Keyboard Shortcuts
Thread View
j
: Next unread messagek
: Previous unread messagej a
: Jump to all threadsj l
: Jump to MailingList overview


...Skeeve
Phone: 1300 239 038; Cell +61 (0)414 753 383 ; skype://skeeve
facebook.com/v4now ; linkedin.com/in/skeeve
twitter.com/theispguy ; blog: www.theispguy.com
Dear All,While this point was raised by Jessica, Skeeve, and Dean during the ML discussion,it is also big question for me, which day and time-slot is best for Policy SIG.Historically, we have SIG session somewhere in Thu.However, do you think it is a barrier for wider participation?(e.g. many operators are leaving in Thu PM?)Also, which session should not be in parallel with Policy SIG?(I also don't want to miss Lightning talks as Skeeve mentioned)Please share your thoughts on this list and/or offline in Fukuoka.Regards,Masato YamanishiAPNIC Policy SIG Chair (Acting)
* 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

Masato-san,Are you suggesting that we are able to change either Policy or Lightening talks for this event? I would love to go to both.I think this is only really a problem at Apricot events, not APNIC events.
...SkeeveSkeeve Stevens - Senior IP Brokerv4Now - an eintellego Networks serviceskeeve@v4now.com ; www.v4now.comPhone: 1300 239 038; Cell +61 (0)414 753 383 ; skype://skeeve
facebook.com/v4now ; linkedin.com/in/skeeve
twitter.com/theispguy ; blog: www.theispguy.com
IP Address Brokering - Introducing sellers and buyersOn Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 11:18 AM, Masato Yamanishi <myamanis@gmail.com> wrote:Dear All,While this point was raised by Jessica, Skeeve, and Dean during the ML discussion,it is also big question for me, which day and time-slot is best for Policy SIG.Historically, we have SIG session somewhere in Thu.However, do you think it is a barrier for wider participation?(e.g. many operators are leaving in Thu PM?)Also, which session should not be in parallel with Policy SIG?(I also don't want to miss Lightning talks as Skeeve mentioned)Please share your thoughts on this list and/or offline in Fukuoka.Regards,Masato YamanishiAPNIC Policy SIG Chair (Acting)
* 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

...Skeeve
Phone: 1300 239 038; Cell +61 (0)414 753 383 ; skype://skeeve
facebook.com/v4now ; linkedin.com/in/skeeve
twitter.com/theispguy ; blog: www.theispguy.com
Skeeve,Unfortunately, I don't think we can change the schedule in this meeting.I'm asking about future meetings.Regards,Masato2015-03-01 18:46 GMT-08:00 Skeeve Stevens <skeeve@v4now.com>:Masato-san,Are you suggesting that we are able to change either Policy or Lightening talks for this event? I would love to go to both.I think this is only really a problem at Apricot events, not APNIC events.
...SkeeveSkeeve Stevens - Senior IP Brokerv4Now - an eintellego Networks serviceskeeve@v4now.com ; www.v4now.comPhone: 1300 239 038; Cell +61 (0)414 753 383 ; skype://skeeve
facebook.com/v4now ; linkedin.com/in/skeeve
twitter.com/theispguy ; blog: www.theispguy.com
IP Address Brokering - Introducing sellers and buyersOn Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 11:18 AM, Masato Yamanishi <myamanis@gmail.com> wrote:Dear All,While this point was raised by Jessica, Skeeve, and Dean during the ML discussion,it is also big question for me, which day and time-slot is best for Policy SIG.Historically, we have SIG session somewhere in Thu.However, do you think it is a barrier for wider participation?(e.g. many operators are leaving in Thu PM?)Also, which session should not be in parallel with Policy SIG?(I also don't want to miss Lightning talks as Skeeve mentioned)Please share your thoughts on this list and/or offline in Fukuoka.Regards,Masato YamanishiAPNIC Policy SIG Chair (Acting)
* 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

FWIW, a few years ago we did have at least two APRICOTs where there was nothing in parallel with the Thursday Policy SIG. It meant that the technical/ops part of the conference finished on Wednesday. APRICOT 2009 was one example - for reference. (And tech/ops people left on Wednesday night.)
But we reverted to putting regular conference content in parallel with the Policy SIG following requests and feedback for that.
And yes, if there is clear desire from the Policy SIG to be standalone, the APRICOT PC will pay very close attention to that desire. :-)
philip --
Skeeve Stevens wrote on 2/03/2015 12:04 :
OK... so a year in the future... that should easily be dealt with by talking to the Apricot Program Committee... as it is a very reasonable and obvious thing to do.
