Orbit

Thank you very much Aftab and Owen for your constructive feedback. We will definitely consider those views.

If any one has any different perspective please jump in and share your thoughts.

Sincerely,

Sumon

On Mon, May 6, 2019 at 10:52 AM Owen DeLong owen@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.

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”.

I support the language proposed by Sumon whether or not he chooses to take my NIR suggestion.

Owen

On May 5, 2019, at 03:21 , Aftab Siddiqui aftab.siddiqui@gmail.com wrote:

Thanks Sumon bhai for the initiative,

<nitpik> Revised text suggest that all members/resource holders in APNIC are ISPs only, I would suggest to make it "APNIC and NIR members or resource holders in Asia Pacific region". Because not all members are resource holders.

Secondly, when you start mentioning topics in the charter then it may create confusion moving forward that only these topics can be covered so how about adding "not limited to" or "services related to resources" or something like that.

</nitpik>

Regards,

Aftab A. Siddiqui

On Sun, May 5, 2019 at 4:31 PM Sumon Ahmed Sabir sasabir@gmail.com wrote:

...

Dear Members,

In the last APNIC meeting in Daejoan there was a discussion that there is a perception That Policy SIG discusses only about “Address Policy”. On the other hand there is a understanding that Policy SIG covers a wider range of registry issues, RPKI or any other topics that requires a procedures and rules.

To avoid confusion and to bring clarity in the Policy Charter few proposals came in. That either we can change the Name of the Policy SIG to cover wider range or to amend the Policy-SIG Charter to bring clarity about the scope of Policy SIG.

After discussions chairs feels that we can make some changes in the SIG Charter to bring clarity:

Current SIG Charter https://www.apnic.net/community/policy/policy-sig/ says:

‘The Policy SIG charter is to develop policies and procedures which relate to the management and use of Internet address resources by APNIC, NIRs, and ISPs within the Asia Pacific region.”

And here is the possible changes proposed:

“The Policy SIG charter is to develop policies which relate to the management and use of Internet address resources by APNIC, NIRs, and ISPs within the Asia Pacific region. These include policies for resource allocation, recovery and transfer, and for resource registration within whois, reverse DNS, RPKI and related services.”

Please share your views, comments or suggestions in this regard.

Sincerely,

Sumon, Bertrand and Ching-Heng Chairs, Policy-SIG

•          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

Thanks Paul,

This addresses all my concerns.

Regards,

Aftab A. Siddiqui

On Fri, May 10, 2019 at 1:51 PM Paul Wilson pwilson@apnic.net wrote:

Dear Sumon and all,

To reduce confusion over ISP/LIR/etc terminology, perhaps the charter could be stated more simply, along these lines:

“The Policy SIG charter is to develop policies which relate to the management and use of Internet address resources within the Asia Pacific region. …”

My 2c, with best regards,

---

Paul Wilson, Director-General, APNIC dg@apnic.net http://www.apnic.net @apnicdg

On 9 May 2019, at 19:53, Sumon Ahmed Sabir wrote:

Thank you very much Aftab and Owen for your constructive feedback. We will definitely consider those views.

If any one has any different perspective please jump in and share your thoughts.

Sincerely,

Sumon

On Mon, May 6, 2019 at 10:52 AM Owen DeLong owen@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.

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”.

I support the language proposed by Sumon whether or not he chooses to take my NIR suggestion.

Owen

On May 5, 2019, at 03:21 , Aftab Siddiqui aftab.siddiqui@gmail.com wrote:

Thanks Sumon bhai for the initiative,

<nitpik> Revised text suggest that all members/resource holders in APNIC are ISPs only, I would suggest to make it "APNIC and NIR members or resource holders in Asia Pacific region". Because not all members are resource holders.

Secondly, when you start mentioning topics in the charter then it may create confusion moving forward that only these topics can be covered so how about adding "not limited to" or "services related to resources" or something like that.

</nitpik>

Regards,

Aftab A. Siddiqui

On Sun, May 5, 2019 at 4:31 PM Sumon Ahmed Sabir sasabir@gmail.com wrote:

...

Dear Members,

In the last APNIC meeting in Daejoan there was a discussion that there is a perception That Policy SIG discusses only about “Address Policy”. On the other hand there is a understanding that Policy SIG covers a wider range of registry issues, RPKI or any other topics that requires a procedures and rules.

To avoid confusion and to bring clarity in the Policy Charter few proposals came in. That either we can change the Name of the Policy SIG to cover wider range or to amend the Policy-SIG Charter to bring clarity about the scope of Policy SIG.

After discussions chairs feels that we can make some changes in the SIG Charter to bring clarity:

Current SIG Charter https://www.apnic.net/community/policy/policy-sig/ says:

‘The Policy SIG charter is to develop policies and procedures which relate to the management and use of Internet address resources by APNIC, NIRs, and ISPs within the Asia Pacific region.”

And here is the possible changes proposed:

“The Policy SIG charter is to develop policies which relate to the management and use of Internet address resources by APNIC, NIRs, and ISPs within the Asia Pacific region. These include policies for resource allocation, recovery and transfer, and for resource registration within whois, reverse DNS, RPKI and related services.”

Please share your views, comments or suggestions in this regard.

Sincerely,

Sumon, Bertrand and Ching-Heng Chairs, Policy-SIG

•          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

• 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

Hi Paul, all,

I feel that this proposed charter is not good enough.

Let me try to explain it.

In RIPE we have a WG for every kind of “topic”, for example, addressing, abuse, routing, etc. The PDP updates are discussed in the “plenary” (we have recent small update and this was not really clear).

However, in all the other regions, all the “topics” are within the same “unique” WG. There is an exception for ARIN (if I’m correct) where the PDP is not part of this “policy discussion group”.

The proposed charter, may fail to cover for example the PDP update, but I feel there are many other topics that may be in the future in the same situation.

So why not something more generic in the line of:

“The Policy SIG charter is to develop policies which relate to the management and use of Internet address resources within the Asia Pacific region, including any topics under the scope of the Policy manual or updates of it”.

Regards,

Jordi

El 9/5/19 23:51, "Paul Wilson" <sig-policy-bounces@lists.apnic.net en nombre de pwilson@apnic.net> escribió:

Dear Sumon and all,

To reduce confusion over ISP/LIR/etc terminology, perhaps the charter could be stated more simply, along these lines:

“The Policy SIG charter is to develop policies which relate to the management and use of Internet address resources within the Asia Pacific region. …”

My 2c, with best regards,

________________________________________________________________________ Paul Wilson, Director-General, APNIC dg@apnic.net http://www.apnic.net @apnicdg

On 9 May 2019, at 19:53, Sumon Ahmed Sabir wrote:

Thank you very much Aftab and Owen for your constructive feedback. We will definitely consider those views.

If any one has any different perspective please jump in and share your thoughts.

Sincerely,

Sumon

On Mon, May 6, 2019 at 10:52 AM Owen DeLong owen@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.

