Orbit

SIG-policy

2 Mar 2015 2:18 a.m.

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)

7 11

Replies

Skeeve Stevens

2 Mar 2:46 a.m.

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 ; www.v4now.com

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

IP Address Brokering - Introducing sellers and buyers

On 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 Yamanishi
APNIC 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 Yamanishi

2 Mar 2:58 a.m.

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>:

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 ; www.v4now.com
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

IP Address Brokering - Introducing sellers and buyers

On 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 Yamanishi
APNIC 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 Stevens

2 Mar 3:04 a.m.

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 ; www.v4now.com

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

IP Address Brokering - Introducing sellers and buyers

On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 11:58 AM, Masato Yamanishi <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>:
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 ; www.v4now.com
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

IP Address Brokering - Introducing sellers and buyers

On 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 Yamanishi
APNIC 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

Philip Smith

2 Mar 3:07 a.m.

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

Izumi Okutani

3 Mar 9:25 a.m.

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 Stevens

3 Mar 9:30 a.m.

I agree with Izumi.

That a policy can be reverted at the AMM when it is passed at Policy SIG is unacceptable. It is duplication, redundant and a waste of time. Policy should be 'reported' at the AMM, but not discussed or debated, as the Policy SIG is the appropriate venue for this.

...Skeeve

Skeeve Stevens - Senior IP Broker

v4Now - an eintellego Networks service

skeeve@v4now.com ; www.v4now.com

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

IP Address Brokering - Introducing sellers and buyers

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

Seun Ojedeji

3 Mar 10:14 a.m.

On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 10:25 AM, 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.

Wow! as a region outsider; If Policy SIG is similar "in purpose" to what AFRINIC call the public policy meeting (PPM) then i will say the policy chair may have been lucky to have gotten away with that decision Izumi ;-)

In the AFRINIC region, we do have situations where there are few people in the room due to other engagement (a parallel session or people travelling same day because PPM happen to be on the last day), so it could become a challenge to determine what number of people in the room would be good enough to discuss a policy and observe consensus. However since PPM are announced with prior noticed as defined by PDP we have always ensured to run the meeting and observe consensus and such decision can only be reverted on discussion list (last call period)

Cheers!

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.ng

The key to understanding is humility - my view !

Dean Pemberton

4 Mar 2:29 a.m.

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 Stevens

4 Mar 2:31 a.m.

Let's try again? What were the objections last time?

...Skeeve

Skeeve Stevens - Senior IP Broker

v4Now - an eintellego Networks service

skeeve@v4now.com ; www.v4now.com

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

IP Address Brokering - Introducing sellers and buyers

On 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

Aftab Siddiqui

4 Mar 2:36 a.m.

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. Siddiqui

On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 7:31 AM, Skeeve Stevens <skeeve@v4now.com> wrote:

Let's try again? What were the objections last time?

...Skeeve

Skeeve Stevens - Senior IP Broker
v4Now - an eintellego Networks service
skeeve@v4now.com ; www.v4now.com
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

IP Address Brokering - Introducing sellers and buyers

On 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

4 Mar 2:42 a.m.

The Policy-SIG is also open to anyone where as the consensus at the AMM is members only.

It also seemed like it gave people a time to get additional input/feedback between the Policy-SIG and the AMM.

--
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 Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 11:36 AM, Aftab Siddiqui <aftab.siddiqui@gmail.com> wrote:

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. Siddiqui

On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 7:31 AM, Skeeve Stevens <skeeve@v4now.com> wrote:
Let's try again? What were the objections last time?

...Skeeve

Skeeve Stevens - Senior IP Broker
v4Now - an eintellego Networks service
skeeve@v4now.com ; www.v4now.com
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

IP Address Brokering - Introducing sellers and buyers

On 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

Download
Add to favorites Remove from favorites

Activity Summary

3193 days inactive
3193 days old
sig-policy@lists.apnic.net
7 participants
11 comments