Is it possible for this meeting? Competing event for Policy means there will be little reason to entice people to come .
...Skeeve
*Skeeve Stevens - Senior IP Broker* *v4Now - *an eintellego Networks service skeeve@v4now.com mailto:skeeve@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/networkceoaulinkedin.com/in/skeeve http://linkedin.com/in/skeeve
twitter.com/theispguy http://twitter.com/theispguy ; blog: www.theispguy.com http://www.theispguy.com/
IP Address Brokering - Introducing sellers and buyers
On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 11:58 AM, Masato Yamanishi <myamanis@gmail.com mailto:myamanis@gmail.com> wrote:
Skeeve, Unfortunately, I don't think we can change the schedule in this meeting. I'm asking about future meetings. Regards, Masato 2015-03-01 18:46 GMT-08:00 Skeeve Stevens <skeeve@v4now.com <mailto:skeeve@v4now.com>>: Masato-san, Are you suggesting that we are able to change either Policy or Lightening talks for this event? I would love to go to both. I think this is only really a problem at Apricot events, not APNIC events. ...Skeeve *Skeeve Stevens - Senior IP Broker* *v4Now - *an eintellego Networks service skeeve@v4now.com <mailto:skeeve@v4now.com> ; www.v4now.com <http://www.v4now.com/> Phone: 1300 239 038; Cell +61 (0)414 753 383 <tel:%2B61%20%280%29414%20753%20383> ; 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/> IP Address Brokering - Introducing sellers and buyers On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 11:18 AM, Masato Yamanishi <myamanis@gmail.com <mailto:myamanis@gmail.com>> wrote: Dear All, While this point was raised by Jessica, Skeeve, and Dean during the ML discussion, it is also big question for me, which day and time-slot is best for Policy SIG. Historically, we have SIG session somewhere in Thu. However, do you think it is a barrier for wider participation? (e.g. many operators are leaving in Thu PM?) Also, which session should not be in parallel with Policy SIG? (I also don't want to miss Lightning talks as Skeeve mentioned) Please share your thoughts on this list and/or offline in Fukuoka. Regards, Masato Yamanishi APNIC Policy SIG Chair (Acting) * 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

Great to know this Philip.
We had simliar issue last year, where we discussed about the proposal on reserving a space for DNS anycast, and due to parallel session, some operators could not attend. It got rediscussed at the AMM and the consensus at Policy SIG got reverted. I think it's not efficient that consensus decisions needs to be rediscussed due to parallel sessions and not everyone could participate at Policy SIG.
I provided input to an APNIC staff after the session last year and would like to raise this again.
Thanks, Izumi
On 2015/03/02 12:07, Philip Smith wrote:
FWIW, a few years ago we did have at least two APRICOTs where there was nothing in parallel with the Thursday Policy SIG. It meant that the technical/ops part of the conference finished on Wednesday. APRICOT 2009 was one example - for reference. (And tech/ops people left on Wednesday night.)
But we reverted to putting regular conference content in parallel with the Policy SIG following requests and feedback for that.
And yes, if there is clear desire from the Policy SIG to be standalone, the APRICOT PC will pay very close attention to that desire. :-)
philip
Skeeve Stevens wrote on 2/03/2015 12:04 :
OK... so a year in the future... that should easily be dealt with by talking to the Apricot Program Committee... as it is a very reasonable and obvious thing to do.
Is it possible for this meeting? Competing event for Policy means there will be little reason to entice people to come .
