Sure, Yamanishi-san. I understood your point on the follow up post and I'm aware this information doesn't resolve your concern.
It was intended to share information at the ICANN meeting with the people on this list. Regards, Izumi (2014/03/26 11:14), Masato Yamanishi wrote: > Okutani-san, > > As I wrote in last e-mail to Maemura-san and others, > I have a concern for the process itself and would like to ask EC to claim > it to ICANN. > > http://mailman.apnic.net/mailing-lists/apnic-talk/archive/2014/03/msg00059. > html > >>> EC members> >>> I believe you are preparing some input as APNIC community for this >>> proposed process, >>> I would like to ask you claiming that each internet bodies should have >>> more flexibility during this process, in particular time constrain, and >>> ICANN should respect such flexibility of each internet bodies. > > Rgs, > Masato Yamanishi > > > > > On 14/03/25 18:07, "Izumi Okutani" <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Yamanishi-san and all, >> >> >> I did read your follow up post but just to share more information about >> what's happening here at ICANN Singapore with all of you - >> >> You can find out more details from the presentation and transcripts of >> the session below: >> >> IANA Accountability Transition >> http://singapore49.icann.org/en/schedule/mon-iana-accountability >> >> It was emphasized that ICANN meetings and ICANN community are not the >> only opportuniy or the community to discuss the IANA transition. >> >> They welcome discussions at other forums including those of the RIRs, >> which ofcourse includes APNIC. You can see this from P.17 of the slides, >> APNIC and APRICOT clearly listed. >> >> If there are issues process wise as Yamanishi-san has pointed out, it is >> also possible to submit comments directly to the ICANN as well at: >> >> [email protected] >> http://www.icann.org/en/about/agreements/iana/transition >> >> This is not intended to stop discussions here ofcourse and I just want >> to share that there are ways to directly give feedbacks to the ICANN. >> >> >> Regards, >> Izumi@Singapore >> >> (2014/03/25 3:11), Masato Yamanishi wrote: >>> All, >>> >>> John Curran, ARIN CEO, just shared next step on arin-ppml mailing list, >>> and let me share it as I could not find better source. >>> (Sorry, I don't have any intension to quote it) >>> >>> http://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/2014-March/028006.html >>> >>> And, we need to reply feedback before "Mar 27th, 2014" which means this >>> THURSDAY!! >>> However, I have not yet understood what we need to give a feedback for. >>> Does somebody know it? >>> >>> >>> http://www.icann.org/en/about/agreements/iana/functions-transfer-process- >>> 14m >>> ar14-en.pdf >>> >>> My first comment for this is "It's too urgent. ICANN should not push >>> other >>> internet orgs to do anything." >>> >>> Rgs, >>> Masato Yamanishi >>> >>> >>> On 14/03/22 20:16, "Tony Smith" <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi Naresh >>>> >>>> Sorry, to answer your earlier question about "plans" - the plan is >>>> something >>>> that APNIC, our community, and all interested Internet users worldwide >>>> have >>>> been prompted to contribute to as per the NTIA announcement (which >>>> asked ICANN >>>> to facilitate). >>>> >>>> Paul's email from Friday (available here: >>>> >>>> http://www.apnic.net/publications/news/2014/iana-globalization-consultat >>>> ion-pr >>>> ocess) explained the next steps. >>>> >>>> Everyone - including the Secretariat! - is hoping to find out more at >>>> ICANN 49 >>>> in Singapore. We hope there will be discussion at the meeting on how >>>> this >>>> process is going to work and the community will have some input into >>>> the >>>> mechanics of the consultation process. ICANN changed the program just >>>> today >>>> with an updated time for its discussion session - it is now at 10.30am >>>> SG time >>>> on Monday: >>>> http://singapore49.icann.org/en/schedule/mon-globalization-advisory >>>> >>>> As Paul's email said, the APNIC EC is currently considering the best >>>> ways to >>>> facilitate discussions and capture input from the Asia Pacific >>>> community. It >>>> would be great to hear your and other Members' views on how the APNIC >>>> community can contribute to this process. >>>> >>>> Kind regards >>>> Tony >>>> >>>> From: Naresh Ajwani <[email protected]> >>>> Date: