant cast vote for
  SIG Chair election or not

- we can mitigate frauds in SIG Chair election By revising SIG
  Chair's term of service

- we can resolve a conflict between SIG guideline and current
  practice

- we can resolve unclearness of the successor's term when current
  Chair/Co-Chair resigned or was removed

Disadvantages:
APNIC staff may need to spend some additional time to confirm whether
each voter is registered participants.

There is disadvantage by revising SIG Chair's term of service.


6. Impact on resource holders
-----
No direct impact


7. References
-
Chair Election Procedure Review by Adam Gosling
https://www.apnic.net/community/participat

[sig-policy] Mailing list error

[Adam Gosling]

Dear Colleagues

Yesterday some of you may have incorrectly received a Draft email from Sumon 
Sabir dated 26 September 2016.

I believe this was a moderation error on my part.

Please note that the email is not a new version of prop-116. It is the version 
that was discussed at APNIC 42.

Sorry for any confusion.

Regards,

Adam

Reference:
[sig-policy] DRAFT# New version of prop-116: Prohibit to transfer IPv4 
addresses in the final /8 block
http://mailman.apnic.net/mailing-lists/sig-policy/archive/2017/01/msg1.html


___
Adam Gosling
Senior Internet Policy Analyst, APNIC
e: a...@apnic.net
p: +61 7 3858 3142
m: +61 421 456 243
www.apnic.net
___
 
Join the conversation:   https://blog.apnic.net/
___
 
 

*  sig-policy:  APNIC SIG on resource management policy   *
___
sig-policy mailing list
sig-policy@lists.apnic.net
https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy

[sig-policy] Version 3 of proposal to revise SIG guidelines

[Adam Gosling]

Dear SIG members

A new version of the proposal to modify the APNIC SIG Guidelines has been 
submitted for consideration at APNIC 43 in Ho Chi Minh City, Viet Nam.

Discussions and calls for consensus will take place in each SIG session.

You are invited to comment on the SIG Mailing Lists before the conference. 
Remote participation facilities will also be available during each SIG session.
 
More background to this proposal is available at:

https://www.apnic.net/community/participate/sigs/chair-elections

Regards

Adam
 
 ---

Revising eligible voters of Chair election and Chair's term
ver.3.0

---

Proposer:  Izumi Okutani
   iz...@nic.ad.jp

1. Problem statement


It has been over ten years since the SIG Guidelines document was
developed. The environment has changed since then, and it is now time
for the document to be reviewed and updated, to adapt to the changing
environment in the APNIC community, as the up-to-date document.

  - Regardless of the changes in the environment, what is to remain
consistent is that, the SIG accommodates its members discussions
and consensus, based on bottom-up inclusive spirit.

  - With increasing new participants in the community, which is a
welcoming change, unwritten agreed principles among long time
participants must be clearly described to help new participants
who join the community.

  - More official support from APNIC for Chair/Co-Chair(s)
position, such as described in the guidelines for
Travel Support since May 2016[*], provides more opportunities for
community members to serve as the Chair/Co-Chair.

At the same time, it is important to set clear expectations for
the new Chairs and Co-Chairs on what roles and responsibilities
they have for the position to meet the community's expectations,
and to maintain accountability of the APNIC community as a whole,
visible both within and from the outside.

[*] 
https://www.apnic.net/community/participate/sigs/sig-guidelines/sig-chair-travel-policy

Below are the key issues the proposal seeks to address.

  - Adjusting parts of the document which are no consistent with the
practice
  - The current SIG Guidelines mostly describe administrative
procedures for the SIG, without description about how the
Chair/Co-Chair serve the SIG members, and accommodate discussions 
by its participants

On eligible voters in SIG Chair/Co-Chair election, whether to allow
remote participants to vote, which was one of the proposed points in
version 1.0, there was no clear consensus at APNIC42. 

Therefore, this element of the proposal is not included in ver. 2.0. 
The author suggests to have a separate discussions, not in a form of 
the proposal, to first see what direction can be supported by the
community.

Base on these discussions, a follow up proposal about voting by
remote participants on SIG Chair/Co-Chair election may be considered, 
if the need for the proposal is supported by the community.


2. Objective of policy change
-

To maintaining SIG Guidelines to be up to date, adjusting to the
current environment of the APNIC, to be more useful for
the community members.

Although there were constructive discussions at APNIC42, there was no
consensus on the proposal as a whole, and it was agreed to have
continued discussions. The updated proposal seeks to continue this
work of revising the SIG Guidelines, to clearly describes essential
elements about the SIG.


3. Situation in other regions
-
Please refer following page made by Adam Gosling

Comparison of RIR SIG/WG Chair Election Processes
 https://www.apnic.net/sig-guidelines/chair-elections/other-rirs


4. Proposed policy solution
---

1. SIG Chair/Co-Chair's term of service
Add the following point to SIG Chair/Co-Chair's term of service:
 - If a current Chair/Co-Chair resigned or was removed before the 
   end of the term, the successor takes over the remaining term 
   of the position, and not the regular term (Currently two 
   years).

Rationale:
 - To maintain the election of the Chair and the Co-Chair to be
   staggered as currently described, for smooth transition and
   continuity of the SIG, even if the Chair/Co-Chair resigns or 
   is removed before the end of the regular term.

The following points about SIG Chai

[sig-policy] Policy SIG Co-Chair Nominee

[Adam Gosling]

Dear community members,

The Secretariat has received a nomination for the Policy SIG election if 
a new Co-Chair is required.

Ching-Heng Ku was nominated and has agreed to stand for the position of 
Policy SIG Co-Chair.

A Nomination Statement and Nominee Statement are available from the 
following page:
https://www.apnic.net/community/policy/policy-sig/

Nominations for the positions of Chair and Co-Chair will close at:
23:59 (UTC +10)
Wednesday, 22 February 2017.
https://www.apnic.net/policy-sig/nominate

Regards,

Adam




___
Adam Gosling
Senior Internet Policy Analyst, APNIC
e: a...@apnic.net
p: +61 7 3858 3142
m: +61 421 456 243
www.apnic.net
___
 
Join the conversation:   https://blog.apnic.net/
___
 
 

*  sig-policy:  APNIC SIG on resource management policy   *
___
sig-policy mailing list
sig-policy@lists.apnic.net
https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy

[sig-policy] Policy SIG Chair Nominee

[Adam Gosling]

Dear community members,

The Secretariat has received a nomination for the position of Policy 
SIG Chair.

Sumon Ahmed Sabir was nominated and has agreed to stand for the position.

A Nomination Statement is available from the following page:
https://www.apnic.net/community/policy/policy-sig/

Nominations for the positions of Chair and Co-Chair will close at:
23:59 (UTC +10)
Wednesday, 22 February 2017.
https://www.apnic.net/policy-sig/nominate

Regards,

Adam
___
Adam Gosling
Senior Internet Policy Analyst, APNIC
e: a...@apnic.net
p: +61 7 3858 3142
m: +61 421 456 243
www.apnic.net
___
 
Join the conversation:   https://blog.apnic.net/
___
 
 

*  sig-policy:  APNIC SIG on resource management policy   *
___
sig-policy mailing list
sig-policy@lists.apnic.net
https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy

[sig-policy] Policy SIG Co-Chair Nominee

[Adam Gosling]

Dear community members,

The Secretariat has received a nomination for the Policy SIG election.

Bertrand Cherrier has agreed to stand for the position of Policy SIG 
Co-Chair.

A Nominee Statement are available from the following page:
https://www.apnic.net/community/policy/policy-sig/

Regards,

Adam


___
Adam Gosling
Senior Internet Policy Analyst, APNIC
e: a...@apnic.net
p: +61 7 3858 3142
m: +61 421 456 243
www.apnic.net
___
 
Join the conversation:   https://blog.apnic.net/
___
 
 

*  sig-policy:  APNIC SIG on resource management policy   *
___
sig-policy mailing list
sig-policy@lists.apnic.net
https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy

Re: [sig-policy] Final Comment Period for prop-117-v003: Returned IPv4 address management and Final /8 exhaustion

[Adam Gosling]

Hello Jahangir

Final /8 blocks that are returned from Member accounts are being held in a 
‘reserved’ status by the Secretariat until the community decides to put them 
back in the Final /8 free pool, or place them in the IPv4 recovered pool where 
non-103/8 returns are placed.

At APNIC 43 the proposal reaching consensus was to return them to the Final /8 
pool.