...Skeeve
*Skeeve Stevens - Senior IP Broker* *v4Now - *an eintellego Networks service skeeve@v4now.com mailto:skeeve@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/networkceoaulinkedin.com/in/skeeve http://linkedin.com/in/skeeve
twitter.com/theispguy http://twitter.com/theispguy ; blog: www.theispguy.com http://www.theispguy.com/
IP Address Brokering - Introducing sellers and buyers
On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 11:58 AM, Masato Yamanishi <myamanis@gmail.com mailto:myamanis@gmail.com> wrote:
Skeeve, Unfortunately, I don't think we can change the schedule in this meeting. I'm asking about future meetings. Regards, Masato 2015-03-01 18:46 GMT-08:00 Skeeve Stevens <skeeve@v4now.com <mailto:skeeve@v4now.com>>: Masato-san, Are you suggesting that we are able to change either Policy or Lightening talks for this event? I would love to go to both. I think this is only really a problem at Apricot events, not APNIC events. ...Skeeve *Skeeve Stevens - Senior IP Broker* *v4Now - *an eintellego Networks service skeeve@v4now.com <mailto:skeeve@v4now.com> ; www.v4now.com <http://www.v4now.com/> Phone: 1300 239 038; Cell +61 (0)414 753 383 <tel:%2B61%20%280%29414%20753%20383> ; 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/> IP Address Brokering - Introducing sellers and buyers On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 11:18 AM, Masato Yamanishi <myamanis@gmail.com <mailto:myamanis@gmail.com>> wrote: Dear All, While this point was raised by Jessica, Skeeve, and Dean during the ML discussion, it is also big question for me, which day and time-slot is best for Policy SIG. Historically, we have SIG session somewhere in Thu. However, do you think it is a barrier for wider participation? (e.g. many operators are leaving in Thu PM?) Also, which session should not be in parallel with Policy SIG? (I also don't want to miss Lightning talks as Skeeve mentioned) Please share your thoughts on this list and/or offline in Fukuoka. Regards, Masato Yamanishi APNIC Policy SIG Chair (Acting) * 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: APNIC SIG on resource management policy *
sig-policy mailing list sig-policy@lists.apnic.net http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy

...Skeeve
Phone: 1300 239 038; Cell +61 (0)414 753 383 ; skype://skeeve
facebook.com/v4now ; linkedin.com/in/skeeve
twitter.com/theispguy ; blog: www.theispguy.com
Great to know this Philip.
We had simliar issue last year, where we discussed about the proposal on
reserving a space for DNS anycast, and due to parallel session, some
operators could not attend. It got rediscussed at the AMM and the
consensus at Policy SIG got reverted. I think it's not efficient that
consensus decisions needs to be rediscussed due to parallel sessions and
not everyone could participate at Policy SIG.
I provided input to an APNIC staff after the session last year and would
like to raise this again.
Thanks,
Izumi
On 2015/03/02 12:07, Philip Smith wrote:
> FWIW, a few years ago we did have at least two APRICOTs where there was
> nothing in parallel with the Thursday Policy SIG. It meant that the
> technical/ops part of the conference finished on Wednesday. APRICOT 2009
> was one example - for reference. (And tech/ops people left on Wednesday
> night.)
>
> But we reverted to putting regular conference content in parallel with
> the Policy SIG following requests and feedback for that.
>
> And yes, if there is clear desire from the Policy SIG to be standalone,
> the APRICOT PC will pay very close attention to that desire. :-)
>
> philip
> --
>
>
> Skeeve Stevens wrote on 2/03/2015 12:04 :
>> OK... so a year in the future... that should easily be dealt with by
>> talking to the Apricot Program Committee... as it is a very reasonable
>> and obvious thing to do.
>>
>> Is it possible for this meeting? Competing event for Policy means there
>> will be little reason to entice people to come .
>>
>>
>> ...Skeeve
>>
>> *Skeeve Stevens - Senior IP Broker*
>> *v4Now - *an eintellego Networks service
>> skeeve@v4now.com <mailto:skeeve@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/>
>>
>>
>> IP Address Brokering - Introducing sellers and buyers
>>
>> On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 11:58 AM, Masato Yamanishi <myamanis@gmail.com
>> <mailto:myamanis@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>> Skeeve,
>>
>> Unfortunately, I don't think we can change the schedule in this meeting.
>> I'm asking about future meetings.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Masato
>>
>> 2015-03-01 18:46 GMT-08:00 Skeeve Stevens <skeeve@v4now.com
>> <mailto:skeeve@v4now.com>>:
>>
>> Masato-san,
>>
>> Are you suggesting that we are able to change either Policy or
>> Lightening talks for this event? I would love to go to both.
>>
>> I think this is only really a problem at Apricot events, not
>> APNIC events.
>>
>>
>> ...Skeeve
>>
>> *Skeeve Stevens - Senior IP Broker*
>> *v4Now - *an eintellego Networks service
>> skeeve@v4now.com <mailto:skeeve@v4now.com> ; www.v4now.com
>> <http://www.v4now.com/>
>>
>> Phone: 1300 239 038; Cell +61 (0)414 753 383
>> <tel:%2B61%20%280%29414%20753%20383> ; 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/>
>>
>>
>> IP Address Brokering - Introducing sellers and buyers
>>
>> On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 11:18 AM, Masato Yamanishi
>> <myamanis@gmail.com <mailto:myamanis@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>> Dear All,
>>
>> While this point was raised by Jessica, Skeeve, and Dean
>> during the ML discussion,
>> it is also big question for me, which day and time-slot is
>> best for Policy SIG.
>>
>> Historically, we have SIG session somewhere in Thu.
>> However, do you think it is a barrier for wider participation?
