Some comments:
- there is no problem statement in Section 2 which purports to declare
what the problem is.
- Section 4, item 2. "Members" is mentioned without context. NIR
members? APNIC members? Other members, and if so what of?
- Section 4, item 3. I can't see how APNIC or anyone else can dictate to
any sovereign Government that it will have a minor role in an NIR. If an
NIR truly represents the economy it is located in, surely all interested
parties in that economy will establish exactly what the representation
should be?
- Section 5. None of the advantages listed are obvious from reading the
text as it stands. I can see substantial disadvantages though.
- Section 6. "APNIC members undergo conditional allocations". Please
explain. No evidence provided in text. First mention of creation of NIR
covering communities in multiple countries - what is the rationale for this?
- Section 7 I believe is incomplete. This policy proposal has
substantial impact on the existing NIRs as it changes the fundamental
basis for their existence as it would be entirely feasible for another
organisation or group of organisations to establish themselves as an NIR
within the existing NIR's operational area. This would quite likely be
counter to the existing NIR's rules of association.
I believe this proposal needs substantial work to resolve the issues I
mentioned above. As it stands, it has significant impact on the entire
APNIC, NIR and LIR structure and relationship; I feel this needs to be
carefully considered and documented.