Re: [sig-policy] Re: Decicion :[prop-028-v001]"AbolishingIPv6peraddressf
Chanki Park said the following on 24/11/05 11:34:
>
> What should be done if there were disagreement with chair's decision
> before making decision and after the announcement.
> What process should we take? Is there a process for this?
>
> That's why I called this issue as a "procedural matter."
Ah, the issue is now apparent. Despite the fact that there was
sufficient disquiet at the APNIC meeting about the proposal passed by
the NIR SIG, you want it to proceed. And then you said earlier that the
NIRs don't work for their own self interest - sort of looks as though
KRNIC/NIDA is, doesn't it? If you were interested in the good of the
Internet community in the entire region, you'd respect other people's
point of view and opinions, rather than trying to ram your own opinion
down everyone else's throats.
APNIC members take note, KRNIC clearly have another agenda here.
> I am claiming that the chair and co-chair made WRONG decision.
The chair and co-chair had to make a decision given the feeling in the
room. As your only interest in this proposal is to reduce the fees you
pay to APNIC, clearly you would disagree with their decision. That's life.
If you had respect for the chair and co-chair, and you had respect for
the rest of the Internet community in the region, you'd accept their
decision, and spend your time analysing the discussions and work out how
to make the proposal more acceptable to the entire community.
Izumi-san has proposed establishing a working group to look at this. I'm
not sure it needs to be that formal, as in my view the proposal only
needs the minor modification to have no financial impact on APNIC for it
to be proposed and accepted at the next Member Meeting. But if a working
group is required, hopefully it can start work asap. As I said before,
I'm happy to help, if invited to join...
philip
--