>> (e.g. many operators are leaving in Thu PM?)
>>
>> Also, which session should not be in parallel with Policy SIG?
>> (I also don't want to miss Lightning talks as Skeeve mentioned)
>>
>> Please share your thoughts on this list and/or offline in
>> Fukuoka.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Masato Yamanishi
>> APNIC Policy SIG Chair (Acting)
>>
>> * 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: 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

Great to know this Philip.
We had simliar issue last year, where we discussed about the proposal on reserving a space for DNS anycast, and due to parallel session, some operators could not attend. It got rediscussed at the AMM and the consensus at Policy SIG got reverted.
On 2015/03/02 12:07, Philip Smith wrote:
> FWIW, a few years ago we did have at least two APRICOTs where there was
> nothing in parallel with the Thursday Policy SIG. It meant that the
> technical/ops part of the conference finished on Wednesday. APRICOT 2009
> was one example - for reference. (And tech/ops people left on Wednesday
> night.)
>
> But we reverted to putting regular conference content in parallel with
> the Policy SIG following requests and feedback for that.
>
> And yes, if there is clear desire from the Policy SIG to be standalone,
> the APRICOT PC will pay very close attention to that desire. :-)
>
> philip
> --
>
>
> Skeeve Stevens wrote on 2/03/2015 12:04 :
>> OK... so a year in the future... that should easily be dealt with by
>> talking to the Apricot Program Committee... as it is a very reasonable
>> and obvious thing to do.
>>
>> Is it possible for this meeting? Competing event for Policy means there
>> will be little reason to entice people to come .
>>
>>
>> ...Skeeve
>>
>> *Skeeve Stevens - Senior IP Broker*
>> *v4Now - *an eintellego Networks service
>> skeeve@v4now.com <mailto:skeeve@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/>
>>
>>
>> IP Address Brokering - Introducing sellers and buyers
>>
>> On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 11:58 AM, Masato Yamanishi <myamanis@gmail.com
>> <mailto:myamanis@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>> Skeeve,
>>
>> Unfortunately, I don't think we can change the schedule in this meeting.
>> I'm asking about future meetings.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Masato
>>
>> 2015-03-01 18:46 GMT-08:00 Skeeve Stevens <skeeve@v4now.com
>> <mailto:skeeve@v4now.com>>:
>>
>> Masato-san,
>>
>> Are you suggesting that we are able to change either Policy or
>> Lightening talks for this event? I would love to go to both.
>>
>> I think this is only really a problem at Apricot events, not
>> APNIC events.
>>
>>
>> ...Skeeve
>>
>> *Skeeve Stevens - Senior IP Broker*
>> *v4Now - *an eintellego Networks service
>> skeeve@v4now.com <mailto:skeeve@v4now.com> ; www.v4now.com
>> <http://www.v4now.com/>
>>
>> Phone: 1300 239 038; Cell +61 (0)414 753 383
>> <tel:%2B61%20%280%29414%20753%20383> ; 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/>
>>
>>
>> IP Address Brokering - Introducing sellers and buyers
>>
>> On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 11:18 AM, Masato Yamanishi
>> <myamanis@gmail.com <mailto:myamanis@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>> Dear All,
>>
>> While this point was raised by Jessica, Skeeve, and Dean
>> during the ML discussion,
>> it is also big question for me, which day and time-slot is
>> best for Policy SIG.
>>
>> Historically, we have SIG session somewhere in Thu.
>> However, do you think it is a barrier for wider participation?
>> (e.g. many operators are leaving in Thu PM?)
>>
>> Also, which session should not be in parallel with Policy SIG?
>> (I also don't want to miss Lightning talks as Skeeve mentioned)
>>
>> Please share your thoughts on this list and/or offline in
>> Fukuoka.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Masato Yamanishi
>> APNIC Policy SIG Chair (Acting)
>>
>> * 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: 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
--
Seun Ojedeji,
Federal University Oye-Ekiti
web: http://www.fuoye.edu.ng
Mobile: +2348035233535
alt email: seun.ojedeji@fuoye.edu.ngThe key to understanding is humility - my view !

I agree. Thats why I was in favour of abandoning the AMM consensus. Unfortunately the policy failed. -- Dean Pemberton
Technical Policy Advisor InternetNZ +64 21 920 363 (mob) dean@internetnz.net.nz
To promote the Internet's benefits and uses, and protect its potential.
On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 6:25 PM, Izumi Okutani izumi@nic.ad.jp wrote:
Great to know this Philip.