This final call will end today, unless extended by the Chairs.

Kind regards,

Adam

___
Adam Gosling
Senior Internet Policy Analyst, APNIC
e: a...@apnic.net
p: +61 7 3858 3142
m: +61 421 456 243
www.apnic.net
___

Join the conversation:   https://blog.apnic.net/
___



From:  on behalf of Jahangir Hossain 

Date: Tuesday, 11 April 2017 at 19:39
To: Sumon Ahmed Sabir 
Cc: Policy Mailing List 
Subject: Re: [sig-policy] Final Comment Period for prop-117-v003: Returned IPv4 
address management and Final /8 exhaustion

Hi everyone ,

I have a simple question for clarification . How 103/8 block is returned to 
APNIC which already assigned to members ?


Regards / Jahangir

On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 2:43 PM, Sumon Ahmed Sabir 
mailto:su...@fiberathome.net>> wrote:
Dear colleagues,

Part of prop-117: "Returned IPv4 address management and Final /8 exhaustion",
reached consensus at the APNIC 43 Policy SIG and then later at the AGM.

Components of the proposal regarding which pool 103/8 blocks should be
returned to reached consensus. There was no agreement on the proposal for
Final /8 pool exhaustion procedures.

A new version prop-117-v003 was created to make it clear which part of
the proposal is reaching the final Comment Period.

Synopsis:
-

The proposed policy solution reaching consensus is

Handling returned address:
  - Recovered 103/8 space will be placed in the 103/8 (Final /8) pool.
  - Recovered non-103/8 space will be placed in the IPv4 Recovered pool.

This proposal will now move to the next step in the APNIC Policy
Development Process and is being returned to the Policy SIG mailing list
for the final Comment Period.

At the end of this period the Policy SIG Chairs will evaluate comments
made and determine if the consensus reached at APNIC 43 still holds. The
Chairs may extend the Comment Period to a maximum of eight (8) weeks to
allow further discussion.

If consensus holds, the Chair of the Policy SIG will ask the APNIC Executive
Council to endorse the proposal for implementation.

   - Send all comments and questions to: 
   - Deadline for comments:  23:59 (UTC +10) Wednesday, 12 April 2017

Proposal details, including the full text of the proposal, history, and
links to previous versions are available at:

https://www.apnic.net/community/policy/proposals/prop-117/

Regards

Sumon, Ching-Heng, Bertrand
Policy SIG Chairs



---

prop-117-v003: Returned IPv4 address management and Final /8 exhaustion

---

Proposer:   Tomohiro Fujisaki
fujis...@syce.net<mailto:fujis...@syce.net>


1. Problem statement


APNIC currently makes delegations from two IPv4 pools. These are the
103/8 (Final /8) pool and the non-103/8 IPv4 Recovered pool.

With current policy, all returned address space, including 103/8 blocks,
will be merged into the IPv4 Recovered pool.

If a 103/8 block is returned, it is placed in the IPv4 Recovered pool
and re-distributed as returned space. Some organisations may receive
duplicate blocks from 103/8: one under the final /8 policy, the other
under the returned pool policy.

Current APNIC Policy requires account holders to receive address space
from the 103/8 (Final /8) pool before they can apply for address space
from the Recovered pool.

APNIC currently manages a Recovered Pool Waiting List for approved
requests that cannot be met from the IPv4 Recovered pool.


2. Objective of policy change
-

To simplify the address pool management and to provide guidance for
103/8 pool exhaustion.


3. Situation in other regions
-

None.


4. Proposed policy solution
---

Handling returned address:
  - Recovered 103/8 space will be placed in the 103/8 (Final /8) pool.
  - Recovered non-103/8 space will be placed in the IPv4 Recovered pool.


5. Advantages / Disadvantages
-

Advantages:

  - Simplifying management of remaining IPv4 address pools.

Disadvantages:

None.


6. Impact on resource holders
--

No impact to resource holders.


7. References
-


*  sig-policy:  APNIC SIG on resource management policy   *
___
sig-policy mailing list
sig-policy@lists.apnic.net<mailto:sig-policy@lists.apnic.net&g

[sig-policy] Policy update after ARIN 39

[Adam Gosling]

Dear Community Members,

This email presents a status update of policy proposals in the ARIN
region following the ARIN Advisory Council (AC) meeting on 5 April
2017.


Two Recommended drafts moved to Last Call:

 
- ARIN-2016-3: Alternative Simplified Criteria for Justifying Small 
  IPv4 Transfers
  This proposal allows organizations using 80% of their current 
  space to double their current holdings via 8.3 or 8.4 specified 
  transfers, up to a /16 equivalent.
  
  https://www.arin.net/policy/proposals/2016_3.html

- ARIN-2016-9: Streamline Merger & Acquisition Transfers
  This proposal removes the demonstrated need criteria for Mergers 
  & Acquisition Transfers so that recipients are encouraged to 
  update the registration data.
  
  https://www.arin.net/policy/proposals/2016_9.html
  
 
One draft adopted as a Draft Policy:
--
 
- ARIN-prop-236: Remove Reciprocity Requirement for Inter-RIR 
  Transfers
  This proposal would allow asynchronous inter-RIR transfers between 
  ARIN and regions that have less IPv4 space in their inventory than 
  the global average of RIR IPv4 address inventories. 
  
  https://www.arin.net/policy/proposals/2017_4.html


One draft was abandoned:
--

- Recommended Draft Policy ARIN-2016-8: Removal of Indirect POC 
  Validation Requirement
  https://www.arin.net/policy/proposals/2016_8.html


The ARIN AC continues to work on four draft policies:
-

- Draft Policy ARIN-2017-1: Clarify Slow Start for Transfers
  https://www.arin.net/policy/proposals/2017_3.html

- Draft Policy ARIN-2017-2: Removal of Community Networks
  https://www.arin.net/policy/proposals/2017_2.html
   
- Draft Policy ARIN-2017-3: Update to NPRM 3.6: Annual Whois POC Validation
  https://www.arin.net/policy/proposals/2017_3.html
   
- ARIN-prop-235: Clarify Generic References to "IP Addresses" in NRPM
  https://www.arin.net/policy/proposals/ARIN_prop_235_v3.html

--
An overview of ARIN´s policy proposals can be found here:
 
https://www.arin.net/policy/proposals/index.html
 
Find more information about the ARIN Policy Development Process here:
 
https://www.arin.net/policy/pdp.html


Kind regards,

Adam & George


_______
Adam Gosling
Senior Internet Policy Analyst, APNIC
e: a...@apnic.net
p: +61 7 3858 3142
m: +61 421 456 243
www.apnic.net
___
 
Join the conversation:   https://blog.apnic.net/
___
 
 










*  sig-policy:  APNIC SIG on resource management policy   *
___
sig-policy mailing list
sig-policy@lists.apnic.net
https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy

[sig-policy] APNIC 44 Fellowships now open

[Adam Gosling]

___

APNIC 44 Fellowships now open
___

As part of our commitment to supporting Internet growth in developing
Asia Pacific economies, APNIC’s Fellowship program supports members of
the Internet technical community from these economies to attend,
participate and contribute to APNIC Conferences free of charge.

Fellowship applications for APNIC 44 to be held in Taichung, Taiwan,
are now open.

There are three categories: professional, youth and returning 
fellowships. For more information about the Fellowship program, Key 
dates, criteria, categories, terms, and application, please visit the 
APNIC 44 Conference website:

https://conference.apnic.net/44/fellowship/overview/

APNIC strives for gender, organizational and geographical diversity in
Fellowship selection.

Deadline


The deadline for Fellowship applications is Friday, 07 July 2017 at
23:59 (UTC +10).

___

APNIC Secretariat helpd...@apnic.net
Asia Pacific Network Information Centre (APNIC)   Tel: +61 7 3858 3100
PO Box 3646 South Brisbane, QLD 4101 AustraliaFax: +61 7 3858 3199
6 Cordelia Street, South Brisbane, QLDhttp://www.apnic.net
___
* Sent by email to save paper. Print only if necessary.






*  sig-policy:  APNIC SIG on resource management policy   *
___
sig-policy mailing list
sig-policy@lists.apnic.net
https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy

[sig-policy] Reminder: APNIC 44 Policy Proposal Deadline is 7 August 2017

[Adam Gosling]

Dear community members,

This is a reminder that the deadline set by the Policy SIG Chair for 
proposals to be discussed at APNIC 44 is less than one month away.