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”.

I support the language proposed by Sumon whether or not he chooses to take my NIR suggestion.

Owen

On May 5, 2019, at 03:21 , Aftab Siddiqui aftab.siddiqui@gmail.com wrote:

Thanks Sumon bhai for the initiative,

<nitpik>

Revised text suggest that all members/resource holders in APNIC are ISPs only, I would suggest to make it "APNIC and NIR members or resource holders in Asia Pacific region". Because not all members are resource holders.

Secondly, when you start mentioning topics in the charter then it may create confusion moving forward that only these topics can be covered so how about adding "not limited to" or "services related to resources" or something like that.

</nitpik>

Regards,

Aftab A. Siddiqui

On Sun, May 5, 2019 at 4:31 PM Sumon Ahmed Sabir sasabir@gmail.com wrote:

Dear Members,

In the last APNIC meeting in Daejoan there was a discussion that there is a perception

That Policy SIG discusses only about “Address Policy”. On the other hand there is a understanding

that Policy SIG covers a wider range of registry issues, RPKI or any other topics that requires a

procedures and rules.

To avoid confusion and to bring clarity in the Policy Charter few proposals came in. That either we can change the Name of the Policy SIG to cover wider range or to amend the Policy-SIG Charter to bring clarity about the scope of Policy SIG.

After discussions chairs feels that we can make some changes in the SIG Charter to bring clarity:

Current SIG Charter https://www.apnic.net/community/policy/policy-sig/ says:

‘The Policy SIG charter is to develop policies and procedures which relate to the management and

use of Internet address resources by APNIC, NIRs, and ISPs within the Asia Pacific region.”

And here is the possible changes proposed:

“The Policy SIG charter is to develop policies which relate to the management and use of Internet address resources by APNIC, NIRs, and ISPs within the Asia Pacific region. These include policies for resource allocation, recovery and transfer, and for resource registration within whois, reverse DNS, RPKI and related services.”

Please share your views, comments or suggestions in this regard.

Sincerely,

Sumon, Bertrand and Ching-Heng

Chairs, Policy-SIG

* 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

* 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

********************************************** IPv4 is over Are you ready for the new Internet ? http://www.theipv6company.com The IPv6 Company

This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the exclusive use of the individual(s) named above and further non-explicilty authorized disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited and will be considered a criminal offense. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited, will be considered a criminal offense, so you must reply to the original sender to inform about this communication and delete it.

Just to make it clear. Do you believe that the PDP update is out of the scope?

I think that the PDP is not related to resource management, but the “self-management” of the way the community discusses the resource management and agree on the way it should be managed.

And for me as more we restrict the wording, more risks to wrongly get things that today are in-scope, to be left out.

Regards,

Jordi

El 11/5/19 1:27, "Owen DeLong" owen@delong.com escribió:

That’s not more generic, Jordi, it’s just more words.

There’s nothing within the scope of the policy manual or its updates that doesn’t relate to the management and use of internet address resources.

Owen

On May 10, 2019, at 09:30 , JORDI PALET MARTINEZ jordi.palet@consulintel.es wrote:

Hi Paul, all,

I feel that this proposed charter is not good enough.

Let me try to explain it.

In RIPE we have a WG for every kind of “topic”, for example, addressing, abuse, routing, etc. The PDP updates are discussed in the “plenary” (we have recent small update and this was not really clear).

However, in all the other regions, all the “topics” are within the same “unique” WG. There is an exception for ARIN (if I’m correct) where the PDP is not part of this “policy discussion group”.

The proposed charter, may fail to cover for example the PDP update, but I feel there are many other topics that may be in the future in the same situation.

So why not something more generic in the line of:

“The Policy SIG charter is to develop policies which relate to the management and use of Internet address resources within the Asia Pacific region, including any topics under the scope of the Policy manual or updates of it”.

Regards,

Jordi

El 9/5/19 23:51, "Paul Wilson" <sig-policy-bounces@lists.apnic.net en nombre de pwilson@apnic.net> escribió:

Dear Sumon and all,

To reduce confusion over ISP/LIR/etc terminology, perhaps the charter could be stated more simply, along these lines:

“The Policy SIG charter is to develop policies which relate to the management and use of Internet address resources within the Asia Pacific region. …”

My 2c, with best regards,

________________________________________________________________________ Paul Wilson, Director-General, APNIC dg@apnic.net http://www.apnic.net @apnicdg

On 9 May 2019, at 19:53, Sumon Ahmed Sabir wrote:

Thank you very much Aftab and Owen for your constructive feedback. We will definitely consider those views.

If any one has any different perspective please jump in and share your thoughts.

Sincerely,

Sumon

On Mon, May 6, 2019 at 10:52 AM Owen DeLong owen@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.

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”.

I support the language proposed by Sumon whether or not he chooses to take my NIR suggestion.

Owen

On May 5, 2019, at 03:21 , Aftab Siddiqui aftab.siddiqui@gmail.com wrote:

Thanks Sumon bhai for the initiative,

<nitpik>

Revised text suggest that all members/resource holders in APNIC are ISPs only, I would suggest to make it "APNIC and NIR members or resource holders in Asia Pacific region". Because not all members are resource holders.

Secondly, when you start mentioning topics in the charter then it may create confusion moving forward that only these topics can be covered so how about adding "not limited to" or "services related to resources" or something like that.

</nitpik>

Regards,

Aftab A. Siddiqui

On Sun, May 5, 2019 at 4:31 PM Sumon Ahmed Sabir sasabir@gmail.com wrote:

Dear Members,

In the last APNIC meeting in Daejoan there was a discussion that there is a perception

That Policy SIG discusses only about “Address Policy”. On the other hand there is a understanding

that Policy SIG covers a wider range of registry issues, RPKI or any other topics that requires a

procedures and rules.

To avoid confusion and to bring clarity in the Policy Charter few proposals came in. That either we can change the Name of the Policy SIG to cover wider range or to amend the Policy-SIG Charter to bring clarity about the scope of Policy SIG.

After discussions chairs feels that we can make some changes in the SIG Charter to bring clarity:

Current SIG Charter https://www.apnic.net/community/policy/policy-sig/ says:

‘The Policy SIG charter is to develop policies and procedures which relate to the management and

use of Internet address resources by APNIC, NIRs, and ISPs within the Asia Pacific region.”

And here is the possible changes proposed:

“The Policy SIG charter is to develop policies which relate to the management and use of Internet address resources by APNIC, NIRs, and ISPs within the Asia Pacific region. These include policies for resource allocation, recovery and transfer, and for resource registration within whois, reverse DNS, RPKI and related services.”

Please share your views, comments or suggestions in this regard.

Sincerely,

Sumon, Bertrand and Ching-Heng

Chairs, Policy-SIG

* 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

* 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

********************************************** IPv4 is over Are you ready for the new Internet ? http://www.theipv6company.com The IPv6 Company

This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the exclusive use of the individual(s) named above and further non-explicilty authorized disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited and will be considered a criminal offense. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited, will be considered a criminal offense, so you must reply to the original sender to inform about this communication and delete it.