We had simliar issue last year, where we discussed about the proposal on reserving a space for DNS anycast, and due to parallel session, some operators could not attend. It got rediscussed at the AMM and the consensus at Policy SIG got reverted. I think it's not efficient that consensus decisions needs to be rediscussed due to parallel sessions and not everyone could participate at Policy SIG.
I provided input to an APNIC staff after the session last year and would like to raise this again.
Thanks, Izumi
On 2015/03/02 12:07, Philip Smith wrote:
FWIW, a few years ago we did have at least two APRICOTs where there was nothing in parallel with the Thursday Policy SIG. It meant that the technical/ops part of the conference finished on Wednesday. APRICOT 2009 was one example - for reference. (And tech/ops people left on Wednesday night.)
But we reverted to putting regular conference content in parallel with the Policy SIG following requests and feedback for that.
And yes, if there is clear desire from the Policy SIG to be standalone, the APRICOT PC will pay very close attention to that desire. :-)
philip
Skeeve Stevens wrote on 2/03/2015 12:04 :
OK... so a year in the future... that should easily be dealt with by talking to the Apricot Program Committee... as it is a very reasonable and obvious thing to do.
Is it possible for this meeting? Competing event for Policy means there will be little reason to entice people to come .
...Skeeve
*Skeeve Stevens - Senior IP Broker* *v4Now - *an eintellego Networks service skeeve@v4now.com mailto:skeeve@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/networkceoaulinkedin.com/in/skeeve http://linkedin.com/in/skeeve
twitter.com/theispguy http://twitter.com/theispguy ; blog: www.theispguy.com http://www.theispguy.com/
IP Address Brokering - Introducing sellers and buyers
On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 11:58 AM, Masato Yamanishi <myamanis@gmail.com mailto:myamanis@gmail.com> wrote:
Skeeve, Unfortunately, I don't think we can change the schedule in this meeting. I'm asking about future meetings. Regards, Masato 2015-03-01 18:46 GMT-08:00 Skeeve Stevens <skeeve@v4now.com <mailto:skeeve@v4now.com>>: Masato-san, Are you suggesting that we are able to change either Policy or Lightening talks for this event? I would love to go to both. I think this is only really a problem at Apricot events, not APNIC events. ...Skeeve *Skeeve Stevens - Senior IP Broker* *v4Now - *an eintellego Networks service skeeve@v4now.com <mailto:skeeve@v4now.com> ; www.v4now.com <http://www.v4now.com/> Phone: 1300 239 038; Cell +61 (0)414 753 383 <tel:%2B61%20%280%29414%20753%20383> ; 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/> IP Address Brokering - Introducing sellers and buyers On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 11:18 AM, Masato Yamanishi <myamanis@gmail.com <mailto:myamanis@gmail.com>> wrote: Dear All, While this point was raised by Jessica, Skeeve, and Dean during the ML discussion, it is also big question for me, which day and time-slot is best for Policy SIG. Historically, we have SIG session somewhere in Thu. However, do you think it is a barrier for wider participation? (e.g. many operators are leaving in Thu PM?) Also, which session should not be in parallel with Policy SIG? (I also don't want to miss Lightning talks as Skeeve mentioned) Please share your thoughts on this list and/or offline in Fukuoka. Regards, Masato Yamanishi APNIC Policy SIG Chair (Acting) * 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: 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

...Skeeve
Phone: 1300 239 038; Cell +61 (0)414 753 383 ; skype://skeeve
facebook.com/v4now ; linkedin.com/in/skeeve
twitter.com/theispguy ; blog: www.theispguy.com
I agree. Thats why I was in favour of abandoning the AMM consensus.
Unfortunately the policy failed.
--
Dean Pemberton
Technical Policy Advisor
InternetNZ
+64 21 920 363 (mob)
dean@internetnz.net.nz
To promote the Internet's benefits and uses, and protect its potential.
On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 6:25 PM, Izumi Okutani <izumi@nic.ad.jp> wrote:
> Great to know this Philip.
>
> We had simliar issue last year, where we discussed about the proposal on
> reserving a space for DNS anycast, and due to parallel session, some
> operators could not attend. It got rediscussed at the AMM and the
> consensus at Policy SIG got reverted. I think it's not efficient that
> consensus decisions needs to be rediscussed due to parallel sessions and
> not everyone could participate at Policy SIG.
>
> I provided input to an APNIC staff after the session last year and would
> like to raise this again.
>
>
> Thanks,
> Izumi
>
>
>
> On 2015/03/02 12:07, Philip Smith wrote:
>> FWIW, a few years ago we did have at least two APRICOTs where there was
>> nothing in parallel with the Thursday Policy SIG. It meant that the
>> technical/ops part of the conference finished on Wednesday. APRICOT 2009
>> was one example - for reference. (And tech/ops people left on Wednesday
>> night.)
>>
>> But we reverted to putting regular conference content in parallel with
>> the Policy SIG following requests and feedback for that.
>>
>> And yes, if there is clear desire from the Policy SIG to be standalone,
>> the APRICOT PC will pay very close attention to that desire. :-)
>>
>> philip
>> --
>>
>>
>> Skeeve Stevens wrote on 2/03/2015 12:04 :
>>> OK... so a year in the future... that should easily be dealt with by
>>> talking to the Apricot Program Committee... as it is a very reasonable
>>> and obvious thing to do.
>>>
>>> Is it possible for this meeting? Competing event for Policy means there
>>> will be little reason to entice people to come .
>>>
>>>
>>> ...Skeeve
>>>
>>> *Skeeve Stevens - Senior IP Broker*
>>> *v4Now - *an eintellego Networks service
>>> skeeve@v4now.com <mailto:skeeve@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/>
>>>
>>>
>>> IP Address Brokering - Introducing sellers and buyers
>>>
>>> On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 11:58 AM, Masato Yamanishi <myamanis@gmail.com
>>> <mailto:myamanis@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Skeeve,
>>>
>>> Unfortunately, I don't think we can change the schedule in this meeting.
>>> I'm asking about future meetings.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Masato
>>>
>>> 2015-03-01 18:46 GMT-08:00 Skeeve Stevens <skeeve@v4now.com
>>> <mailto:skeeve@v4now.com>>:
>>>
>>> Masato-san,
>>>
>>> Are you suggesting that we are able to change either Policy or
>>> Lightening talks for this event? I would love to go to both.
>>>
>>> I think this is only really a problem at Apricot events, not
>>> APNIC events.
>>>
>>>
>>> ...Skeeve
>>>
>>> *Skeeve Stevens - Senior IP Broker*
>>> *v4Now - *an eintellego Networks service
>>> skeeve@v4now.com <mailto:skeeve@v4now.com> ; www.v4now.com
>>> <http://www.v4now.com/>
>>>
>>> Phone: 1300 239 038; Cell +61 (0)414 753 383
>>> <tel:%2B61%20%280%29414%20753%20383> ; 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/>
>>>
>>>
>>> IP Address Brokering - Introducing sellers and buyers
>>>
>>> On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 11:18 AM, Masato Yamanishi
>>> <myamanis@gmail.com <mailto:myamanis@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Dear All,
>>>
>>> While this point was raised by Jessica, Skeeve, and Dean
>>> during the ML discussion,
>>> it is also big question for me, which day and time-slot is
>>> best for Policy SIG.
>>>
>>> Historically, we have SIG session somewhere in Thu.
>>> However, do you think it is a barrier for wider participation?
>>> (e.g. many operators are leaving in Thu PM?)
>>>
>>> Also, which session should not be in parallel with Policy SIG?
>>> (I also don't want to miss Lightning talks as Skeeve mentioned)
>>>
>>> Please share your thoughts on this list and/or offline in
>>> Fukuoka.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Masato Yamanishi
>>> APNIC Policy SIG Chair (Acting)
>>>
>>> * 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: 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
* 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

Aftab A. Siddiqui
Let's try again? What were the objections last time?
...SkeeveSkeeve Stevens - Senior IP Brokerv4Now - an eintellego Networks serviceskeeve@v4now.com ; www.v4now.comPhone: 1300 239 038; Cell +61 (0)414 753 383 ; skype://skeeve
facebook.com/v4now ; linkedin.com/in/skeeve
twitter.com/theispguy ; blog: www.theispguy.com
IP Address Brokering - Introducing sellers and buyersOn Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 11:29 AM, Dean Pemberton <dean@internetnz.net.nz> wrote:I agree. Thats why I was in favour of abandoning the AMM consensus.
Unfortunately the policy failed.
--
Dean Pemberton
Technical Policy Advisor
InternetNZ
+64 21 920 363 (mob)
dean@internetnz.net.nz
To promote the Internet's benefits and uses, and protect its potential.
On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 6:25 PM, Izumi Okutani <izumi@nic.ad.jp> wrote:
> Great to know this Philip.
>
> We had simliar issue last year, where we discussed about the proposal on
> reserving a space for DNS anycast, and due to parallel session, some
> operators could not attend. It got rediscussed at the AMM and the
> consensus at Policy SIG got reverted. I think it's not efficient that
> consensus decisions needs to be rediscussed due to parallel sessions and
> not everyone could participate at Policy SIG.