If you have any ideas to improve policy, or wish to make an informational
presentation about an aspect of resource management, please follow the
instructions below.

The submission deadline for APNIC 44 is:

Monday, 7 August 2017.


Submit a Policy Proposal


Complete the online form at:

http://www.apnic.net/community/policy/proposals/submit

For more information on becoming an author go to:


https://www.apnic.net/community/policy/process/guidelines-for-proposal-authors


Propose a presentation
--

Send your synopsis to:
pol...@apnic.net


We look forward to and encourage your participation in the APNIC 44 OPM.

https://conference.apnic.net/44/policy/

Kind regards,

Adam and George
APNIC Secretariat


___
Adam Gosling
Senior Internet Policy Analyst, APNIC
e: a...@apnic.net
p: +61 7 3858 3142
m: +61 421 456 243
www.apnic.net
___
 
Join the conversation:   https://blog.apnic.net/
___
 
 




*  sig-policy:  APNIC SIG on resource management policy   *
___
sig-policy mailing list
sig-policy@lists.apnic.net
https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy

[sig-policy] Reminder: APNIC Policy SIG proposal deadline in one week (7 August)

[Adam Gosling]

Dear community members,

This is a reminder that the deadline set by the Policy SIG Chair for
proposals to be discussed at APNIC 44 is one week away.

If you have any ideas to improve policy, please follow the
instructions below.

The submission deadline for APNIC 44 is:

Monday, 7 August 2017.


Submit a Policy Proposal


Complete the online form at:

http://www.apnic.net/community/policy/proposals/submit

For more information on becoming an author go to:


https://www.apnic.net/community/policy/process/guidelines-for-proposal-authors

We look forward to and encourage your participation in the APNIC 44 OPM.

https://conference.apnic.net/44/policy/

Kind regards,

Adam and George
APNIC Secretariat


___
Adam Gosling
Senior Internet Policy Analyst, APNIC
e: a...@apnic.net
p: +61 7 3858 3142
m: +61 421 456 243
www.apnic.net
___
Join the conversation:   https://blog.apnic.net/
___


*  sig-policy:  APNIC SIG on resource management policy   *
___
sig-policy mailing list
sig-policy@lists.apnic.net
https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy

Re: [sig-policy] [Sig-policy] New version of prop-116: Prohibit to transfer IPv4 addresses in the final /8 block

[Adam Gosling]

Dear Tomohiro,

The APNIC Secretariat is reviewing the policy proposals under discussion and 
seeks clarification to better understand the intention of prop-116-v004: 
Prohibit to transfer IPv4 addresses in the final /8 block.

APNIC remains neutral and objective about the outcome of this discussion and 
only requires clarification to ensure correct implementation, should the 
proposal reach consensus.

- Would the prohibition apply to resources that are received as the result of a 
transfer? Or does this proposal only apply to delegations directly from the 
free pool?

We appreciate your feedback.

Regards,

Adam

___
Adam Gosling
Senior Internet Policy Analyst, APNIC
e: a...@apnic.net
p: +61 7 3858 3142
m: +61 421 456 243
www.apnic.net
___
 
Join the conversation:   https://blog.apnic.net/
___
 
 

On 24/8/17, 07:26, "sig-policy-boun...@lists.apnic.net on behalf of Stephane 
MATEO"  wrote:

Hi all,

- Do you support or oppose the proposal?
I support this proposal.

 - Do you see any disadvantages in this proposal?
No, personally I do not need another address range but it is at least 
protecting the last block for those who need some and not for the transfer 
market.
Moreover, if you don't need your IPv4 ranges anymore, give it back to your 
RIR.

 - Is there anything in the proposal that is not clear?
Fine by me


Regards,
Stephane MATEO
Offratel Lagoon
CTO
Tel : +687 29.68.41 | www.lagoon.nc | 


-Message d'origine-
De : sig-policy-boun...@lists.apnic.net 
[mailto:sig-policy-boun...@lists.apnic.net] De la part de chku
Envoyé : mercredi 9 août 2017 17:12
À : sig-policy 
Objet : [sig-policy] [Sig-policy] New version of prop-116: Prohibit to 
transfer IPv4 addresses in the final /8 block

Dear SIG members

A new version of the proposal "prop-116: Prohibit to transfer IPv4 
addresses in the final /8 block" has been sent to the Policy SIG for review.

It will be presented at the Open Policy Meeting at APNIC 44 which will be 
held in Taichung, Taiwan on Wednesday and Thursday, 14 & 15 September 2017.

Information about earlier versions is available from:

http://www.apnic.net/policy/proposals/prop-116

You are encouraged to express your views on the proposal:

 - Do you support or oppose the proposal?
 - Do you see any disadvantages in this proposal?
 - Is there anything in the proposal that is not clear?
 - What changes could be made to this proposal to make it more effective?

Please find the text of the proposal below.

Kind Regards,

Sumon, Bertrand, Ching-Heng
APNIC Policy SIG Chairs



---

prop-116-v004: Prohibit to transfer IPv4 addresses in the final /8 block

---

Proposer:   Tomohiro Fujisaki
fujis...@syce.net


1. Problem statement


There are a lot of transfers of IPv4 address blocks from 103/8 happening, 
both within the APNIC region and among RIRs.

Then number of transfer from 103/8 block are about 200, which is about 12% 
of the total number of transfers. This looks so high since APNIC manages about 
40/8.

And based on the information provided by APNIC Secretariat, number of 
transfers from the 103/8 block are increasing year by year.

Updated by APNIC Secretariat on 27 January 2017:

1) M&A transfers containing 103/8 space

+--+---+---+-
|  |   Total   | Number of |
| Year | Transfers |   /24s|
+--+---+---+-
| 2011 | 3 | 12 |
| 2012 |10 | 46 |
| 2013 |18 | 66 |
| 2014 |   126 |498 |
| 2015 |   147 |573 |
| 2016 |63 |239 |
| 2017 |45 |178 |
+--+---++-

2) Market transfers containing 103/8 space

+--+---+---+
|  |   Total   | Number of |
| Year | Transfers |   /24s|
+--+---+---+
| 2011 | 2 | 2 |
| 2012 |21 |68 |
| 2013 |16 |61 |
| 2014 |25 |95 |
| 2015 |67 |   266 |
| 2016 |   103 |   394 |
| 2017 |70 |   288 |
+--+---+---+

And also, transfers from the 103/8 block include:
  - Take place within 1 year of distribution, or
  - Multiple blocks to a single organization in case of beyond 1 year.
   

Re: [sig-policy] [Sig-policy] prop-118: No need policy in APNIC region, to be dis cussed at APNIC 44 Policy SIG

[Adam Gosling]

Dear David,

The APNIC Secretariat is reviewing the policy proposals under discussion and 
seeks clarification to better understand the intention of prop-118-v001: No 
need policy in APNIC region.

APNIC remains neutral and objective about the outcome of this discussion and 
only requires clarification to ensure correct implementation, should the 
proposal reach consensus.

These questions refer to the first bullet point in Section 4 'Proposed policy 
solution'.

- In that bullet point; "to its service region" seems to refer to recipients of 
inter-region transfers. Can you be specific about which transfers this proposal 
affects? Do you intend for the policy to also apply to transfers within the 
regional, including those between APNIC and NIR account holders?

- That bullet point requires transfers to "comply with the policies relating to 
transfers within its service region". Which region are you referring to? The 
APNIC region, or the counterpart region in an inter-RIR transfer? I think I 
understand your intention, but the current text seems to require transfers to 
comply with existing policy.

We would appreciate your clarification.

Regards,

Adam

_______
Adam Gosling
Senior Internet Policy Analyst, APNIC
e: a...@apnic.net
p: +61 7 3858 3142
m: +61 421 456 243
www.apnic.net
___
 
Join the conversation:   https://blog.apnic.net/
___
 
 

On 24/8/17, 13:57, "sig-policy-boun...@lists.apnic.net on behalf of David 
Hilario"  wrote:

Hi,


On 23 August 2017 at 10:34, Aftab Siddiqui  wrote:
> Thanks George for the details.
>
> So this policy is trying to solve the problems which don't exist.
>

The policy is not trying to fix a "problem", it is trying to simplify
things and lighten the administrative burden in the process.

We tend to amass a lot of procedures and policies that stick around
simply because "that's how we always have done it".
Over time things become just a bit anachronistic.