Sunday, 23 March 2014 10:19 am >>>> To: MAEMURA Akinori <[email protected]> >>>> Cc: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> >>>> Subject: Re: [apnic-talk] IANA Globalization Progress >>>> >>>> Maemura, hi >>>> >>>> Masato; Do you mean that DG had signed it before consulting EC nor >>>> members as >>>>>> there was not enough time? >>>>>> Does it comply with APNIC by-laws 54? It says; >>>> Maemura; "I am sure he has been in full touch with the EC to proceed >>>> these >>>> issues and signed them under the EC's authorization." >>>> >>>> Is it part of any Munute of Meeting or mails and if in public domain? >>>> >>>> Transparency wud help more. I am still waiting for the plans if any, I >>>> had >>>> asked for in this thread mails >>>> >>>> Regards & best wishes >>>> >>>> Naresh Ajwani >>>> >>>> On 23 Mar 2014 06:37, "MAEMURA Akinori" <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> Masato, >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> (2014/03/21 11:18), Masato Yamanishi wrote: >>>>>>> Maemura-san and EC members, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Thank you for sharing EC's view. >>>>>>> Let me quote your statement in slightly different order to make my >>>>>> comment. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Technically speaking on the basis of our governing provisions, >>>>>>>>> the Executive Council has function to act on behalf of the Members >>>>>>>>> in the interval between AGMs, and to manage the activities, >>>>>>>>> functions >>>>>>>>> and affairs of APNIC. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> More practically, the EC represents the Membership to manage >>>>>>>>> APNIC's >>>>>>>>> activity, >>>>>>>>> and need to comply the will of the Membership, sometimes with the >>>>>>>>> broader community. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> We have the power to authorise the activity by DG and Secretariat >>>>>>>>> for >>>>>>>>> the Membership, >>>>>>>>> but need to synchronise our thought on the authorization with the >>>>>>>>> Membership. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> That is why we set a timeslot to discuss the Internet Governance >>>>>>>>> issue >>>>>>>>> in the AMM this time, >>>>>>>>> after we announced our support for Montevideo Statement in >>>>>>>>> January. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> It complies with APNIC by-laws 30, so I don't see any problem from >>>>>>> procedure perspective. >>>>> Yes, as you see the wording in my message was in accordance with it. >>>>> >>>>>>> BUT, >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Montevideo Statement was crafted among the I* CEOs in the >>>>>>>>> situation, as >>>>>>>>> Tony has already told, >>>>>>>>> with very limited time allowance with very quick moves at that >>>>>>>>> time, >>>>>>>>> and so was the I*'s reaction to NTIA statement. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Do you mean that DG had signed it before consulting EC nor members >>>>>>> as >>>>>>> there was not enough time? >>>>>>> Does it comply with APNIC by-laws 54? It says; >>>>> I am sure he has been in full touch with the EC to proceed these >>>>> issues and >>>>> signed them under the EC's authorization. >>>>> >>>>> Akinori >>>>>>> 54. The main functions of the Director General are: >>>>>>> a. to act as the chief executive officer of APNIC and the >>>>>>> corporation; >>>>>>> b. to have, subject to the provisions of these by-laws and to the >>>>>>> direction of the Executive Council, the responsibility for the >>>>>>> general >>>>>>> management and control of the activities, functions and affairs of >>>>>>> APNIC >>>>>>> and the corporation and shall perform all duties and have all >>>>>>> powers which >>>>>>> are commonly incident to the office of chief executive or which are >>>>>>> delegated by the Executive Council; >>>>>>> c. to execute all contracts, agreements and other instruments of >>>>>>> the >>>>>>> corporation which are authorised including affixing the Seal of the >>>>>>> corporation; >>>>>>> d. to appoint and have general supervision and direction of all >>>>>>> of the >>>>>>> other staff and agents of APNIC and the corporation, including but >>>>>>> not >>>>>>> limited to bookkeeping, accounting and treasury functions on behalf >>>>>>> of the >>>>>>> Treasurer; >>>>>>> e. to implement strategic policies, prepare plans for APNIC, and >>>>>>> shall >>>>>>> coordinate its activities, functions and affairs; >>>>>>> f. to report to the Executive Council and to put forward >>>>>>> resolutions for >>>>>>> the consideration of the Executive Council; >>>>>>> g. to take all the actions required to ensure the economic use of >>>>>>> APNIC's resources and shall be responsible to the Executive Council >>>>>>> for >>>>>>> all the administrative and financial aspects of APNIC's activities; >>>>>>> h. to act as the legal representative of APNIC and the >>>>>>> corporation; >>>>>>> i. to act as an ex-officio member of the Executive Council. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Rgs, >>>>>>> Masato Yamanishi >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On 14/03/19 0:12, "MAEMURA Akinori" <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Dear Masato, Pranesh and everyone, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I know this is very late response for your request for the EC to >>>>>>> clarify. >>>>>>>>> Apologies. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> At Mon, 17 Mar 2014 15:41:35 -0700 >>>>>>>>> In message <cf4cc73d.85d7d%[email protected] >>>>>>> <mailto:cf4cc73d.85d7d%[email protected]> > >>>>>>>>> "Re: [apnic-talk] IANA Globalization Progress" >>>>>>>>> "Masato Yamanishi <[email protected]>" wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> | Pranesh and All, >>>>>>>>> | >>>>>>>>> | While I'm not new to APNIC, I have same question/concern. >>>>>>>>> | Can EC clarify it? >>>>>>>>> | >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Montevideo Statement was crafted among the I* CEOs in the >>>>>>>>> situation, as >>>>>>>>> Tony has already told, with very limited time allowance with very >>>>>>>>> quick >>>>>>>>> moves at that time, and so was the I*'s reaction to NTIA >>>>>>>>> statement. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Technically speaking on the basis of our governing provisions, the >>>>>>>>> Executive Council has function to act on behalf of the Members in >>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>> interval between AGMs, and to manage the activities, functions and >>>>>>>>> affairs of APNIC. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> More practically, the EC represents the Membership to manage >>>>>>>>> APNIC's >>>>>>>>> activity, and need to comply the will of the Membership, >>>>>>>>> sometimes with >>>>>>>>> the broader community. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> We have the power to authorise the activity by DG and Secretariat >>>>>>>>> for >>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>> Membership, but need to synchronise our thought on the >>>>>>>>> authorization >>>>>>> with >>>>>>>>> the Membership. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> That is why we set a timeslot to discuss the Internet Governance >>>>>>>>> issue >>> in >>>>>>>>> the AMM this time, after we announced our support for Montevideo >>>>>>>>> Statement in January. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> It was great to see very active discussion there, and that it >>>>>>>>> triggered >>>>>>>>> the continued discussion on line. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> As Masato points out, now Paul is more engaged in the activity of >>>>>>>>> coordination among our fellow organizations and ITU arena, which >>>>>>>>> is >>>>>>> based >>>>>>>>> on the EC's authorization. We authorize becuase we think it >>>>>>>>> needed. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I understand it looks like politics game with little thing, if not >>>>>>>>> nothing, to do with Members' own business. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> However from the viewpoint of a company whose business is serving >>>>>>>>> community with Internet Resource, one of which is APNIC, it is >>>>>>>>> really >>>>>>>>> important to address the risk of unwanted non-viable arrangement >>>>>>>>> and to >>>>>>>>> have people with other stakes understand our position. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Moreover, as already mentioned, the forthcoming couple of years >>>>>>>>> are >>>>>>> quite >>>>>>>>> crucial stage for us to keep our healthy business environment. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> That's why we authorize these activities by Secretariat, and what >>>>>>>>> we >>>>>>> need >>>>>>>>> to have you understand. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> As we have many things to come, Director General and the EC will >>>>>>>>> have >>>>>>>>> more communication each other to consider these actions, than we >>>>>>>>> have >>>>>>>>> already been doing. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I know, through my own business, that how Internet Governance >>>>>>>>> issues are >>>>>>>>> difficult for people (e.g. of tech community) to realize, I am >>>>>>>>> still on >>>>>>>>> the way to find how I can couple the issue we confront adequately >>>>>>>>> with >>>>>>>>> community's interest. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> The EC needs to have the Membership's support with well-informed >>>>>>> consent, >>>>>>>>> and of course we need to change our thought just in case we found >>>>>>>>> it was >>>>>>>>> not of the Membership and community, and I hope the current >>>>>>>>> discussion >>>>>>>>> will valuable for the purpose. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Sincerely, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> MAEMURA Akinori, my own hat on, but I am sure the EC well sheres >>>>>>>>> these >>>>>>>>> points >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> | Rgs, >>>>>>>>> | Masato Yamanishi >>>>>>>>> | >>>>>>>>> | >>>>>>>>> | >>>>>>>>> | On 14/03/14 23:01, "Pranesh Prakash" <[email protected]> >>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>> | >>>>>>>>> | >Tony Smith [2014-03-14 21:42]: >>>>>>>>> | >> As I'm sure you appreciate, the news from the US has just >>>>>>>>> arrived >>>>>>>>> this >>>>>>>>> | >>morning and a lot of the details are still coming to light. >>>>>>>>> We're >>>>>>>>> | >>planning to prepare something that explains what this >>>>>>>>> development >>>>>>>>> means >>>>>>>>> | >>in more detail when more information is confirmed. >>>>>>>>> | > >>>>>>>>> | >I'm sorry, but I'm new to APNIC's lists. >>>>>>>>> | > >>>>>>>>> | >Was there any consultation within APNIC before APNIC's >>>>>>>>> leader's name >>>>>>>>> was >>>>>>>>> | >added to this statement? Could you also point me towards the >>>>>>> community >>>>>>>>> | >consultation / mailing list discussions that took place before >>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>> | >Montevideo Declaration was signed as something APNIC endorsed? >>>>>>>>> | > >>>>>>>>> | >> But for now, we wanted to alert everyone to this news and >>>>>>>>> the fact >>>>>>>>> | >>consultation will begin in our region in Singapore. >>>>>>>>> | > >>>>>>>>> | >Could you outline the intra-APNIC consultations (i.e., not the >>>>>>>>> ICANN >>>>>>>>> | >consultations about which ICANN's published a document) that >>>>>>>>> will >>>>>>> take >>>>>>>>> | >place with regard to this? Which mailing list will these >>>>>>>>> discussions >>>>>>>>> be >>>>>>>>> | >directed towards? >>>>>>>>> | > >>>>>>>>> | >-- >>>>>>>>> | >Pranesh Prakash >>>>>>>>> | >Policy Director, Centre for Internet and Society >>>>>>>>> | >T: +91 80 40926283 <tel:%2B91%2080%2040926283> | W: >>>>>>> http://cis-india.org >>>>>>>>> | >------------------- >>>>>>>>> | >Access to Knowledge Fellow, Information Society Project, Yale >>>>>>>>> Law >>>>>>>>> School >>>>>>>>> | >M: +1 520 314 7147 <tel:%2B1%20520%20314%207147> | W: >>>>>>> http://yaleisp.org >>>>>>>>> | >PGP ID: 0x1D5C5F07 | Twitter: >>>>>>>>> https://twitter.com/pranesh_prakash >>>>>>>>> | > >>>>>>>>> | >>>>>>>>> | >>>>>>>>> | _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>>> | apnic-talk mailing list >>>>>>>>> | [email protected] >>>>>>>>> | http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/apnic-talk >>>>>>>>> | >>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> apnic-talk mailing list >>>>> [email protected] >>>>> http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/apnic-talk >>>> _______________________________________________ apnic-talk mailing list >>>> [email protected] >>>> http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/apnic-talk >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> apnic-talk mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/apnic-talk >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> apnic-talk mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/apnic-talk > > _______________________________________________ apnic-talk mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/apnic-talk
