Dear All,
As you know, we had a session about "Internet Governance" in AMM on Feb
28th.
http://2014.apricot.net/program#session/66335
In that session, I expressed two concerns for current APNIC's approach for
Internet Governance activity.
1. In current approach, it is NOT clear that Internet Governance has
relevance to our daily businesses and operations in the Internet.
As a result, current approach is making a gap inside APRICOT and/or
APNIC community though its intension is involving more
participants to Internet Governance activity.
2. While there is a question for its efficiency, APNIC is spending too much
budget and human resources for Internet Governance
activity and it is causing negative impact for APNIC daily operations
as RIR.
(If you want to know more details, please see a copy of my statement
attached at the end of this e-mail,
or a transcript from page 31 at
https://conference.apnic.net/data/37/28Feb14-AMM-2-final.txt)
While EC promised to ask members' comments for this issue in next member
survey,
I also would like to ask you (not only APNIC members, but also everybody) to
express your views about this issue on this list.
Rgs,
Masato Yamanishi
=========================from transcript=========================
I have two major concerns about this context.
First, it is very important to keep liaising with the
other bodies, like ISTAR, ITU and UN. I also understand
your intention, Paul, in introducing the governance
discussion in this community and involving more people
in this discussion.
However, despite your intention, actually you are
making a gap in APNIC community and APRICOT community,
because the discussion has only buzzwords, many
buzzwords, like "globalization", "fragmentation",
"coordination", "cooperation", "interaction",
"evolution", "accelerating", "encouraging". I pick up
these words from your presentation.
I can pick up more from other presentation, but it
is a waste of time.
Also, it has very few realistic things.
Another good example is the video message from ICANN
CEO on Wednesday's session. It was very short message,
just 20 seconds, I think. But he just said, "IANA
should be global." What did he mean by "global"? Isn't
IANA global already? I cannot totally understand his
comment.
Also, people in the governance discussion often say,
"Without xxx, the Internet will stop or will die." But
it's not true.
Let's consider the case if the Internet governed by
ICANN will be corrupted totally for some reason. What
happens? Is this the end of the Internet or is this the
end of the world? Totally not.
In such case, I think Google will say, "Okay, we can
provide alternative solution. You can resolve all
existing domains by asking to 8.8.8.8, also we can
provide additional features, like filtering focusing
size, because we have enough data from gmail service;
also we can provide additional service.
How about this? Everybody use that service and
everybody will become more happy. No problem.
People saying, "Without xxx logic," it is like the
boy who cried wolf. There are so many such people in
the governance discussion.
As a result, many people, in particular working for
operators, saying, "Oh, this discussion is not related
with me, and also related with my company. Those high
level people are doing something, but it's not for me."
Even if they were to bring it back to their company, the
reaction is, "Oh, then, what next?" Nothing happens.
It means you fail to involve operators, not only
individual level, but also on the company level.
The second concern: in my understanding, main object
of APNIC is regional address registry. However, it
seems you are spending too much resources for the
governance discussion. In this context --
APPLAUSE -- resources means HR resources, budget and also
meeting time, including this session. I don't want to
open details in here, but I have clear evidence which
shows APNIC is spending too much resources to the
governance discussion and as a result, it is causing
negative impact for daily work as RIR.
I don't think it is your intention, but the fact
is fact.
Then it is not a comment only from me. I talk with
many people in yesterday and I heard same concerns from
multiple people, directly and indirectly.
As one of the APNIC members, I would like to ask two
things to our EC members and also our Director General.
The first one is considering the way to approach the
community regarding the governance discussion. Current
way is totally misleading. Okay?
The second one is limiting the resources which will
be used for the governance discussion, because it
already has negative impact for daily work at RIR.
Thank you.
=========================from transcript=========================
_______________________________________________
apnic-talk mailing list
[email protected]
http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/apnic-talk