Need base was intended for the purpose of slowing the exhaustion of
the global IP pool, while we prepare for the replacement protocol...
and somehow we submitted that one to stricter distribution from day
one and it is currently still trying to recover.

Need demonstration was never intended to prevent IPv4 holders from
exchanging IPs between each other, keeping the need based purpose on
transfers is actually difficult to justify.

Prevent speculators and hoarders?
Organisations with large pockets can do this already, need base can
justify almost any sizes in the world of VPS.

We are only restricting smaller organisations willing to acquire
resources in order try to have enough IPv4 space to cover their future
needs based on what they can afford today.
While larger organisations have no problem forking out large amount of
money and can justify any sizes really.


>
> On Wed, 23 Aug 2017 at 12:28 George Kuo  wrote:
>>
>> Hi Aftab,
>>
>> Thanks for your patience. I now have more information for you.
>>
>> Total number of IPv4 market transfers that did not get completed in the
>> last 12 months is 97.
>>
>> Below is the breakdown of reasons:
>> Fraud:   4

Good news they that they were caught.

>> Recipient could not demonstrate needs:   1

Interesting number.
Was it a "could not demonstrate any need?", or "a specific need for a
specific transfer size?"
I would guess it is the second option, specific need for specific transfer 
size.

>> Recipient did not accept transfer:   6

That category is odd, I know APNIC cannot give details of individual
case, but why would a recipient be rejecting a transfer that they
somehow initiated to begin with.

>> Requests corrected as M&A transfer: 23

Removing the need base in transfer would even simplify those, you can
do an M&A provide lots of sensitive confidential information to a
third party, or simply do a transfer of the resources.

Anyone who has been involved in an M&A would know that it involves an
enormous amount of work and lots of extremely sensitive information
that often is not really appropriate to share with any external
parties.

>> No response from member:30
>> Member requested to cancel transfer:33
>>

You still have 63 cancelled transfers for whatever reason, if that is
due to the administrative burden put on the offering

Re: [sig-policy] New proposal prop-120: Final /8 pool exhaustion plan

[Adam Gosling]

Dear Tomohiro,

APNIC Secretariat is reviewing the policy proposals under discussion and seeks 
clarification to better understand the intention of prop-120-v001: Final /8 
pool exhaustion plan.

APNIC remains neutral and objective about the outcome of this discussion and 
only requires clarification to ensure correct implementation should the 
proposal reach consensus.

- After exhaustion, will initial resource requests from new Members be filled 
before unmet requests from Members already on the waiting list prior to 
exhaustion? Or will this priority only apply to requests submitted after the 
exhaustion date?

We appreciate your clarification.

Regards,

Adam

___
Adam Gosling
Senior Internet Policy Analyst, APNIC
e: a...@apnic.net
p: +61 7 3858 3142
m: +61 421 456 243
www.apnic.net
___
 
Join the conversation:   https://blog.apnic.net/
___
 
 

On 9/8/17, 16:17, "sig-policy-boun...@lists.apnic.net on behalf of chku" 
 wrote:

Dear SIG members

The proposal "prop-120: Final /8 pool exhaustion plan" has been sent 
to the Policy SIG for review.

It will be presented at the Open Policy Meeting at APNIC 44 which will 
be held in Taichung, Taiwan on Wednesday and Thursday, 14 & 15 September 
2017.

We invite you to review and comment on the proposal on the mailing list
before the meeting.

The comment period on the mailing list before an APNIC meeting is an
important part of the policy development process. We encourage you to
express your views on the proposal:

  - Do you support or oppose this proposal?
  - Do you see any disadvantages in this proposal?
  - Is there anything in the proposal that is not clear?
  - What changes could be made to this proposal to make it more
effective?

Information about this proposal is available at:

http://www.apnic.net/policy/proposals/prop-120

Regards

Sumon, Bertrand, Ching-Heng
APNIC Policy SIG Chairs


---

prop-120-v001: Final /8 pool exhaustion plan

---

Proposer:   Tomohiro Fujisaki
fujis...@syce.net


1. Problem statement


APNIC makes IPv4 address delegation from two IPv4 pools. These are the
103/8 (Final /8) pool and the non-103/8 IPv4 Recovered pool.

Currently, there are no IPv4 addresses in the non-103/8 IPv4 Recovered
pool and APNIC manages a Recovered Pool Waiting List for approved
requests. And, based on the Geoff's projection (*1), the 103/8 (Final
/8) pool will be exhausted in a few years.

It will be necessary to make a guidance about how to manage the IPv4
delegation after both IPv4 pools exhaustion.


2. Objective of policy change
-

To provide a guidance for 103/8 pool exhaustion.


3. Situation in other regions
-

None.


4. Proposed policy solution
---

Guidance for 103/8 pool exhaustion:

  - The first time an approved request cannot be fulfilled from the 103/8 
pool, Final /8 delegations will end.

  - APNIC will begin to manage only one (Recovered) IPv4 pool containing 
any residual 103/8 space and all future returns, including 103/8 
returns.

  - Each new account holder can receive up to a /21 from the IPv4
Recovered pool.

  - Existing account holders who have not yet received the maximum /21
from the two pools may continue to apply for space from the Recovered
pool until they have received a maximum /21 from the two pools.

  - A waiting list will be created if approved requests cannot be 
fulfilled. Each new account holder will be given priority in the
waiting list.


5. Advantages / Disadvantages
-

Advantages:

  - Possible to avoid confusion at 103/8 address pool exhaustion date

Disadvantages:

None.


6. Impact on resource holders
--

No impact to resource holders.


7. References
-
1. IPv4 Address Report
  http://www.potaroo.net/tools/ipv4/







___
Sig-policy-chair mailing list
sig-policy-ch...@apnic.net
https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy-chair


*  sig-policy:  APNIC SIG on resource management policy   *
__

Re: [sig-policy] prop-119: Temporary transfers, to be discussed at APNIC 44 Polic y SIG

[Adam Gosling]

Dear David,

The APNIC Secretariat is reviewing the policy proposals under discussion and 
seeks clarification to better understand the intention of prop-119-v001: 
Temporary transfers.

APNIC remains neutral and objective about the outcome of this discussion and 
only requires clarification to ensure correct implementation should the 
proposal reach consensus.

- Will recipient organisations of a temporary transfer be required to be an 
APNIC account holder?

- Will Historical Resources be covered by this policy?

The Secretariat believes an administrative and legal review of this proposal is 
required. Further questions may arise as a result of that review.

We appreciate your clarification.

Regards,

Adam

___
Adam Gosling
Senior Internet Policy Analyst, APNIC
e: a...@apnic.net
p: +61 7 3858 3142
m: +61 421 456 243
www.apnic.net
___

Join the conversation:   https://blog.apnic.net/
___



On 1/9/17, 17:31, 
"sig-policy-boun...@lists.apnic.net<mailto:sig-policy-boun...@lists.apnic.net> 
on behalf of Masato Yamanishi" 
mailto:sig-policy-boun...@lists.apnic.net> 
on behalf of myama...@gmail.com<mailto:myama...@gmail.com>> wrote:

Hi David,

Oh, I thought I had replied, but seems not.

>Simply speaking not having the resources in MyAPNIC is equivalent as
to not having them at all.
>You do not have full control of the resources in the APNIC database,
>you do not control the RPKI or reverse delegation.

I'm afraid you just rephrased what you wrote previously, which was not clear 
for me. So still unclear.
Let me ask more specifically.
What do you mean by "full control of the resources in the APNIC database"?
What do you mean by "control the RPKI or reverse delegation"?
Why your customer cannot or doesn't want to ask their upstream to manage RPKI 
or reverse delegation?
Why your customer cannot or doesn't want to ask their upstream to point NS 
record of assigned space to their customer?

>If someone wants it to be possible, I don't see the reason to why object it?

NO. I don't think it is enough justification nor problem statement to propose 
the policy, in particular for v4.

Still, against for this proposal.