* 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

********************************************** IPv4 is over Are you ready for the new Internet ? http://www.theipv6company.com The IPv6 Company

This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the exclusive use of the individual(s) named above and further non-explicilty authorized disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited and will be considered a criminal offense. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited, will be considered a criminal offense, so you must reply to the original sender to inform about this communication and delete it.

I’m not interpreting the PDP as part of that, however, I’m fine if the staff confirms that it is in-scope according to their understanding.

We have a recent experience of policies (resource hijacking is a policy violation) being declared out-of-scope in ARIN by the AC. I know the PDP is very different, but let’s make sure we don’t have this situation replicated in other APNIC.

Regards,

Jordi

El 11/5/19 18:05, "Owen DeLong" owen@delong.com escribió:

On May 11, 2019, at 06:13, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ jordi.palet@consulintel.es wrote:

Just to make it clear. Do you believe that the PDP update is out of the scope?

No

I think that the PDP is not related to resource management, but the “self-management” of the way the community discusses the resource management and agree on the way it should be managed.

The pdp is absolutely related to the management of resources in that it is the process by which we develop those policies.

And for me as more we restrict the wording, more risks to wrongly get things that today are in-scope, to be left out.

Agreed. However, in my view, your proposal is not less restrictive, just more verbose.

Owen

Regards,

Jordi

El 11/5/19 1:27, "Owen DeLong" owen@delong.com escribió:

That’s not more generic, Jordi, it’s just more words.

There’s nothing within the scope of the policy manual or its updates that doesn’t relate to the management and use of internet address resources.

Owen

On May 10, 2019, at 09:30 , JORDI PALET MARTINEZ jordi.palet@consulintel.es wrote:

Hi Paul, all,

I feel that this proposed charter is not good enough.

Let me try to explain it.

In RIPE we have a WG for every kind of “topic”, for example, addressing, abuse, routing, etc. The PDP updates are discussed in the “plenary” (we have recent small update and this was not really clear).

However, in all the other regions, all the “topics” are within the same “unique” WG. There is an exception for ARIN (if I’m correct) where the PDP is not part of this “policy discussion group”.

The proposed charter, may fail to cover for example the PDP update, but I feel there are many other topics that may be in the future in the same situation.

So why not something more generic in the line of:

“The Policy SIG charter is to develop policies which relate to the management and use of Internet address resources within the Asia Pacific region, including any topics under the scope of the Policy manual or updates of it”.

Regards,

Jordi

El 9/5/19 23:51, "Paul Wilson" <sig-policy-bounces@lists.apnic.net en nombre de pwilson@apnic.net> escribió:

Dear Sumon and all,

To reduce confusion over ISP/LIR/etc terminology, perhaps the charter could be stated more simply, along these lines:

“The Policy SIG charter is to develop policies which relate to the management and use of Internet address resources within the Asia Pacific region. …”

My 2c, with best regards,

________________________________________________________________________ Paul Wilson, Director-General, APNIC dg@apnic.net http://www.apnic.net @apnicdg

On 9 May 2019, at 19:53, Sumon Ahmed Sabir wrote:

Thank you very much Aftab and Owen for your constructive feedback. We will definitely consider those views.

If any one has any different perspective please jump in and share your thoughts.

Sincerely,

Sumon

On Mon, May 6, 2019 at 10:52 AM Owen DeLong owen@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.

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”.

I support the language proposed by Sumon whether or not he chooses to take my NIR suggestion.

Owen

On May 5, 2019, at 03:21 , Aftab Siddiqui aftab.siddiqui@gmail.com wrote:

Thanks Sumon bhai for the initiative,

<nitpik>

Revised text suggest that all members/resource holders in APNIC are ISPs only, I would suggest to make it "APNIC and NIR members or resource holders in Asia Pacific region". Because not all members are resource holders.

Secondly, when you start mentioning topics in the charter then it may create confusion moving forward that only these topics can be covered so how about adding "not limited to" or "services related to resources" or something like that.

</nitpik>

Regards,

Aftab A. Siddiqui

On Sun, May 5, 2019 at 4:31 PM Sumon Ahmed Sabir sasabir@gmail.com wrote:

Dear Members,

In the last APNIC meeting in Daejoan there was a discussion that there is a perception

That Policy SIG discusses only about “Address Policy”. On the other hand there is a understanding

that Policy SIG covers a wider range of registry issues, RPKI or any other topics that requires a

procedures and rules.

To avoid confusion and to bring clarity in the Policy Charter few proposals came in. That either we can change the Name of the Policy SIG to cover wider range or to amend the Policy-SIG Charter to bring clarity about the scope of Policy SIG.

After discussions chairs feels that we can make some changes in the SIG Charter to bring clarity:

Current SIG Charter https://www.apnic.net/community/policy/policy-sig/ says:

‘The Policy SIG charter is to develop policies and procedures which relate to the management and

use of Internet address resources by APNIC, NIRs, and ISPs within the Asia Pacific region.”

And here is the possible changes proposed:

“The Policy SIG charter is to develop policies which relate to the management and use of Internet address resources by APNIC, NIRs, and ISPs within the Asia Pacific region. These include policies for resource allocation, recovery and transfer, and for resource registration within whois, reverse DNS, RPKI and related services.”

Please share your views, comments or suggestions in this regard.

Sincerely,

Sumon, Bertrand and Ching-Heng

Chairs, Policy-SIG

* 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

* 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

********************************************** IPv4 is over Are you ready for the new Internet ? http://www.theipv6company.com The IPv6 Company

This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the exclusive use of the individual(s) named above and further non-explicilty authorized disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited and will be considered a criminal offense. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited, will be considered a criminal offense, so you must reply to the original sender to inform about this communication and delete it.

* 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

********************************************** IPv4 is over Are you ready for the new Internet ? http://www.theipv6company.com The IPv6 Company

This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the exclusive use of the individual(s) named above and further non-explicilty authorized disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited and will be considered a criminal offense. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited, will be considered a criminal offense, so you must reply to the original sender to inform about this communication and delete it.

********************************************** IPv4 is over Are you ready for the new Internet ? http://www.theipv6company.com The IPv6 Company

This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the exclusive use of the individual(s) named above and further non-explicilty authorized disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited and will be considered a criminal offense. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited, will be considered a criminal offense, so you must reply to the original sender to inform about this communication and delete it.

My own opinion only and not speaking on behalf of or for the AC...

In the case of ARIN, your proposal was not to modify the PDP and addressed primarily the detailed operational practices of ARIN staff. It did not address the administration and registration of number resources, but rather the behavior of individuals external to ARIN with regard to how they configure their routers.

In ARIN, the PDP is under the control of the board and is not modifiable via the PDP.

I see no connection between your efforts here and your out of scope proposal there.