>
> I provided input to an APNIC staff after the session last year and would
> like to raise this again.
>
>
> Thanks,
> Izumi
>
>
>
> On 2015/03/02 12:07, Philip Smith wrote:
>> FWIW, a few years ago we did have at least two APRICOTs where there was
>> nothing in parallel with the Thursday Policy SIG. It meant that the
>> technical/ops part of the conference finished on Wednesday. APRICOT 2009
>> was one example - for reference. (And tech/ops people left on Wednesday
>> night.)
>>
>> But we reverted to putting regular conference content in parallel with
>> the Policy SIG following requests and feedback for that.
>>
>> And yes, if there is clear desire from the Policy SIG to be standalone,
>> the APRICOT PC will pay very close attention to that desire. :-)
>>
>> philip
>> --
>>
>>
>> Skeeve Stevens wrote on 2/03/2015 12:04 :
>>> OK... so a year in the future... that should easily be dealt with by
>>> talking to the Apricot Program Committee... as it is a very reasonable
>>> and obvious thing to do.
>>>
>>> Is it possible for this meeting? Competing event for Policy means there
>>> will be little reason to entice people to come .
>>>
>>>
>>> ...Skeeve
>>>
>>> *Skeeve Stevens - Senior IP Broker*
>>> *v4Now - *an eintellego Networks service
>>> skeeve@v4now.com <mailto:skeeve@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/>
>>>
>>>
>>> IP Address Brokering - Introducing sellers and buyers
>>>
>>> On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 11:58 AM, Masato Yamanishi <myamanis@gmail.com
>>> <mailto:myamanis@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Skeeve,
>>>
>>> Unfortunately, I don't think we can change the schedule in this meeting.
>>> I'm asking about future meetings.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Masato
>>>
>>> 2015-03-01 18:46 GMT-08:00 Skeeve Stevens <skeeve@v4now.com
>>> <mailto:skeeve@v4now.com>>:
>>>
>>> Masato-san,
>>>
>>> Are you suggesting that we are able to change either Policy or
>>> Lightening talks for this event? I would love to go to both.
>>>
>>> I think this is only really a problem at Apricot events, not
>>> APNIC events.
>>>
>>>
>>> ...Skeeve
>>>
>>> *Skeeve Stevens - Senior IP Broker*
>>> *v4Now - *an eintellego Networks service
>>> skeeve@v4now.com <mailto:skeeve@v4now.com> ; www.v4now.com
>>> <http://www.v4now.com/>
>>>
>>> Phone: 1300 239 038; Cell +61 (0)414 753 383
>>> <tel:%2B61%20%280%29414%20753%20383> ; 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/>
>>>
>>>
>>> IP Address Brokering - Introducing sellers and buyers
>>>
>>> On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 11:18 AM, Masato Yamanishi
>>> <myamanis@gmail.com <mailto:myamanis@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Dear All,
>>>
>>> While this point was raised by Jessica, Skeeve, and Dean
>>> during the ML discussion,
>>> it is also big question for me, which day and time-slot is
>>> best for Policy SIG.
>>>
>>> Historically, we have SIG session somewhere in Thu.
>>> However, do you think it is a barrier for wider participation?
>>> (e.g. many operators are leaving in Thu PM?)
>>>
>>> Also, which session should not be in parallel with Policy SIG?
>>> (I also don't want to miss Lightning talks as Skeeve mentioned)
>>>
>>> Please share your thoughts on this list and/or offline in
>>> Fukuoka.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Masato Yamanishi
>>> APNIC Policy SIG Chair (Acting)
>>>
>>> * 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: 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
* 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

Dean Pemberton
Technical Policy Advisor
InternetNZ
+64 21 920 363 (mob)
dean@internetnz.net.nz
To promote the Internet's benefits and uses, and protect its potential.
What I can recall, the objection was more members join AMM rather Policy-SIG therefore the consensus at Policy-SIG is not actual consensus of the members at the event. I hope secretariat can suggest what other issues were registered.Regards,
Aftab A. SiddiquiOn Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 7:31 AM, Skeeve Stevens <skeeve@v4now.com> wrote:Let's try again? What were the objections last time?
...SkeeveSkeeve Stevens - Senior IP Brokerv4Now - an eintellego Networks serviceskeeve@v4now.com ; www.v4now.comPhone: 1300 239 038; Cell +61 (0)414 753 383 ; skype://skeeve
facebook.com/v4now ; linkedin.com/in/skeeve
twitter.com/theispguy ; blog: www.theispguy.com
IP Address Brokering - Introducing sellers and buyersOn Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 11:29 AM, Dean Pemberton <dean@internetnz.net.nz> wrote:I agree. Thats why I was in favour of abandoning the AMM consensus.
Unfortunately the policy failed.
--
Dean Pemberton
Technical Policy Advisor
InternetNZ
+64 21 920 363 (mob)
dean@internetnz.net.nz
To promote the Internet's benefits and uses, and protect its potential.
On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 6:25 PM, Izumi Okutani <izumi@nic.ad.jp> wrote:
> Great to know this Philip.
>
> We had simliar issue last year, where we discussed about the proposal on
> reserving a space for DNS anycast, and due to parallel session, some
> operators could not attend. It got rediscussed at the AMM and the
> consensus at Policy SIG got reverted. I think it's not efficient that
> consensus decisions needs to be rediscussed due to parallel sessions and
> not everyone could participate at Policy SIG.
>
> I provided input to an APNIC staff after the session last year and would
> like to raise this again.
>
>
> Thanks,
> Izumi
>
>
>
> On 2015/03/02 12:07, Philip Smith wrote:
>> FWIW, a few years ago we did have at least two APRICOTs where there was
>> nothing in parallel with the Thursday Policy SIG. It meant that the
>> technical/ops part of the conference finished on Wednesday. APRICOT 2009
>> was one example - for reference. (And tech/ops people left on Wednesday
>> night.)
>>
>> But we reverted to putting regular conference content in parallel with
>> the Policy SIG following requests and feedback for that.
>>
>> And yes, if there is clear desire from the Policy SIG to be standalone,
>> the APRICOT PC will pay very close attention to that desire. :-)
>>
>> philip
>> --
>>
>>
>> Skeeve Stevens wrote on 2/03/2015 12:04 :
>>> OK... so a year in the future... that should easily be dealt with by
>>> talking to the Apricot Program Committee... as it is a very reasonable
>>> and obvious thing to do.
>>>
>>> Is it possible for this meeting? Competing event for Policy means there
>>> will be little reason to entice people to come .
>>>
>>>
>>> ...Skeeve
>>>
>>> *Skeeve Stevens - Senior IP Broker*
>>> *v4Now - *an eintellego Networks service
>>> skeeve@v4now.com <mailto:skeeve@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/>
>>>
>>>
>>> IP Address Brokering - Introducing sellers and buyers
>>>
>>> On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 11:58 AM, Masato Yamanishi <myamanis@gmail.com
>>> <mailto:myamanis@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Skeeve,
>>>
>>> Unfortunately, I don't think we can change the schedule in this meeting.
>>> I'm asking about future meetings.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Masato
>>>
>>> 2015-03-01 18:46 GMT-08:00 Skeeve Stevens <skeeve@v4now.com
>>> <mailto:skeeve@v4now.com>>:
>>>
>>> Masato-san,
>>>
>>> Are you suggesting that we are able to change either Policy or
>>> Lightening talks for this event? I would love to go to both.
>>>
>>> I think this is only really a problem at Apricot events, not
>>> APNIC events.
>>>
>>>
>>> ...Skeeve
>>>
>>> *Skeeve Stevens - Senior IP Broker*
>>> *v4Now - *an eintellego Networks service
>>> skeeve@v4now.com <mailto:skeeve@v4now.com> ; www.v4now.com
>>> <http://www.v4now.com/>
>>>
>>> Phone: 1300 239 038; Cell +61 (0)414 753 383
>>> <tel:%2B61%20%280%29414%20753%20383> ; 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/>
>>>
>>>
>>> IP Address Brokering - Introducing sellers and buyers
>>>
>>> On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 11:18 AM, Masato Yamanishi
>>> <myamanis@gmail.com <mailto:myamanis@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Dear All,
>>>
>>> While this point was raised by Jessica, Skeeve, and Dean
>>> during the ML discussion,
>>> it is also big question for me, which day and time-slot is
>>> best for Policy SIG.
>>>
>>> Historically, we have SIG session somewhere in Thu.
>>> However, do you think it is a barrier for wider participation?
>>> (e.g. many operators are leaving in Thu PM?)
>>>
>>> Also, which session should not be in parallel with Policy SIG?
>>> (I also don't want to miss Lightning talks as Skeeve mentioned)
>>>
>>> Please share your thoughts on this list and/or offline in
>>> Fukuoka.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Masato Yamanishi
>>> APNIC Policy SIG Chair (Acting)
>>>
>>> * 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: 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
* 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
Activity Summary
- 3193 days inactive
- 3193 days old
- sig-policy@lists.apnic.net
- 7 participants
- 11 comments