Regards,
Matt


2017-08-23 21:01 GMT-07:00 David Hilario 
mailto:d.hila...@laruscloudservice.net>>:
Hi,


On 23 August 2017 at 10:32, Masato Yamanishi 
mailto:myama...@gmail.com>> wrote:
> Hi Proposer,
>
> I have same view as Mr. David Huberman.
> From the problem statement of prop-119 which says,
>
>>1. Problem statement
>>
>>
>>It is currently not possible for an organisation to receive a temporary
>>transfer under the current policy framework. Some organisations do not
>>want to have address space registered as assignments or sub-allocations,
>>but would rather have the address space registered as "ALLOCATED PA".
>
>
> or your message on Aug 17th,
>
>>It actually came up a few time from larger networks who tend to want
>>that, it is a form of long term leasing for them, they want the
>>resources into their registry out of convenience but also due to
>>internal procedures, they for example only want to commit for a 5 year
>>period while preparing their IPv6 and then return the space.
>>
>>The do not want to receive a sub-allocation or assignment, as it needs
>>to be part of their LIR/registry for them to be able to count it into
>>the network inventory and use the address.
>>
>>Some organisation have strict policies against use of external IP space.
>
>
> or your another message on Aug 17th,
>
>>The policy came to be as we have had several large companies actually
>>asking for such type of transfers.
>>
>>It is already a possibility in the RIPE region to do such transfers.
>>
>>It is really to cover a corner case where organisations are not able
>>or interested in receiving the IP space in form of assignments or
>>sub-allocations, but need them to be part of their own registry for
>>full control of the space and only for a pre-set amount of time.
>
>
> or your another message on Aug 18th,
>
>>If it is not registered to your LIR in your registry, you cannot send
>>an email to helpd...@apnic.net<mailto:helpd...@apnic.net> as it is not your 
>>space to control in
>>APNIC DB in the first place, but the space from your LIR that has
>>issued the space to you, your LIR decides how to register it and which
>>maintainers will be on it, you are not in full control.
>>
>>And ultimately for the ones using RPKI, 

[sig-policy] APNIC implements three policy proposals

[Adam Gosling]

___

Implementation of APNIC 44 proposals reaching consensus
___


APNIC has implemented, with immediate effect, the policy proposals that 
reached consensus during APNIC 44 in Taichung, Taiwan.

The proposals are:

prop-116: Prohibit to transfer IPv4 addresses in the final /8 block
https://www.apnic.net/community/policy/proposals/prop-116

prop-121: Updating “Initial IPv6 allocation” policy
https://www.apnic.net/community/policy/proposals/prop-121

prop-122: Updating “Subsequent IPv6 allocation” policy
https://www.apnic.net/community/policy/proposals/prop-122


Executive Council (EC) endorsement
--

The APNIC EC endorsed the three proposals via an electronic ballot and 
asked the APNIC Secretariat to implement the proposals immediately. 

Implementation of the proposals lifts the moratorium on 103/8 block
transfers imposed during the APNIC 44 APNIC Member Meeting.


https://mailman.apnic.net/mailing-lists/sig-policy/archive/2017/09/msg00049.html


Editorial comment period


APNIC seeks final editorial comments on the following draft changes to 
the APNIC Internet Number Resource Policies document.

This is an editorial review only. Consensus has already been reached on
these policy changes. Therefore, during the comment period, interested 
parties may:

- Object to the wording provided by the Secretariat
- Suggest improvements to any aspect of the document
- Request that an additional call for comment be made if substantial
  revisions are required

To review the draft document, please see:

https://www.apnic.net/community/policy/drafts/apnic-127-v005


Deadline for comments
-

Your comments are requested before 20 December 2017. Please send your 
comments to: 

pol...@apnic.net


___
Adam Gosling
Senior Internet Policy Analyst, APNIC
e: a...@apnic.net
p: +61 7 3858 3142
m: +61 421 456 243
www.apnic.net
___
 
Join the conversation:   https://blog.apnic.net/
___
 
 

*  sig-policy:  APNIC SIG on resource management policy   *
___
sig-policy mailing list
sig-policy@lists.apnic.net
https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy

Re: [sig-policy] APNIC 45 Proposal deadline

[Adam Gosling]

Hi Skeeve, Bertrand

I think Skeeve means *present* the proposal remotely at the meeting.

Proposal submission to the mailing list 4 weeks prior is a PDP requirement. In 
the past the Chairs will allow a remote presentation at the meeting. We are in 
Kathmandu, so I can’t guarantee a seamless connection, but we’ll try our best.

Regards,

Adam


___
Adam Gosling
Senior Internet Policy Analyst, APNIC
e: a...@apnic.net
p: +61 7 3858 3142
m: +61 421 456 243
www.apnic.net
___

Join the conversation:   https://blog.apnic.net/
___


On 18/12/17, 11:09, 
"sig-policy-boun...@lists.apnic.net<mailto:sig-policy-boun...@lists.apnic.net> 
on behalf of Bertrand Cherrier" 
mailto:sig-policy-boun...@lists.apnic.net> 
on behalf of b.cherr...@micrologic.nc<mailto:b.cherr...@micrologic.nc>> wrote:


Hi Skeeve,

I’m not sure I understand your question ... I pretty sure I didn’t :p
If you want to propose a new policy, you can do it remotely (as you did before)
Or do you want to propose a policy during the meeting through remote 
participation ?
For the last, the answer is no, as the deadline for policy proposal is on 
January 19th

Regards,

Cordialement,


Bertrand Cherrier
Administration Systèmes - R&D
Micro Logic Systems
b.cherr...@micrologic.nc<mailto:b.cherr...@micrologic.nc>
https://www.mls.nc
Tél : +687 24 99 24
VoIP : 65 24 99 24
SAV : +687 36 67 76 (58F/min)


On 16 Dec 2017, at 0:01, Skeeve Stevens wrote:
Hey Bertrand,

Can I make a request to propose a polict remotely?

I will try to be there, but I will need to see how I go.


...Skeeve

Skeeve Stevens - Founder & The Architect - eintellego Networks (Cambodia) Pte 
Ltd.
Email: ske...@eintellegonetworks.asia<mailto:ske...@eintellegonetworks.asia> ; 
Web: eintellegonetworks.asia<http://eintellegonetworks.asia/>

Cell +61 (0)414 753 383 ; Skype: skeeve

Facebook: eintellegonetworks<http://facebook.com/eintellegonetworks> ; Twitter: 
eintellego<https://twitter.com/eintellego>

LinkedIn: /in/skeeve<http://linkedin.com/in/skeeve> ; Expert360: 
Profile<https://expert360.com/profile/d54a9> ; Keybase: 
https://keybase.io/skeeve



Elastic Fabrics - Elastic Engineers - Elastic ISPs - Elastic Enterprises

On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 2:10 PM, Bertrand Cherrier 
mailto:b.cherr...@micrologic.nc>> wrote:

Dear Colleagues,

The APNIC 45 Policy SIG session and Open Policy Meeting (OPM) will be
held in Kathmandu, Nepal on Tuesday, 27 February 2018.

https://conference.apnic.net/45

If you have any ideas to improve policy, or wish to make an informational
presentation about an aspect of resource management, please follow the
instructions below.

The submission deadline for APNIC 45 is Friday, 19 January 2018.

Submit a Proposal or Presentation

To propose a new policy, or submit a presentation synopsis visit the
APNIC 45 website.

https://conference.apnic.net/45/policy/call-for-proposals/

We look forward to and encourage your participation in the APNIC 45 OPM.

Kind regards,

Sumon, Bertrand, Ching-Heng
Policy SIG Chairs

Cordialement,


Bertrand Cherrier
Administration Systèmes - R&D
Micro Logic Systems
b.cherr...@micrologic.nc<mailto:b.cherr...@micrologic.nc>
https://www.mls.nc
Tél : +687 24 99 24
VoIP : 65 24 99 24
SAV : +687 36 67 76 (58F/min)


*  sig-policy:  APNIC SIG on resource management policy   *
___
sig-policy mailing list
sig-policy@lists.apnic.net<mailto:sig-policy@lists.apnic.net>
https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy

*  sig-policy:  APNIC SIG on resource management policy   *
___
sig-policy mailing list
sig-policy@lists.apnic.net
https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy

Re: [sig-policy] prop-133-v001: Secretariat impact assessment

[Adam Gosling]

Hi Jordi

My comments are inline

> 
> New version:
> 
> 2.2.3. Assigned address space
> Assigned address space is address space that is delegated to an LIR, or
> end-user, for exclusive use within the infrastructure they operate.

This is not simply clarifying the text. The existing text is explicit. This 
relaxes the policy.
Your proposal text mentions “As a consequence, if there is a request with a 
documented purpose, and in the future the assigned space is used for some other 
purposes, it will violate the policy”.

This is not an error. I’m quite certain the very restrictive wording is 
deliberate. The community expected Members to use the resources for *exactly* 
the demonstrated need and to return them if that demonstrated need no longer 
exists. This is evident in the text at 4.1. License Renewal, which says; 
“Licenses to organizations shall be renewable on the following conditions: - 
The original basis of the delegation remains valid”.