Owen

On May 14, 2019, at 06:15, Srinivas Chendi sunny@apnic.net wrote:

Hi Jordi,

Thanks for your contribution to this discussion so far.

As per the SIG Guidelines, Policy SIG Chair is responsible to accept or reject a proposal and to check if it is in scope of the active SIG charter.

Please refer to the section 2.4 of SIG Guidelines https://www.apnic.net/community/participate/sigs/sig-guidelines/

<snip> Accept or reject proposals for discussion at the forthcoming SIG (and suggest an alternative forum if the topic is not relevant to that particular SIG) [1]

[1] The Chair may decide that a proposal is not suitable for discussion at the forthcoming SIG session if:

The proposal is out of scope for the SIG
The proposal is insufficiently developed to be the basis for a 

useful discussion The agenda has already been filled by topics of greater priority

</snip>

Regards Sunny

...

On 14/05/2019 8:11 pm, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ wrote: I’m not interpreting the PDP as part of that, however, I’m fine if the staff confirms that it is in-scope according to their understanding.

We have a recent experience of policies (resource hijacking is a policy violation) being declared out-of-scope in ARIN by the AC. I know the PDP is very different, but let’s make sure we don’t have this situation replicated in other APNIC.

Regards,

Jordi

El 11/5/19 18:05, "Owen DeLong" <owen@delong.com mailto:owen@delong.com> escribió:

On May 11, 2019, at 06:13, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ <jordi.palet@consulintel.es mailto:jordi.palet@consulintel.es> wrote:

Just to make it clear. Do you believe that the PDP update is out of the scope?

No

I think that the PDP is not related to resource management, but the “self-management” of the way the community discusses the resource management and agree on the way it should be managed.

The pdp is absolutely related to the management of resources in that it is the process by which we develop those policies.

And for me as more we restrict the wording, more risks to wrongly get things that today are in-scope, to be left out.

Agreed. However, in my view, your proposal is not less restrictive, just more verbose.

Owen

Regards,

Jordi

El 11/5/19 1:27, "Owen DeLong" <owen@delong.com mailto:owen@delong.com> escribió:

That’s not more generic, Jordi, it’s just more words.

There’s nothing within the scope of the policy manual or its updates that doesn’t relate to the management and use of internet address resources.

Owen

   On May 10, 2019, at 09:30 , JORDI PALET MARTINEZ
   <jordi.palet@consulintel.es <mailto:jordi.palet@consulintel.es>>
   wrote:

   Hi Paul, all,

   I feel that this proposed charter is not good enough.

   Let me try to explain it.

   In RIPE we have a WG for every kind of “topic”, for example,
   addressing, abuse, routing, etc. The PDP updates are discussed
   in the “plenary” (we have recent small update and this was not
   really clear).

   However, in all the other regions, all the “topics” are within
   the same “unique” WG. There is an exception for ARIN (if I’m
   correct) where the PDP is not part of this “policy discussion
   group”.

   The proposed charter, may fail to cover for example the PDP
   update, but I feel there are many other topics that may be in
   the future in the same situation.

   So why not something more generic in the line of:

   “The Policy SIG charter is to develop policies which relate to
   the management and use of Internet address resources within the
   Asia Pacific region, including any topics under the scope of the
   Policy manual or updates of it”.


   Regards,

   Jordi

   El 9/5/19 23:51, "Paul Wilson"
   <sig-policy-bounces@lists.apnic.net
   <mailto:sig-policy-bounces@lists.apnic.net>en nombre
   depwilson@apnic.net <mailto:pwilson@apnic.net>> escribió:

   Dear Sumon and all,

   To reduce confusion over ISP/LIR/etc terminology, perhaps the
   charter could be stated more simply, along these lines:

   “The Policy SIG charter is to develop policies which relate to
   the management and use of Internet address resources within the
   Asia Pacific region. …”

   My 2c, with best regards,

   ________________________________________________________________________
   Paul Wilson, Director-General, APNIC dg@apnic.net
   <mailto:dg@apnic.net>
   http://www.apnic.net <http://www.apnic.net/>@apnicdg

   On 9 May 2019, at 19:53, Sumon Ahmed Sabir wrote:

       Thank you very much Aftab and Owen for your constructive
       feedback. We will definitely consider those views.

       If any one has any different perspective please jump in and
       share your thoughts.

       Sincerely,

       Sumon

       On Mon, May 6, 2019 at 10:52 AM Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com
       <mailto:owen@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.

           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”.

           I support the language proposed by Sumon whether or not
           he chooses to take my NIR suggestion.

           Owen





               On May 5, 2019, at 03:21 , Aftab Siddiqui
               <aftab.siddiqui@gmail.com
               <mailto:aftab.siddiqui@gmail.com>> wrote:

               Thanks Sumon bhai for the initiative,

               <nitpik>

               Revised text suggest that all members/resource
               holders in APNIC are ISPs only, I would suggest to
               make it "APNIC and NIR members or resource holders
               in Asia Pacific region". Because not all members are
               resource holders.

               Secondly, when you start mentioning topics in the
               charter then it may create confusion moving forward
               that only these topics can be covered so how about
               adding "not limited to" or "services related to
               resources" or something like that.

               </nitpik>

               Regards,

               Aftab A. Siddiqui

               On Sun, May 5, 2019 at 4:31 PM Sumon Ahmed Sabir
               <sasabir@gmail.com <mailto:sasabir@gmail.com>> wrote:

                   Dear Members,





                   In the last APNIC meeting in Daejoan there was a
                   discussion that there is a perception

                   That Policy SIG discusses only about “Address
                   Policy”. On the other hand there is a understanding

                   that Policy SIG covers a wider range of registry
                   issues, RPKI or any other topics that requires a

                   procedures and rules.





                   To avoid confusion and to bring clarity in the
                   Policy Charter few proposals came in. That
                   either we can change the Name of the Policy SIG
                   to cover wider range or to amend the Policy-SIG
                   Charter to bring clarity about the scope of
                   Policy SIG.





                   After discussions chairs feels that we can make
                   some changes in the SIG Charter to bring clarity:









                   Current SIG Charter
                   https://www.apnic.net/community/policy/policy-sig/ says:









                   ‘The Policy SIG charter is to develop policies
                   and procedures which relate to the management and

                   use of Internet address resources by APNIC,
                   NIRs, and ISPs within the Asia Pacific region.”





                   And here is the possible changes proposed:





                     “The Policy SIG charter is to develop policies
                   which relate to the management and use of
                   Internet  address resources by APNIC, NIRs,
                   and ISPs within the Asia Pacific region.  These
                   include policies for resource allocation,
                   recovery and transfer, and for resource
                   registration within whois, reverse DNS, RPKI and
                   related services.”





                   Please share your views, comments or suggestions
                   in this regard.









