Dave, On Apr 28, 2014, at 8:13 AM, Dave Mead <[email protected]> wrote: > APNIC is serving two continents - Asia and Oceania. Yes, as per UN, these two > are continents on their own.
As you're probably aware, the Internet's view of geo-political aggregations is a bit different than the UN's or most people's. For example, most folks would think, e.g., Tajikistan would be in "Asia" and Mexico would be in "North America". There are various reasons for this, most of which derive from how the Internet grew sort of organically from seeds planted by specific individuals and institutions instead of political dictates. That is not to say that the Internet's or the UN's view is right or wrong, rather that's just the way things evolved. > how can APNIC possibly serve two continents and assure its services are > provided fairly to all those 56 countries under its management? Pragmatically speaking, it seems to have done reasonably well so far. Can you point to a specific case where APNIC and its related structures (e.g., NIRs) have not provided its services fairly? > I'm affraid, your reach and tasks are not fairly balanced among AP region. Can you provide the data that led you to this observation? > This is not an equal represntation and voice from across the AP region. Take > an examle of Microsoft. Hmm. https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/news/exec/slt.aspx -- of 14 people on Microsoft's executive staff, it appears one was born in India and two were born in China. Looking at Microsoft's board (https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/news/exec/bod.aspx) is even less AP region representative. > There are damn good decision makers in ASIA too who can bring APNIC closer to > the community yet maintain the equal representation. Typically, community driven governance-related institutions rely on elections and elected officials for representation, not the staffing of their secretariats. With APNIC, the Secretariat acts on and by direction of the membership as represented by the EC. As staffing is an operational matter, I personally do not think it wise to impose quotas on the Secretariat's staffing to drive representation. I guess I'm having difficulty understanding the problem you're trying to solve. Can you explain a bit more as to what you believe APNIC is failing at? > Why not all LEA tainings are jointly funded with technical partners and tap > into government budget? Having some recent experience in this space, my impression is that LEA generally prefer to spend their budget on activities directly related to catching bad guys and, perhaps surprisingly, the relationship between catching bad guys and the allocation of IP addresses is seen by the folks who sign the checks as quite tenuous. In my experience, the check signers appear, for good or ill, to prefer to hire more cops and buy more equipment, with training in the Internet space being more focused on cyber-security and computer forensics than on Internet numbers resource management. Regards, -drc
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
_______________________________________________ apnic-talk mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/apnic-talk