However, I suspect this activity already happens in practice. So I’m supportive 
of the spirit of this change if the community agrees that delegation of 
resources for generic ‘own infrastructure’ usage is currently acceptable. 

I would specifically like to caution the removal of the “may not be 
sub-assigned”. This is the *definition* for ‘assigned’ space at APNIC. In the 
impact assessment, the Secretariat says, “assigned address space cannot be 
sub-assigned to other networks”. Who says? If this is only a technical 
limitation of MyAPNIC and it is no longer stated explicitly in the policy, then 
it allows for open interpretation/argument. 

Is the Secretariat confident the “exclusive use within infrastructure they 
operate” phrase means the same thing? Please just be careful of unintended 
consequences to Section 4.0.

Regards,

Adam



> 
> Please, update the version number of this proposal with this change, which I 
> guess it clears your impact assesment as well.
> 
> Regards,
> Jordi
> @jordipalet
> 
> 
> 
> El 14/2/20 14:48, "Srinivas Chendi"  nombre de su...@apnic.net> escribió:
> 
>Dear SIG members,
> 
>Here is the Secretariat impact assessment for proposal “prop-133-v001: 
>Clarification on Sub-Assignments” and the same is also published at:
> 
> https://www.apnic.net/community/policy/proposals/prop-133/
> 
>Staff comments
>--
> 
>This proposal appears to be straightforward. APNIC notes the expansion 
>policy text to elaborate on IPv6 assignment, and it is unlikely to 
>change current practices for evaluating IPv6 requests.
> 
>The proposed text “and may not be sub-assigned to other networks.” is 
>redundant as assigned address space cannot be sub-assigned to other 
>networks.
> 
> 
>Technical comments
>--
> 
>No comments.
> 
> 
>Legal comments
>--
> 
>No comments.
> 
> 
>Implementation
>--
> 
>within 3 months.
> 
> 
>Regards
>Sunny
> 
> 
>On 20/01/2020 10:18 am, Bertrand Cherrier wrote:
>> Dear SIG members
>> 
>> The proposal "prop-133-v001: Clarification on Sub-Assignments" has been
>> sent to the Policy SIG for review.
>> 
>> (This is a new version of "prop-124" proposal abandoned after APNIC 48
>> as it did not reach consensus at APNIC 46, APNIC 47, and APNIC 48.)
>> 
>> It will be presented during the Open Policy Meeting at APNIC 49 in
>> Melbourne, Australia on Thursday, 20 February 2020.
>> 
>> We invite you to review and comment on the proposal on the mailing list
>> before the meeting.
>> 
>> The comment period on the mailing list before an APNIC meeting is an
>> important part of the policy development process. We encourage you to
>> express your views on the proposal:
>> 
>>  * Do you support or oppose this proposal?
>>  * Does this proposal solve a problem you are experiencing? If so, tell
>>the community about your situation.
>>  * Do you see any disadvantages in this proposal?
>>  * Is there anything in the proposal that is not clear?
>>  * What changes could be made to this proposal to make it more effective?
>> 
>> Information about this proposal is available at:
>> http://www.apnic.net/policy/proposals/prop-133
>> 
>> Regards
>> 
>> Sumon, Bertrand, Ching-Heng
>> APNIC Policy SIG Chairs
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> prop-133-v001: Clarification on Sub-Assignments
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Proposer: Jordi Palet Martinez
>> jordi.pa...@theipv6company.com 
>> 
>> 
>>1. Problem statement
>> 
>> Note that this proposal is ONLY relevant when end-users obtain direct
>> assignments from APNIC, or when a LIR obtains, also from APNIC, and 
>> assignment
>> for exclusive use within its infrastructure.
>> Consequently, this is NOT relevant in case of LIR allocations.
>> 
>> The intended goal of assignments is for usage by end-users o

Re: [sig-policy] prop-130-v002: Secretariat impact assessment

[Adam Gosling]

Hi Jordi

Please stop saying you are “clarifying” policy text when you are actually 
changing policy. People with English as a second language may misunderstand 
what is happening.

I’m supportive of more specific language in the M&A policy, but this is 
basically an inter-RIR IPv6 transfer policy.

I do not support this policy proposal because I doubt there are sufficient 
legitimate use cases to justify the significant implementation burden, 
technical issues, and legal work this would create for the Secretariat(s). 

Your response to the assessment provided by Sunny doesn’t address the technical 
implementation issues. When the Secretariat tells you that it is a 6-month 
timeframe it is because it is complex and expensive to do. Simply saying you 
understand the implementation issues for APNIC and other RIRs doesn’t change 
this. It should mean that you have to work hard to demonstrate there is a 
community need for the change. Also, I’m not sure what you mean by “full” 
implementation. You can’t have a half implemented Policy.

In my opinion, you haven’t provided sufficient justification for this change in 
policy and I think it’s a bad idea for a host of reasons.

My recommendation is that the Secretariat editorially “clarify” Sections 8.4, 
11.0, and 13.3 to explicitly say "APNIC will only recognize the intra-RIR 
transfer of…."

Regards,

Adam




> On 16 Feb 2020, at 11:55 am, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ 
>  wrote:
> 
> Hi Sunny, all,
> 
> I understand that your assesment for this proposal is only informational 
> inputs and not suggesting any text changes, in the sense that:
> 
> 1) The M&A from/to other regions will need to be verified by the 
> counter-party RIR. I expect that this is part of the operational procedure, 
> and I suggest to use the same as you actually have for Inter-RIR transfers, 
> may be requiring slight modifications. However, I don't think it is relevant 
> to include that in the policy text, and instead should be fully managed by 
> the staff.
> 
> 2) I fully understand that there are implementation implications, not only in 
> APNIC systems, but also in couter-party RIRs, and the "full" implementation 
> will depend on all that.
> 
> Let me know if otherwise you think "anything" should be added/clarified in 
> the policy proposal.
> 
> Regards,
> Jordi
> @jordipalet
> 
> 
> 
> El 14/2/20 14:49, "Srinivas Chendi"  nombre de su...@apnic.net> escribió:
> 
>Dear SIG members,
> 
>Here is the Secretariat impact assessment for proposal “prop-130-v002: 
>Modification of transfer policies” and the same is also published at:
> 
> https://www.apnic.net/community/policy/proposals/prop-130/
> 
>Staff comments
>--
> 
>Possible difficulties in verifying mergers, acquisition, reorganization, 
>or relocation from out of APNIC region due to unfamiliarity of languages 
>and legal systems.
> 
>The NRO comparative policy matrix indicates APNIC Members outside of the 
>region must have network presence in the Asia Pacific. Additionally, 
>some RIRs have an ‘out of region’ policy which restricts where they can 
>use their resources.
> 
>Members may face difficulties updating their domain objects if there has 
>been a partial IPv6 transfer where a larger block has been de-aggregated.
> 
> 
>Technical comments
>--
> 
>APNIC’s current systems are not configured to handle inter-RIR IPv6 
>reverse DNS. This will need to be developed.
> 
>APNIC cannot predict when other RIRs will support IPv6 reverse DNS 
>fragments incoming to their systems.
> 
> 
>Legal comments
>--
> 
>This will affect how APNIC verifies M&A documents. May require cross RIR 
>coordination.
> 
> 
>Implementation
>--
> 
>6 months
> 
> 
>Regards
>Sunny
> 
> 
>On 20/01/2020 10:16 am, Bertrand Cherrier wrote:
>> Dear SIG members,
>> 
>> A new version of the proposal "prop-130: Modification of transfer policies"
>> has been sent to the Policy SIG for review.
>> 
>> It will be presented during the Open Policy Meeting at APNIC 49 in
>> Melbourne,
>> Australia on Thursday, 20 February 2020.
>> 
>> We invite you to review and comment on the proposal on the mailing list
>> before the meeting.
>> 
>> The comment period on the mailing list before an APNIC meeting is an
>> important part of the policy development process. We encourage you to
>> express your views on the proposal:
>> 
>>  * Do you support or oppose this proposal?
>>  * Does this proposal solve a problem you are experiencing? If so, tell
>>the community about your situation.
>>  * Do you see any disadvantages in this proposal?
>>  * Is there anything in the proposal that is not clear?
>>  * What changes could be made to this proposal to make it more effective?
>> 
>> Information about this proposal is available at:
>> http://www.apnic.net/policy/proposals/prop-130
>> 
>> Regards
>> 
>> Sumon, Bertrand, Chi

Re: [sig-policy] prop-134-v001: Secretariat impact assessment

[Adam Gosling]

Hi Jordi 

My comments are inline

> 
> New version:
> 
> Step 2: Consensus Determination
> Consensus is defined as “rough consensus” (RFC7282) as observed by the Chairs.
> 

You are making a significant change, but presenting it as a “clarification”. 
It is okay to consider adoption of IETF definitions of “rough consensus” to use 
in the APNIC Policy Process, but this is not a clarification. To be clear, the 
SIG doesn’t currently use the “rough consensus” model in RFC 7282. It uses the 
consensus model in the APNIC SIG Guidelines. 
https://www.apnic.net/community/participate/sigs/sig-guidelines/#steps 

The RFC is similar, but fundamentally different. Changing this in the PDP is 
not just a word tweak. It would result in a different approach from the Chairs 
and participants. There is no concept of “Minor” and “Major” objections in RFC 
7282, for example.