                   Sincerely,





                   Sumon, Bertrand and Ching-Heng

                   Chairs, Policy-SIG

                   *              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
               <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 <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 listsig-policy@lists.apnic.net
   <mailto:sig-policy@lists.apnic.net>https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy


   **********************************************
   IPv4 is over
   Are you ready for the new Internet ?
   http://www.theipv6company.com <http://www.theipv6company.com/>
   The IPv6 Company

   This electronic message contains information which may be
   privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be
   for the exclusive use of the individual(s) named above and
   further non-explicilty authorized disclosure, copying,
   distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if
   partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited and
   will be considered a criminal offense. If you are not the
   intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying,
   distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if
   partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited,
   will be considered a criminal offense, so you must reply to the
   original sender to inform about this communication and delete it.

   *              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

---

IPv4 is over Are you ready for the new Internet ? http://www.theipv6company.com The IPv6 Company

This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the exclusive use of the individual(s) named above and further non-explicilty authorized disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited and will be considered a criminal offense. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited, will be considered a criminal offense, so you must reply to the original sender to inform about this communication and delete it.

---

IPv4 is over Are you ready for the new Internet ? http://www.theipv6company.com The IPv6 Company

This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the exclusive use of the individual(s) named above and further non-explicilty authorized disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited and will be considered a criminal offense. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited, will be considered a criminal offense, so you must reply to the original sender to inform about this communication and delete it.

•          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

Hi Aftab,

If you don’t get my emails in the list, it may be due to DMARC. Email servers (such as mine), using DMARC, may get rejected by clients of mailing lists if the mailing list is keeping my email instead of using the list one.

It may happen that the APNIC list is not correctly configured?

In all the other RIRs and IETF, this has been “fixed” in mailman long time ago.

Regards,

Jordi

El 14/5/19 16:09, "Aftab Siddiqui" aftab.siddiqui@gmail.com escribió:

Hi Jordi,

You can always bring any topic to apnic-talk mailing list for discussion. Not everything has to be discussed on policy-sig mailing list.

And somehow I’m not receiving your emails sent to the policy-sig mailing list :)

On Tue, 14 May 2019 at 11:15 pm, Srinivas Chendi sunny@apnic.net wrote:

Hi Jordi,

Thanks for your contribution to this discussion so far.

As per the SIG Guidelines, Policy SIG Chair is responsible to accept or reject a proposal and to check if it is in scope of the active SIG charter.

Please refer to the section 2.4 of SIG Guidelines https://www.apnic.net/community/participate/sigs/sig-guidelines/

<snip> Accept or reject proposals for discussion at the forthcoming SIG (and suggest an alternative forum if the topic is not relevant to that particular SIG) [1]

[1] The Chair may decide that a proposal is not suitable for discussion at the forthcoming SIG session if:

The proposal is out of scope for the SIG The proposal is insufficiently developed to be the basis for a useful discussion The agenda has already been filled by topics of greater priority </snip>

Regards Sunny

On 14/05/2019 8:11 pm, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ wrote:

I’m not interpreting the PDP as part of that, however, I’m fine if the staff confirms that it is in-scope according to their understanding.

We have a recent experience of policies (resource hijacking is a policy violation) being declared out-of-scope in ARIN by the AC. I know the PDP is very different, but let’s make sure we don’t have this situation replicated in other APNIC.

Regards,

Jordi

El 11/5/19 18:05, "Owen DeLong" <owen@delong.com mailto:owen@delong.com> escribió:

On May 11, 2019, at 06:13, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ <jordi.palet@consulintel.es mailto:jordi.palet@consulintel.es> wrote:

Just to make it clear. Do you believe that the PDP update is out of
the scope?

No

I think that the PDP is not related to resource management, but the
“self-management” of the way the community discusses the resource
management and agree on the way it should be managed.

The pdp is absolutely related to the management of resources in that it is the process by which we develop those policies.

And for me as more we restrict the wording, more risks to wrongly
get things that today are in-scope, to be left out.

Agreed. However, in my view, your proposal is not less restrictive, just more verbose.

Owen

Regards,

Jordi

El 11/5/19 1:27, "Owen DeLong" <owen@delong.com
<mailto:owen@delong.com>> escribió:

That’s not more generic, Jordi, it’s just more words.

There’s nothing within the scope of the policy manual or its updates
that doesn’t relate to the management and use of internet address
resources.

Owen




    On May 10, 2019, at 09:30 , JORDI PALET MARTINEZ
    <jordi.palet@consulintel.es <mailto:jordi.palet@consulintel.es>>
    wrote:

    Hi Paul, all,

    I feel that this proposed charter is not good enough.

    Let me try to explain it.

    In RIPE we have a WG for every kind of “topic”, for example,
    addressing, abuse, routing, etc. The PDP updates are discussed
    in the “plenary” (we have recent small update and this was not
    really clear).

    However, in all the other regions, all the “topics” are within
    the same “unique” WG. There is an exception for ARIN (if I’m
    correct) where the PDP is not part of this “policy discussion
    group”.

    The proposed charter, may fail to cover for example the PDP
    update, but I feel there are many other topics that may be in
    the future in the same situation.

    So why not something more generic in the line of:

    “The Policy SIG charter is to develop policies which relate to
    the management and use of Internet address resources within the
    Asia Pacific region, including any topics under the scope of the
    Policy manual or updates of it”.


    Regards,

    Jordi

    El 9/5/19 23:51, "Paul Wilson"
    <sig-policy-bounces@lists.apnic.net
    <mailto:sig-policy-bounces@lists.apnic.net>en nombre
    depwilson@apnic.net <mailto:pwilson@apnic.net>> escribió:

    Dear Sumon and all,

    To reduce confusion over ISP/LIR/etc terminology, perhaps the
    charter could be stated more simply, along these lines:

    “The Policy SIG charter is to develop policies which relate to
    the management and use of Internet address resources within the
    Asia Pacific region. …”

    My 2c, with best regards,

    ________________________________________________________________________
    Paul Wilson, Director-General, APNIC dg@apnic.net
    <mailto:dg@apnic.net>
    http://www.apnic.net <http://www.apnic.net/>@apnicdg

    On 9 May 2019, at 19:53, Sumon Ahmed Sabir wrote:

        Thank you very much Aftab and Owen for your constructive
        feedback. We will definitely consider those views.

        If any one has any different perspective please jump in and
        share your thoughts.

        Sincerely,

        Sumon

        On Mon, May 6, 2019 at 10:52 AM Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com
        <mailto:owen@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.

            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”.

            I support the language proposed by Sumon whether or not
            he chooses to take my NIR suggestion.

            Owen





                On May 5, 2019, at 03:21 , Aftab Siddiqui
                <aftab.siddiqui@gmail.com
                <mailto:aftab.siddiqui@gmail.com>> wrote:

                Thanks Sumon bhai for the initiative,

                <nitpik>

                Revised text suggest that all members/resource
                holders in APNIC are ISPs only, I would suggest to
                make it "APNIC and NIR members or resource holders
                in Asia Pacific region". Because not all members are
                resource holders.

                Secondly, when you start mentioning topics in the
                charter then it may create confusion moving forward
                that only these topics can be covered so how about
                adding "not limited to" or "services related to
                resources" or something like that.

                </nitpik>

                Regards,

                Aftab A. Siddiqui

                On Sun, May 5, 2019 at 4:31 PM Sumon Ahmed Sabir
                <sasabir@gmail.com <mailto:sasabir@gmail.com>> wrote:

                    Dear Members,





                    In the last APNIC meeting in Daejoan there was a
                    discussion that there is a perception

                    That Policy SIG discusses only about “Address
                    Policy”. On the other hand there is a understanding

                    that Policy SIG covers a wider range of registry
                    issues, RPKI or any other topics that requires a

                    procedures and rules.





                    To avoid confusion and to bring clarity in the
                    Policy Charter few proposals came in. That
                    either we can change the Name of the Policy SIG
                    to cover wider range or to amend the Policy-SIG
                    Charter to bring clarity about the scope of
                    Policy SIG.





                    After discussions chairs feels that we can make
                    some changes in the SIG Charter to bring clarity:









                    Current SIG Charter
                    https://www.apnic.net/community/policy/policy-sig/ says:









                    ‘The Policy SIG charter is to develop policies
                    and procedures which relate to the management and

                    use of Internet address resources by APNIC,
                    NIRs, and ISPs within the Asia Pacific region.”





                    And here is the possible changes proposed:





                      “The Policy SIG charter is to develop policies
                    which relate to the management and use of
                    Internet  address resources by APNIC, NIRs,
                    and ISPs within the Asia Pacific region.  These
                    include policies for resource allocation,
                    recovery and transfer, and for resource
                    registration within whois, reverse DNS, RPKI and
                    related services.”





                    Please share your views, comments or suggestions
                    in this regard.









                    Sincerely,





                    Sumon, Bertrand and Ching-Heng

                    Chairs, Policy-SIG

                    *              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
                <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 <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 listsig-policy@lists.apnic.net
    <mailto:sig-policy@lists.apnic.net>https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy


    **********************************************
    IPv4 is over
    Are you ready for the new Internet ?
    http://www.theipv6company.com <http://www.theipv6company.com/>
    The IPv6 Company

    This electronic message contains information which may be
    privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be
    for the exclusive use of the individual(s) named above and
    further non-explicilty authorized disclosure, copying,
    distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if
    partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited and
    will be considered a criminal offense. If you are not the
    intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying,
    distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if
    partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited,
    will be considered a criminal offense, so you must reply to the
    original sender to inform about this communication and delete it.

    *              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


**********************************************
IPv4 is over
Are you ready for the new Internet ?
http://www.theipv6company.com
The IPv6 Company

This electronic message contains information which may be privileged
or confidential. The information is intended to be for the exclusive
use of the individual(s) named above and further non-explicilty
authorized disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents
of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is
strictly prohibited and will be considered a criminal offense. If
you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure,
copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information,
even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited,
will be considered a criminal offense, so you must reply to the
original sender to inform about this communication and delete it.

---

IPv4 is over Are you ready for the new Internet ? http://www.theipv6company.com The IPv6 Company

This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the exclusive use of the individual(s) named above and further non-explicilty authorized disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited and will be considered a criminal offense. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited, will be considered a criminal offense, so you must reply to the original sender to inform about this communication and delete it.

•          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

Hi Jordi,

You're right! We haven't been able to enable DMARC on our mailman due to a number of dependencies and risks but we are looking into migrating to a new server soon.

Regards Sunny

On 15/05/2019 1:19 am, Srinivas Chendi wrote:

Thanks Jordi.

FYI, consulting with our technical team about this.

Regards Sunny

On 15/05/2019 12:20 am, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ wrote:

Hi Aftab,

If you don’t get my emails in the list, it may be due to DMARC. Email servers (such as mine), using DMARC, may get rejected by clients of mailing lists if the mailing list is keeping my email instead of using the list one.

It may happen that the APNIC list is not correctly configured?

In all the other RIRs and IETF, this has been “fixed” in mailman long time ago.

Regards,

Jordi

El 14/5/19 16:09, "Aftab Siddiqui" <aftab.siddiqui@gmail.commailto:aftab.siddiqui@gmail.com mailto:aftab.siddiqui@gmail.commailto:aftab.siddiqui@gmail.com> escribió:

Hi Jordi,

You can always bring any topic to apnic-talk mailing list for discussion. Not everything has to be discussed on policy-sig mailing list.

And somehow I’m not receiving your emails sent to the policy-sig mailing list :)

On Tue, 14 May 2019 at 11:15 pm, Srinivas Chendi <sunny@apnic.netmailto:sunny@apnic.net mailto:sunny@apnic.netmailto:sunny@apnic.net> wrote:

Hi Jordi,

Thanks for your contribution to this discussion so far.

As per the SIG Guidelines, Policy SIG Chair is responsible to accept or reject a proposal and to check if it is in scope of the active SIG charter.

Please refer to the section 2.4 of SIG Guidelines https://www.apnic.net/community/participate/sigs/sig-guidelines/

<snip> Accept or reject proposals for discussion at the forthcoming SIG (and suggest an alternative forum if the topic is not relevant to that particular SIG) [1]

[1] The Chair may decide that a proposal is not suitable for discussion at the forthcoming SIG session if:

The proposal is out of scope for the SIG The proposal is insufficiently developed to be the basis for a useful discussion The agenda has already been filled by topics of greater priority </snip>

Regards Sunny

On 14/05/2019 8:11 pm, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ wrote: > I’m not interpreting the PDP as part of that, however, I’m fine if the > staff confirms that it is in-scope according to their understanding. > > We have a recent experience of policies (resource hijacking is a policy > violation) being declared out-of-scope in ARIN by the AC. I know the PDP > is very different, but let’s make sure we don’t have this situation > replicated in other APNIC. > > > Regards, > > Jordi > > El 11/5/19 18:05, "Owen DeLong" <owen@delong.commailto:owen@delong.com mailto:owen@delong.commailto:owen@delong.com > <mailto:owen@delong.com mailto:owen@delong.commailto:owen@delong.com>> escribió: > > > On May 11, 2019, at 06:13, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ > <jordi.palet@consulintel.esmailto:jordi.palet@consulintel.es mailto:jordi.palet@consulintel.esmailto:jordi.palet@consulintel.es <mailto:jordi.palet@consulintel.es mailto:jordi.palet@consulintel.esmailto:jordi.palet@consulintel.es>> wrote: > > Just to make it clear. Do you believe that the PDP update is out of > the scope? > > No > > > > I think that the PDP is not related to resource management, but the > “self-management” of the way the community discusses the resource > management and agree on the way it should be managed. > > The pdp is absolutely related to the management of resources in that it > is the process by which we develop those policies. > > > > And for me as more we restrict the wording, more risks to wrongly > get things that today are in-scope, to be left out. > > Agreed. However, in my view, your proposal is not less restrictive, just > more verbose. > > Owen > > > > > Regards, > > Jordi > > El 11/5/19 1:27, "Owen DeLong" <owen@delong.commailto:owen@delong.com mailto:owen@delong.commailto:owen@delong.com > <mailto:owen@delong.com mailto:owen@delong.commailto:owen@delong.com>> escribió: > > That’s not more generic, Jordi, it’s just more words. > > There’s nothing within the scope of the policy manual or its updates > that doesn’t relate to the management and use of internet address > resources. > > Owen > > > > > On May 10, 2019, at 09:30 , JORDI PALET MARTINEZ > <jordi.palet@consulintel.esmailto:jordi.palet@consulintel.es mailto:jordi.palet@consulintel.esmailto:jordi.palet@consulintel.es <mailto:jordi.palet@consulintel.es mailto:jordi.palet@consulintel.esmailto:jordi.palet@consulintel.es>> > wrote: > > Hi Paul, all, > > I feel that this proposed charter is not good enough. > > Let me try to explain it. > > In RIPE we have a WG for every kind of “topic”, for example, > addressing, abuse, routing, etc. The PDP updates are discussed > in the “plenary” (we have recent small update and this was not > really clear). > > However, in all the other regions, all the “topics” are within > the same “unique” WG. There is an exception for ARIN (if I’m > correct) where the PDP is not part of this “policy discussion > group”. > > The proposed charter, may fail to cover for example the PDP > update, but I feel there are many other topics that may be in > the future in the same situation. > > So why not something more generic in the line of: > > “The Policy SIG charter is to develop policies which relate to > the management and use of Internet address resources within the > Asia Pacific region, including any topics under the scope of the > Policy manual or updates of it”. > > > Regards, > > Jordi > > El 9/5/19 23:51, "Paul Wilson" > <sig-policy-bounces@lists.apnic.netmailto:sig-policy-bounces@lists.apnic.net mailto:sig-policy-bounces@lists.apnic.netmailto:sig-policy-bounces@lists.apnic.net > <mailto:sig-policy-bounces@lists.apnic.net mailto:sig-policy-bounces@lists.apnic.netmailto:sig-policy-bounces@lists.apnic.net>en nombre > depwilson@apnic.netmailto:depwilson@apnic.net mailto:depwilson@apnic.netmailto:depwilson@apnic.net <mailto:pwilson@apnic.net mailto:pwilson@apnic.netmailto:pwilson@apnic.net>> escribió: > > Dear Sumon and all, > > To reduce confusion over ISP/LIR/etc terminology, perhaps the > charter could be stated more simply, along these lines: > > “The Policy SIG charter is to develop policies which relate to > the management and use of Internet address resources within the > Asia Pacific region. …” > > My 2c, with best regards, > > ________________________________________________________________________ > Paul Wilson, Director-General, APNIC dg@apnic.netmailto:dg@apnic.net mailto:dg@apnic.netmailto:dg@apnic.net > <mailto:dg@apnic.net mailto:dg@apnic.netmailto:dg@apnic.net> > http://www.apnic.net http://www.apnic.net/http://www.apnic.net/@apnicdg > > On 9 May 2019, at 19:53, Sumon Ahmed Sabir wrote: > > Thank you very much Aftab and Owen for your constructive > feedback. We will definitely consider those views. > > If any one has any different perspective please jump in and > share your thoughts. > > Sincerely, > > Sumon > > On Mon, May 6, 2019 at 10:52 AM Owen DeLong <owen@delong.commailto:owen@delong.com mailto:owen@delong.commailto:owen@delong.com > <mailto:owen@delong.com mailto:owen@delong.commailto:owen@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. > > 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”. > > I support the language proposed by Sumon whether or not > he chooses to take my NIR suggestion. > > Owen > > > > > > On May 5, 2019, at 03:21 , Aftab Siddiqui > <aftab.siddiqui@gmail.commailto:aftab.siddiqui@gmail.com mailto:aftab.siddiqui@gmail.commailto:aftab.siddiqui@gmail.com > <mailto:aftab.siddiqui@gmail.com mailto:aftab.siddiqui@gmail.commailto:aftab.siddiqui@gmail.com>> wrote: > > Thanks Sumon bhai for the initiative, > > <nitpik> > > Revised text suggest that all members/resource > holders in APNIC are ISPs only, I would suggest to > make it "APNIC and NIR members or resource holders > in Asia Pacific region". Because not all members are > resource holders. > > Secondly, when you start mentioning topics in the > charter then it may create confusion moving forward > that only these topics can be covered so how about > adding "not limited to" or "services related to > resources" or something like that. > > </nitpik> > > Regards, > > Aftab A. Siddiqui > > On Sun, May 5, 2019 at 4:31 PM Sumon Ahmed Sabir > <sasabir@gmail.commailto:sasabir@gmail.com mailto:sasabir@gmail.commailto:sasabir@gmail.com <mailto:sasabir@gmail.com mailto:sasabir@gmail.commailto:sasabir@gmail.com>> wrote: > > Dear Members, > > > > > > In the last APNIC meeting in Daejoan there was a > discussion that there is a perception > > That Policy SIG discusses only about “Address > Policy”. On the other hand there is a understanding > > that Policy SIG covers a wider range of registry > issues, RPKI or any other topics that requires a > > procedures and rules. > > > > > > To avoid confusion and to bring clarity in the > Policy Charter few proposals came in. That > either we can change the Name of the Policy SIG > to cover wider range or to amend the Policy-SIG > Charter to bring clarity about the scope of > Policy SIG. > > > > > > After discussions chairs feels that we can make > some changes in the SIG Charter to bring clarity: > > > > > > > > > > Current SIG Charter > https://www.apnic.net/community/policy/policy-sig/ says: > > > > > > > > > > ‘The Policy SIG charter is to develop policies > and procedures which relate to the management and > > use of Internet address resources by APNIC, > NIRs, and ISPs within the Asia Pacific region.” > > > > > > And here is the possible changes proposed: > > > > > > “The Policy SIG charter is to develop policies > which relate to the management and use of > Internet address resources by APNIC, NIRs, > and ISPs within the Asia Pacific region. These > include policies for resource allocation, > recovery and transfer, and for resource > registration within whois, reverse DNS, RPKI and > related services.” > > > > > > Please share your views, comments or suggestions > in this regard. > > > > > > > > > > Sincerely, > > > > > > Sumon, Bertrand and Ching-Heng > > Chairs, Policy-SIG > > * sig-policy: APNIC SIG on > resource management policy * > _______________________________________________ > sig-policy mailing list > sig-policy@lists.apnic.netmailto:sig-policy@lists.apnic.net mailto:sig-policy@lists.apnic.netmailto:sig-policy@lists.apnic.net > <mailto:sig-policy@lists.apnic.net mailto:sig-policy@lists.apnic.netmailto: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.netmailto:sig-policy@lists.apnic.net mailto:sig-policy@lists.apnic.netmailto:sig-policy@lists.apnic.net > <mailto:sig-policy@lists.apnic.net mailto:sig-policy@lists.apnic.netmailto: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.netmailto:sig-policy@lists.apnic.net mailto:sig-policy@lists.apnic.netmailto:sig-policy@lists.apnic.net <mailto:sig-policy@lists.apnic.net mailto:sig-policy@lists.apnic.netmailto:sig-policy@lists.apnic.net> > https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy > > * sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management policy * > _______________________________________________ sig-policy > mailing listsig-policy@lists.apnic.netmailto:listsig-policy@lists.apnic.net mailto:listsig-policy@lists.apnic.netmailto:listsig-policy@lists.apnic.net > <mailto:sig-policy@lists.apnic.net mailto:sig-policy@lists.apnic.netmailto:sig-policy@lists.apnic.net>https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy > > > ********************************************** > IPv4 is over > Are you ready for the new Internet ? > http://www.theipv6company.com http://www.theipv6company.com/http://www.theipv6company.com/ > The IPv6 Company > > This electronic message contains information which may be > privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be > for the exclusive use of the individual(s) named above and > further non-explicilty authorized disclosure, copying, > distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if > partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited and > will be considered a criminal offense. If you are not the > intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, > distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if > partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited, > will be considered a criminal offense, so you must reply to the > original sender to inform about this communication and delete it. > > * sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management > policy * > _______________________________________________ > sig-policy mailing list > sig-policy@lists.apnic.netmailto:sig-policy@lists.apnic.net mailto:sig-policy@lists.apnic.netmailto:sig-policy@lists.apnic.net <mailto:sig-policy@lists.apnic.net mailto:sig-policy@lists.apnic.netmailto:sig-policy@lists.apnic.net> > https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy > > > ********************************************** > IPv4 is over > Are you ready for the new Internet ? > http://www.theipv6company.com > The IPv6 Company > > This electronic message contains information which may be privileged > or confidential. The information is intended to be for the exclusive > use of the individual(s) named above and further non-explicilty > authorized disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents > of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is > strictly prohibited and will be considered a criminal offense. If > you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, > copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, > even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited, > will be considered a criminal offense, so you must reply to the > original sender to inform about this communication and delete it. > > > ********************************************** > IPv4 is over > Are you ready for the new Internet ? > http://www.theipv6company.com > The IPv6 Company > > This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or > confidential. The information is intended to be for the exclusive use of > the individual(s) named above and further non-explicilty authorized > disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this > information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly > prohibited and will be considered a criminal offense. If you are not the > intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution > or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including > attached files, is strictly prohibited, will be considered a criminal > offense, so you must reply to the original sender to inform about this > communication and delete it. > > > * sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management policy * > _______________________________________________ > sig-policy mailing list > sig-policy@lists.apnic.netmailto:sig-policy@lists.apnic.net mailto:sig-policy@lists.apnic.netmailto: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.netmailto:sig-policy@lists.apnic.net mailto:sig-policy@lists.apnic.netmailto:sig-policy@lists.apnic.net https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy

--

Regards,

Aftab A. Siddiqui

********************************************** IPv4 is over Are you ready for the new Internet ? http://www.theipv6company.com The IPv6 Company

This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the exclusive use of the individual(s) named above and further non-explicilty authorized disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited and will be considered a criminal offense. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited, will be considered a criminal offense, so you must reply to the original sender to inform about this communication and delete it.

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

Apologies for the delay in responding, I agree to Paul’s version as it is succinct and addresses the concern for which the SIG Charter.

Regards

From: sig-policy-bounces@lists.apnic.net [mailto:sig-policy-bounces@lists.apnic.net] On Behalf Of Paul Wilson Sent: Friday, May 10, 2019 9:21 AM To: Sumon Ahmed Sabir Cc: mailman_SIG-policy Subject: Re: [sig-policy] Amendment of SIG Charter

Dear Sumon and all,

To reduce confusion over ISP/LIR/etc terminology, perhaps the charter could be stated more simply, along these lines:

“The Policy SIG charter is to develop policies which relate to the management and use of Internet address resources within the Asia Pacific region. …”

My 2c, with best regards,

________________________________________________________________________ Paul Wilson, Director-General, APNIC dg@apnic.net http://www.apnic.net http://www.apnic.net @apnicdg

On 9 May 2019, at 19:53, Sumon Ahmed Sabir wrote:

Thank you very much Aftab and Owen for your constructive feedback. We will definitely consider those views.

If any one has any different perspective please jump in and share your thoughts.

Sincerely,

Sumon

On Mon, May 6, 2019 at 10:52 AM Owen DeLong owen@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.

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”.

I support the language proposed by Sumon whether or not he chooses to take my NIR suggestion.

Owen

On May 5, 2019, at 03:21 , Aftab Siddiqui aftab.siddiqui@gmail.com wrote:

Thanks Sumon bhai for the initiative,

<nitpik>

Revised text suggest that all members/resource holders in APNIC are ISPs only, I would suggest to make it "APNIC and NIR members or resource holders in Asia Pacific region". Because not all members are resource holders.

Secondly, when you start mentioning topics in the charter then it may create confusion moving forward that only these topics can be covered so how about adding "not limited to" or "services related to resources" or something like that.

</nitpik>

Regards,

Aftab A. Siddiqui

On Sun, May 5, 2019 at 4:31 PM Sumon Ahmed Sabir sasabir@gmail.com wrote:

Dear Members,

In the last APNIC meeting in Daejoan there was a discussion that there is a perception

That Policy SIG discusses only about “Address Policy”. On the other hand there is a understanding

that Policy SIG covers a wider range of registry issues, RPKI or any other topics that requires a

procedures and rules.

To avoid confusion and to bring clarity in the Policy Charter few proposals came in. That either we can change the Name of the Policy SIG to cover wider range or to amend the Policy-SIG Charter to bring clarity about the scope of Policy SIG.

After discussions chairs feels that we can make some changes in the SIG Charter to bring clarity:

Current SIG Charter https://www.apnic.net/community/policy/policy-sig/ https://www.apnic.net/community/policy/policy-sig/ says:

‘The Policy SIG charter is to develop policies and procedures which relate to the management and

use of Internet address resources by APNIC, NIRs, and ISPs within the Asia Pacific region.”

And here is the possible changes proposed:

“The Policy SIG charter is to develop policies which relate to the management and use of Internet address resources by APNIC, NIRs, and ISPs within the Asia Pacific region. These include policies for resource allocation, recovery and transfer, and for resource registration within whois, reverse DNS, RPKI and related services.”

Please share your views, comments or suggestions in this regard.

Sincerely,

Sumon, Bertrand and Ching-Heng

Chairs, Policy-SIG

* 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

* 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 https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy