Hi Owen, On Mon, May 6, 2019 at 2:52 PM Owen DeLong <o...@delong.com> wrote:
> Aftab, I think you misread the proposed language. > > First, neither the current version nor the proposed version refer to > members at all, but to the actions of the APNIC, NIRs, and ISPs. The one > change I think should be made there is to replace ISPs with LIRs since not > all LIRs are technically ISPs, though that is certainly the most common > case. > I agree with your first point, I did misread the language slightly :) so no argument on that. But LIR will further confuse people as within APNIC region we don't use this term as in RIPE NCC to replace it with every member. > As to your “not limited to” or “services related to resources”, I fail to > see how that is not addressed by the proposed “…and related services”. > The whole argument in the last meeting started because it states "Address Resource" and whether this is the right platform to discuss something related to whois or any other topic. I am in favor of making it more generic rather putting specific words. > > I support the language proposed by Sumon whether or not he chooses to take > my NIR suggestion. > > Owen > >
* 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