> Consensus is determined first considering the SIG mailing list, other 
> electronic means, and the SIG session, and afterwards at the Member Meeting.

I’m supportive of the spirit of this change.

It’s a bit late in the day to be proposing changes, but I would have written: 

“The Chair(s) assess if the SIG has reached consensus on a proposal by 
considering discussions both on the mailing list and at the Open Policy (Policy 
SIG) Meeting. The Chair(s) may use measurement techniques to take the 
temperature of the room. Consensus must be reached first at the SIG session and 
afterwards at the Member Meeting for the process to continue."

I think retaining the “process to continue” wording is important. I also think 
there is a lack of clarity about who is deciding Consensus at the Member 
Meeting. Is it the APNIC Executive Council Chair? The Chair of that particular 
meeting? The Policy SIG Chair? Or the Co-Chair presenting the report?

> 
> If there is no consensus on a proposal, the authors can decide to
> withdraw it.
> 

This removes discretion from the Chair (and the SIG), to abandon a proposal if 
an Author repeatedly persists with the same unpopular idea. I think that’s 
interesting and worth discussing if that’s what we want.



> Otherwise, the proposal will be considered as expired by the next OPM, unless 
> a new version
> is provided, restarting the discussions with the community.
> 


I like the idea that a proposal has to change before it can be re-presented. In 
the past, authors have just re-presented the same proposal until they get an 
friendly crowd and it passes. The effects of this have been negative IMO. 
Also, could I just add white space to the proposal and say that it has changed? 
How about this wording?

"Otherwise, the proposal will be considered expired unless a new version 
incorporating SIG feedback is provided before the next “Proposal Deadline” to 
restart the discussions.”

I hope these suggestions help. It is very difficult to make changes to the PDP. 
This would also require changes to the SIG Guidelines.

Regards,

Adam



> 
> Please, update the version number of this proposal with these changes, which 
> I guess clears your impact assessment as well.
> 
> Regards,
> Jordi
> @jordipalet
> 
> 
> 
> El 14/2/20 14:47, "Srinivas Chendi"  nombre de su...@apnic.net> escribió:
> 
>Dear SIG members,
> 
>Here is the Secretariat impact assessment for proposal “prop-134-v001: 
>PDP Update” and the same is also published at:
> 
> https://www.apnic.net/community/policy/proposals/prop-134/
> 
>Staff comments
>--
> 
>No foreseen change on APNIC Services procedures or systems as a result 
>of this policy proposal.
> 
>For reference and definition of “Rough Consensus” suggest adding RFC 
>7282 to the proposed text.
> 
>It is difficult to keep track of proposals “expire in six months” may be 
>change to “expire at the next OPM”.
> 
> 
>Technical comments
>--
> 
>No comments.
> 
> 
>Legal comments
>--
> 
>Given that rough consensus is defined under RFC 7282 - no further comments.
> 
> 
>Implementation
>--
> 
>within 3 months.
> 
> 
>Regards
>Sunny
> 
> 
>On 20/01/2020 10:23 am, Bertrand Cherrier wrote:
>> Dear SIG members
>> 
>> The proposal "prop-134-v001: PDP Update" has been sent to the Policy SIG 
>> for review.
>> 
>> (This is a new version of "prop-126" proposal abandoned after APNIC 48 
>> as it did not reach consensus at APNIC 46, APNIC 47, and APNIC 48.)
>> 
>> It will be presented during the Open Policy Meeting at APNIC 49 in 
>> Melbourne, Australia on Thursday, 20 February 2020.
>> 
>> We invite you to review and comment on the proposal on the mailing list 
>> before the meeting.
>> 
>> The comment period on the mailing list before an APNIC meeting is an 
>> important part of the policy development process. We encourage you to 
>> express your views on the proposal:
>> 
>>  * Do you support or opp

Re: [sig-policy] prop-134-v001: Secretariat impact assessment

[Adam Gosling]

Hi Jordi

Sorry, but I have a very close knowledge of these documents. They are not 
perfect (or even good). Everybody may not always understand them, or apply 
them. That is why I want to make sure people understand what it is they are 
changing from and what they are changing to.


> On 17 Feb 2020, at 1:30 pm, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ  
> wrote:
> 
> Hi Adam,
>  
> -> The first problem we have here is that those guidelines were developed 
> long time ago (2 decades or so), when we had many SIGs, and they were 
> developed by the SIG chairs, not the community. The 2nd issue is that the PDP 
> doesn’t mention anything about the guidelines.

Then propose that we add a reference to the Guidelines into the PDP. We can 
easily reach consensus and move on.

> This is not a mere editorial comment, it requires the community to accept 
> those guidelines in a modification (thru a policy proposal) of the PDP. The 
> third problem is that the PDP talks about “general agreement”, while the 
> guidelines talks about “consensus”. It is a matter of English wording? I 
> don’t know, but making it clear is good for everyone. Otherwise a newcomer 
> will not see in the meeting that we are following our own process (because we 
> aren’t!).
> -> If I recall correctly, when asked at least one of the co-chairs about what 
> they recognize as consensus, and I believe is the way they explain at the 
> beginning of each Policy SIG, they use the rough consensus definition and I’m 
> almost sure they even mention the IETF RFC.

The only reference Google finds to RFC7282 on the www.apnic.net or 
conference.apnic.net site is your presentation 
https://www.google.com.au/search?q=site:www.apnic.net+rfc7282&gbv=1&sei=gTxLXuOENLuX4-EPpp-I8Ac

I checked the slides presented at the beginning of APNIC 46 and 47. These 
explain Consensus = ‘general agreement’ and the concept of Minor and Major 
Objections. They also provide the URL for the PDP and SIG Guidelines.

Anybody that says APNIC Policy runs on ‘rough consensus’ has made an assumption 
or is using the phrase to make it easier for you to understand to idea of 
'general agreement'.


>  
> The RFC is similar, but fundamentally different. Changing this in the PDP is 
> not just a word tweak. It would result in a different approach from the 
> Chairs and participants. There is no concept of “Minor” and “Major” 
> objections in RFC 7282, for example.
> -> The RFC doesn’t provide the “operational” details, it is an informational 
> document, so nothing precludes the co-chairs for their assessment to still 
> make some “classification”, but again,  the guidelines aren’t part of the 
> PDP, unless we change it. I think they key here, and again, I believe is the 
> understanding of the chairs, if I got it correctly, we aren’t counting hands 
> or votes, but instead we declare consensus “when all the issues are 
> addressed, but not necessarily accommodated”, which is the “short” 
> description of the RFC.

My reading of the Guidelines and the practice I have noticed from past Chairs 
is that Minor Objections can be 'addressed but not necessarily accommodated'. 
For Major Objections the guidelines say "When this happens, the Chair should 
encourage the proponent and the community to continue discussion and develop a 
more widely accepted proposal to be presented at the following meeting.” 

I’m not saying that it is bad to change. I am just saying that we should be 
aware of what change we are making.

>> 
>> If there is no consensus on a proposal, the authors can decide to
>> withdraw it.
>> 
>  
> This removes discretion from the Chair (and the SIG), to abandon a proposal 
> if an Author repeatedly persists with the same unpopular idea. I think that’s 
> interesting and worth discussing if that’s what we want.
>  
>  
> -> Which I think is wrong. It is inappropriate (in my opinion) that (and it 
> may be again an English understanding) chairs can “abandon” on behalf of the 
> authors (I will understand “force withdrawal”). If there is an unpopular 
> idea, the community will not reach consensus. That’s it. Instead, chairs can 
> decide NOT allocate time in the agenda (if other newer proposals require more 
> time) for a proposal that is not getting consensus after several attempts, 
> but I think it has been demonstrated many times, that ideas that doesn’t work 
> on the first round, may work after 3-4 consecutive rounds (because the lack 
> of inputs in the list take much much much longer), and even sometimes, 
> authors may decide not to continue, and after some years come back and then 
> in works. This is normal, because all this is evolving all the time.

I see your point. I still disagree and would prefer the Chair’s to have some 
right to put a stop to unpopular ideas that are presented over and over. An 
earlier Chair started the three strikes rule, which seems to have become the 
norm. (He also used to reference the Tao of IETF in his slides)

This needs to be done carefully to stick t

Re: [sig-policy] prop-130-v003: Modification of transfer policies

[Adam Gosling]

Hi Jordi

Just personally. I did not mean to question your honesty or commitment to the 
community. I respect and appreciate your involvement in the PDP and wish other 
authors would put forward proposals I could comment on.

My observation was that your policy proposals often have an impact that is 
different from your stated purpose. I believe that is the case here. Allowing 
inter-RIR IPv6 transfers as an M&A request is not a barrier to transfer and has 
the same technical outcome anyway.

Some community members, whose English is not as good as yours, may not realise 
this.

The community has considered inter-RIR IPv6 transfers in the past and found 
they were not acceptable (at that time).

All policy is a cost / benefit consideration. Your stated benefit is that some 
resource holder may at some time in the future require this service and that at 
the time the counterpart RIR may have a policy that allows it and may have 
developed the technical ability to fulfil the request.

The cost is estimated by the Secretariat as 3 months development time. Perhaps 
the Secretariat could tell us what project will be cancelled if this proposal 
reaches consensus, because this development time will not be budgeted for 2021.

Your point that the RIR's and the community should develop solutions the 
community may want/need in future is quite valid. However, if that’s what you 
are proposing, then make that more transparent in your proposal.

If the community demonstrates that it accepts this cost / benefit trade-off, 
I’ll happily support the proposal.

Regards,

Adam



> On 1 Mar 2021, at 9:09 pm, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ  
> wrote:
> 
> Hi Adam,
> 
> I don't have the need to "disguise" any policy proposal. I'm a very honest 
> and transparent person, pity that you didn't noticed it, and if I believe 
> that IPv6 transfers outside of M&A's are required, I will submit that policy 
> in an open and transparent manner.
> 
> I've you believe that I'm trying to cheat the community, please say so 
> clearly and show evidences.
> 
> That said, I'm happy to work on IPv6 Inter-RIR transfers at a later stage, 
> but this is not the case with this proposal.
> 
> The policies not always have cases that *already happened*. The policies 
> should be there to prevent those cases being real needs and rejected. In 
> fact, if they happened there may several situations:
> 1) The organizations that need that read the policy manual, understood they 
> can't do it, and desisted.
> 2) They asked the secretariat.
> 3) They didn't read the policy/DBs update is managed (or not updated al all), 
> that nobody noticed it, especially in intra-RIR situations.
> 
> So the question here is, do we want to have oredered solutions for real 
> business situations, or we prefer to ignore them and even force them to 
> bypass the policies and hide the situation?
> 
> If we don't have policies up-front problems, then problems became a huge 
> issue, delay business, even may create losses. Some folks will just ignore 
> policies and go ahead. We all know it. Policies have been done *always* 
> up-front issues happening, when those possible issues where discovred, not 
> just after we discover the issue. Some times we have policies too late, 
> because nobody discovered the issue: that's unavoidable, because we don't 
> have the crystal ball.
> 
> I can't talk for the secretariat if there have been questions about this 
> previously, hopefully they can say. I know it happened in other regions.
> 
> By the way, my reading of the RIPE procedures is that they don't distinguish 
> if you do an M&A with all the resources or part of it, they may confirm it 
> (I'm sure they are in the list), if that's the case, and if already happened 
> or there have been questions on that.
> 
> Clearly the secretariat, and the same for other RIRs, should work on 
> developing whatever the community decides is good to have. And I think it is 
> much better to ensure that we have those developments in mind up-front of 
> having real problems, specially if they may be complex and require 
> coordination among different RIRs, instead of rushing when we have the 
> problems already in our back, right?
> 
> Regards,
> Jordi
> @jordipalet
> 
> 
> 
> El 1/3/21 3:31, "sig-policy-boun...@lists.apnic.net en nombre de 
> em...@adamgosling.com"  em...@adamgosling.com> escribió:
> 
>Hi all,
> 
>I oppose this proposal.
> 
>I am not convinced of the need for it. Are there examples of when an M&A 
>request was refused that would be permitted by this policy change?
> 
>This looks like an IPv6 Inter-RIR transfer proposal in disguise?
> 
>I don't think the APNIC Secretariat should be required to do the 
>development work to support IPv6 reverse DNS if there is no clear 
>indication that other regions will support IPv6 reverse DNS fragments in 
>the future.
> 
> 
>Adam
> 
> 
> 
> 
>On 2021-02-01 22:25, chku wrote:
>> Dear SIG members,
>> 
>> A new versio

[sig-policy] Thank you and goodbye

[Adam Gosling]

Hello all,

It is with great nostalgia that I am writing to let you all know that I will 
soon be unsubscribing from the Policy SIG list.

As I am no longer actively involved with the community, Secretariat operations, 
or with the policy documentation, I feel there is little I can responsibly add 
to the discussions.

With the successful implementation of props 135, 136, 139, and 140, it is clear 
the SIG is able to deal with the issues I highlighted in my report to the 
Secretariat last year. There is more work to be done, but others are better 
positioned to do this than I.

Since leaving APNIC in 2019 I have spent time traveling the country before 
retiring to a small, beach-side community in Far North Queensland. It is hot 
and humid, but the scenery is outstanding and the locals are friendly. I may do 
some work in the future, but for now I am enjoying my freedom.

I have so much respect for the many great people on this list who have 
contributed so much to the industry over the years.  I will miss being 
associated with you and sharing your passion. Good luck in your future 
endeavours.

Yours Sincerely,

Adam Gosling



> On 6 Dec 2021, at 12:10 pm, Srinivas (Sunny) Chendi  wrote:
> 
> __
> 
> End of Final editorial comments on draft policy document
> ___
> 
> The deadline for final editorial comments on draft policy document
> closed on 05 December 2021.
> 
> Sections 2.9, 2.10, 5.0, 5.2.1, 5.2.2, 5.3, 5.3.1, 5.3.2, 5.6, 5.6.1,
> and 10.1.4.1 of the document "APNIC Internet Number Resource Policies"
> has been updated, to implement policy proposals reaching consensus at
> APNIC 52, and published as APNIC-127 version 010.
> 
> https://www.apnic.net/community/policy/resources
> 
> The proposals are:
> 
> prop-135: Documentation
> https://www.apnic.net/community/policy/proposals/prop-135
> 
> prop-136: Registration Requirements
> https://www.apnic.net/community/policy/proposals/prop-136
> 
> prop-139: SOR not required
> https://www.apnic.net/community/policy/proposals/prop-139
> 
> prop-140: Update End-Site Definition
> https://www.apnic.net/community/policy/proposals/prop-140
> 
> 
> Guideline document:
> 
> prop-138: Restricting AS-ID in ROA, that reached consensus at APNIC 52
> to be a guideline is also implemented.
> 
> https://www.apnic.net/about-apnic/corporate-documents/documents/resource-guidelines/route-roa/
> 
> 
> Kind regards,
> Sunny
> 
> ___
> 
> Srinivas (Sunny) Chendi
> Senior Advisor - Policy and Community Development
> 
> Asia Pacific Network Information Centre (APNIC) |  Tel: +61 7 3858 3100
> PO Box 3646 South Brisbane, QLD 4101 Australia  |  Fax: +61 7 3858 3199
> 6 Cordelia Street, South Brisbane, QLD  | http://www.apnic.net
> ___
> 
> 
> *  sig-policy:  APNIC SIG on resource management policy   
> *
> ___
> sig-policy mailing list
> sig-policy@lists.apnic.net
> https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy

*  sig-policy:  APNIC SIG on resource management policy   *
___
sig-policy mailing list
sig-policy@lists.apnic.net
https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy