Re: It's been 20 years today (Oct 16, UTC). Hard to believe.

[Wayne Bouchard]

It is a fact that I learned much of what I initially knew about
internetworking by reading the protocols outlined in many of the
offical RFC documents. You couldn't pick one of these up without
seeing the name Postel at the top. I never met him but give due
deference and respect to his work and what it ultimately produced.

On Mon, Oct 15, 2018 at 10:00:33PM -0400, Rodney Joffe wrote:
> At NANOG two weeks ago, we had an interesting discussion at one of the lunch 
> tables. One of the subjects we discussed was the original IANA, and RFC 
> Editor, Jon Postel.
> 
> Seven of the ten people at the table had never heard of him. Maybe these days 
> it no longer matters who he was, and what he meant to where we are today.
> 
> 
> 
> For those who care about the history of the Internet, and routing and 
> addressing. And protocols???
> 
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2468
> 
> Oct 16, 1998.

---
Wayne Bouchard
w...@typo.org
Network Dude
http://www.typo.org/~web/

Re: It's been 20 years today (Oct 16, UTC). Hard to believe.

[Brian Kantor]

How soon we forget!

It was a telephone call to Jon (there was no email) in 1981 that
got my group the network that I still manage.  He was the editor
for the three RFCs that have my name on them.  I remember him as a
brilliant, kindly, efficient, helpful, and dedicated giant of the
early Internet.
- Brian


On Mon, Oct 15, 2018 at 10:00:33PM -0400, Rodney Joffe wrote:
> At NANOG two weeks ago, we had an interesting discussion at one of the lunch 
> tables. One of the subjects we discussed was the original IANA, and RFC 
> Editor, Jon Postel.
> 
> Seven of the ten people at the table had never heard of him. Maybe these days 
> it no longer matters who he was, and what he meant to where we are today.
> 
> 
> 
> For those who care about the history of the Internet, and routing and 
> addressing. And protocols…
> 
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2468
> 
> Oct 16, 1998.

Re: It's been 20 years today (Oct 16, UTC). Hard to believe.

[Suzanne Woolf]

> On Oct 15, 2018, at 10:00 PM, Rodney Joffe  wrote:
> 
> At NANOG two weeks ago, we had an interesting discussion at one of the lunch 
> tables. One of the subjects we discussed was the original IANA, and RFC 
> Editor, Jon Postel.
> 
> Seven of the ten people at the table had never heard of him. Maybe these days 
> it no longer matters who he was, and what he meant to where we are today.
> 
> 
> 
> For those who care about the history of the Internet, and routing and 
> addressing. And protocols…

And the principles  that make it “the Internet”, not just “some internets.”

> 
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2468
> 



Suzanne

It's been 20 years today (Oct 16, UTC). Hard to believe.

[Rodney Joffe]

At NANOG two weeks ago, we had an interesting discussion at one of the lunch 
tables. One of the subjects we discussed was the original IANA, and RFC Editor, 
Jon Postel.

Seven of the ten people at the table had never heard of him. Maybe these days 
it no longer matters who he was, and what he meant to where we are today.



For those who care about the history of the Internet, and routing and 
addressing. And protocols…

https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2468

Oct 16, 1998.

Re: ARIN TAL copyright

[John Curran]

On 15 Oct 2018, at 6:13 PM, Baldur Norddahl  wrote:
> 
> I understand the issue is that ARIN wants protection from being sued, should 
> I somehow harm myself with this service. 

To be clear, ARIN would like to make sure that should any network operators 
impact their services through use of the ARIN RPKI repository [something that 
really shouldn’t really be possible given network operators following best 
practices e.g. RFC 7115] that when such operators are litigated by their 
customers (or those trying to reach their customers), the liability remains 
with the network operator.   Obviously if ARIN is acting with malfeasance or is 
grossly negligent, then the liability should be with ARIN, but indemnification 
clauses are generally inapplicable in such circumstances. 

Thanks,
/John

John Curran
President and CEO
American Registry for Internet Numbers

Re: Hulu / ESPN: Commercial IP Address

[Stuart Henderson]

On 2018-10-15, Brandon Butterworth  wrote:
> On Sat Oct 13, 2018 at 02:39:37PM -0400, Daniel Corbe wrote:
>> I had a customer with a similar issue.   I statically assigned them a  
>> different IP and it didn???t resolve it.   The problem turned out to be 
>> tied  to their Hulu account.
>
> I had a similar issue with wifi calling on O2 in the UK. it
> worked on some wifi but not others. After pressing O2 support
> for quite some time they admitted "you're on commercial IP space
> which we don't support" but would say no more.
>
> After a little puzzling I realised the working wifis were
> NATed to 1918 so I added NAT to one that wasn't working and the
> phone registered OK for wifi calling. The address it was NATed
> to was the same range so it appears their test is for 1918 space
> on the client.

Wifi calling (and femtocells and UMA) use IPsec. If NAT is detected
(rewriting just the port number is probably enough) it will trigger
using UDP encapsulation, without NAT perhaps they are trying to do ESP
and they've blocked that somewhere.

They usually have geolocation / ISP whitelists too, presumably to stop
people trying to use it to get around roaming charges. (I've also seen
a Vodafone femtocell do something funny with frequent NTP packets
which makes me suspect they may do latency checks sometimes as well).

some shallow statistics about finding the name/netname for IP address using RDAP and WHOIS

[Martin T]

Hi!

For testing a script I generated 1 random IPv4 and global unicast
IPv6 addresses. For all those addresses I tried to find the
netname/name attribute value from WHOIS servers using the latest
version of https://github.com/rfc1036/whois and RDAP servers using the
curl. Basically 'whois -H ' and 'curl -L
"https://rdap.db.ripe.net/ip/"'. Out of those 1 random IPv4
and IPv6 addresses, 7351 gave the same name/netname using RDAP and
WHOIS. In case of 2285 addresses, the RDAP was able to find the name
while WHOIS was not. Probably thanks to bootstrap feature. In case of
364 addresses, the WHOIS found a different netname than RDAP. Those
cases can be seen here: http://termbin.com/p6u7 Left column is the
RDAP and the right one is the WHOIS. If "IANA-BLK" WHOIS results for
IPv6 are excluded, then only <1% of queries did not return a result
using RDAP while they did return a result using WHOIS.
In short, based on this small test, the RDAP is much more reliable
than WHOIS for finding the name/netname for an IP address.

Maybe those results are interesting or useful for somebody.

PS. IPv4 and IPv6 addresses were generated like this:

if (( $(($RANDOM % 2)) == 0 )); then

# Generate random IPv4 address.
printf -v ip '%d.%d.%d.%d' \
"$(($RANDOM % 256))" \
"$(($RANDOM % 256))" \
"$(($RANDOM % 256))" \
"$(($RANDOM % 256))"
else

# Gnerate random IPv6 global unicast address.
hex_digit=( 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 a b c d e f )
ip=
for i in {1..7}; do
nibble=
for i in {1..4}; do
nibble="$nibble""${hex_digit[$(($RANDOM % 16))]}"
done
ip="$ip":"$nibble"
done
ip=2001"$ip"
fi


Martin

ARIN TAL copyright

[Baldur Norddahl]

Hi,

The URL to the ARIN TAL nor the ARIN TAL document itself is not 
copyrightable. The ARIN TAL document contains a URL and a key, which is 
a machine generated random number. Neither is based on any creative work 
whatsoever, and so can not be copyrighted. Also would be protected by 
free speech and fair use.


The service itself can have terms and conditions, but access the the TAL 
document is not an effective enforcement. Bundlers of software can 
include this information at will. No need to download it.


I understand the issue is that ARIN wants protection from being sued, 
should I somehow harm myself with this service. However ARIN already 
offers a similar service without any terms and conditions: The reverse 
DNS. As reverse DNS is often used by SMTP mail servers and mail clients 
to stop spam, I might not receive an important mail due to the failure 
of the ARIN reverse DNS service. And then sue ARIN for my financial loss.


As a compromise, I suggest that ARIN outsource the service to somewhere 
with a less hostile legal environment. For example, maybe RIPE could 
mirror the ARIN service. The ARIN service may still require terms and 
conditions, while automatically installed software would use the RIPE 
mirror.


Regards,

Baldur

Re: Hurricane Michael: Communication Service Provider status

[Mike Hammett]

" Note: although the FCC encourages independent ISPs to report outages, none 
have." 

Where to? 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 

Midwest Internet Exchange 

The Brothers WISP 

- Original Message -

From: "Sean Donelan"  
To: nanog@nanog.org 
Sent: Friday, October 12, 2018 3:09:07 PM 
Subject: Re: Hurricane Michael: Communication Service Provider status 


Note: although the FCC encourages independent ISPs to report outages, none 
have. 



13 fatalities reported as of 10/12/2018 

Public Safety Answering Points (9-1-1) outages: 
16 Public Safety Answering Points rerouted 

Curfews: 
Florida: Bay, Franklin, Gadsden, Gulf, Jackson, Liberty 

Electric grid outages: 

Alabama: 25,652 customers (1.01%) 
Florida: 351,433 customers (3.34%) 
Georgia: 304,862 customers (6.44%) 
North Carolina: 492,058 customers (9.94%) 
South Carolina: 7,422 customers (0.29%) 
Virginia 523,304 customers (13.92%) 

Florida Counties with more than 90% customers outage: 
Bradford (91%), Calhoun (100%), Franklin (97%), Gadsden (100%), Gulf 
(99%), Holmes (93%), Jackson (100%), Liberty (100%), Washington (100%) 


Airport status: 

All commercial airports have re-opened. Various temporary flight 
restrictions announced in NOTAMs. 

Sea port status: 

Panama City, FL closed 
Wilmington, NC closed 

Retail fuel stations (out of fuel, power or both): 

6.3% of all Florida stations closed 
41% of Florida panhandle stations closed 
3.2% of Georgia stations closed 
1.7% of Alabama stations closed 


NOAA Weather Radio transmitters out of service (hurricane area): 

Columbus, AL 
Talahassee, FL 
Sneads, FL 
Westville, FL 
East Point, FL 
Panama City, FL 
Pelham, GA 
Lafayette, LA 
New Bern, NC 
Henderson, NC 

Cellular Service (more than 50% out of service): 

Bay County, FL (72.8%) 238 sites out of service 
Gadsden County, FL (58.10%) 36 sites out of service 
Gulf County, FL (65.20%) 15 sites out of service 
Washington County, FL (56.40%) 22 sites out of service 

Cable systems and Wireline subscriber reported outages (likely more, since 
customers may not have reported problems yet, e.g. no outages reported in 
Virgina) 

Alabama: 18,244 
Florida: 252,748 
Georgia: 103,755 

Broadcasters: 

4 TV stations out of service 
27 FM stations out of service 
5 AM stations out of service 

RE: NAT on a Trident/Qumran(/or other?) equipped whitebox?

[adamv0025]

Interesting, but isn’t stateful tracking once again just swapping, but in this 
case port 123 in port 32123 out? 

So none of the chips you named below support swapping parts of L4 header and 
that part is actually done with SW assistance please?  

So for example the following:

https://eos.arista.com/7150s-nat-practical-guide-source-nat-dynamic/#2Dynamic_Source_NATOverload_Many_to_one

- wouldn’t be at line-rate please?

 

Thank you

 

adam

 

netconsultings.com

::carrier-class solutions for the telecommunications industry::

 

From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Paul Zugnoni
Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2018 6:04 AM
To: w...@felter.org
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: NAT on a Trident/Qumran(/or other?) equipped whitebox?

 

The key to answering the question of NAT support on a Broadcom switch 
forwarding chip, is... another question: What /flavour of NAT/ you're looking 
for. Generally Trident (1,2,3), Tomahawk(1,2) and I believe Jericho all support 
varying degrees of swapping parts of an IP or Eth header for other parts - i.e. 
TTL of 249 in, TTL of 248 out, MPLS tag 500 in, MPLS tag 513 out. And, to your 
benefit, SRC IP of 10.1.1.1 in, SRC IP of 10.2.2.2 out. That can be handled at 
line rate (yes 10G); how many of those rules depends on the chip.

 

So that's perfectly fine for static NAT. Problem with static NAT (i.e. 1:1) 
isn't what I suspect most of us are looking for. PAT, or "nat overload" - i.e. 
your internal 10.x or 192.168.x networks to the internet using one or a few 
public IPv4's - requires stateful tracking, which is not what any of those 
chips do. So you're dependent on what route engine and software is in use to 
supply stateful NAT / PAT, and the requirement being higher there generally 
means you'll need a firewall or router (which, btw, might actually be using one 
of the aforementioned Broadcom switch chips for the forwarding plane!). To 
achieve line rate for stateful NAT / PAT there's more than the switch chip and 
software in the equation, and can be the limiting factor to achieving "line 
rate" for a set of 10G ports.

 

PZ

 

On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 12:20 PM Wes Felter mailto:w...@felter.org> > wrote:

On 10/9/18 10:35 AM, Jason Lixfeld wrote:
> Has anyone played around with this?  Curious if the BCM (or whatever other 
> chip) can do this, and if not, if any of the box vendors have tried to find a 
> way to get these things to do a bunch of NAT - say some flavour of NAT, 
> line-rate @ 10G.  If so, anyone know of a NOS that has support for it?  
> OcNOS, Cumulus Linux, PicOS and Switch Light OS seem to have none, but not 
> sure if there are others out there.

For 10G I would use software NAT like a firewall or CGN virtual 
appliance. Switch ASICs generally don't support NAT well; Tofino and 
maybe Jericho II can probably do it but at high cost and as you 
discovered the market isn't trying very hard to provide "routing" or 
"firewalling" functionality on "switching" ASICs.

Re: ARIN RPKI TAL deployment issues

[Edward Dore]

From: NANOG  on behalf of John Curran 

Date: Wednesday, 26 September 2018 at 16:51
To: Tony Finch 
Cc: David Wishnick , nanog list , 
"b...@benjojo.co.uk" , Job Snijders 
Subject: Re: ARIN RPKI TAL deployment issues

On 26 Sep 2018, at 11:02 AM, Tony Finch mailto:d...@dotat.at>> 
wrote:

John Curran mailto:jcur...@arin.net>> wrote:


From 


"CA Terms & Conditions

APNIC’s Certification Authority (CA) services are provided under the
following terms and conditions: ...

• The recipient of any Digital Certificates issued by the APNIC CA
service will indemnify APNIC against any and all claims by third parties
for damages of any kind arising from the use of that certificate.”

That's about certificates, not about trust anchors. It applies to APNIC
members and account holders, not to relying parties.

Tony -

Interesting assertion… while APNIC does issue digital certificates to APNIC 
customers for identity authentication purposes, it also issues digital 
certificates for RPKI.

It’s possible that the intent that the term “Digital Certificates” 
(capitalized) in the CA Terms and Conditions refers to only to those within 
APNIC’s identity CA, but the argument against that would be APNIC’s online 
information about "Digital Certificates" -

=== From 
)

What is a Digital Certificate?

Digital Certificates bind an identity to a pair of electronic keys that can be 
used to encrypt and sign digital information. APNIC uses electronic 
certificates to prove its own identity, the identity of its Members, and the 
right-of-use over Internet resources.

APNIC issues regular Public Key Infrastructure (PKI) certificates for access 
control to APNIC services such as the MyAPNIC Member services website.

In the case of Resource Certification, APNIC issues Resource Public Key 
Infrastructure (RPKI) certificates that have ‘Certificate Extensions’ added. 
These Certificate Extensions carry the Internet number resources allocated or 
assigned to the APNIC Member who is the subject of the Resource Certificate. 
These Resource Certificates are different to the identity certificates used for 
Web system access, and may only be used in the context of verifying an entity’s 
“right-of-use” over an IP address or AS. As a result, APNIC now manages two 
independent certificate authorities, one for Member services, and the second 
for Resource Certification.
…
===

Given that APNIC explicitly mentions the RPKI electronic certificates in their 
explanation of what Digital Certificates are (and further noting that ROA’s do 
indeed contain within them end-entity resource certificates with keys for 
verification), APNIC”s overall CA Terms and Conditions, including the 
referenced indemnification clause, would appear to be applicable to their RPKI 
CA services.

If the intent was indeed to limit the scope, then then APNIC could have easily 
used the term “Identity Certificates” in the indemnification clause to make 
clear its limited scope; i.e. if you’re particularly concerned about liability 
from the resulting indemnification, it might be best to get this clarified one 
way or the other from APNIC.

Thanks!
/John

John Curran
President and CEO
ARIN

I asked APNIC about this and they confirmed that making use of their RPKI TAL 
does not bind you to their CA terms and conditions, so there’s no indemnity 
requirement.

Edward Dore
Freethought Internet

Re: Hulu / ESPN: Commercial IP Address

[Colin Johnston]

nhs public wifi seems weird for hulu and wifi calling,  uses sophos i see so 
wondered if right rules enabled...

col

Sent from my iPod

> On 15 Oct 2018, at 09:10, Christian de Larrinaga  wrote:
> 
> Brandon, That is odd. Might this be an artefact of cellular carriers being 
> fixated on revenue protection of their inter carrier rates. Are they 
> (wrongly) assuming a public IP might be a grey market termination risk onto 
> their networks?
> 
> best 
> 
> Christian
> 
> Brandon Butterworth wrote:
>> 
>>> On Sat Oct 13, 2018 at 02:39:37PM -0400, Daniel Corbe wrote:
>>> 
>>> I had a customer with a similar issue.   I statically assigned them a  
>>> different IP and it didn???t resolve it.   The problem turned out to be 
>>> tied  to their Hulu account.
>> 
>> 
>> I had a similar issue with wifi calling on O2 in the UK. it
>> worked on some wifi but not others. After pressing O2 support
>> for quite some time they admitted "you're on commercial IP space
>> which we don't support" but would say no more.
>> 
>> After a little puzzling I realised the working wifis were
>> NATed to 1918 so I added NAT to one that wasn't working and the
>> phone registered OK for wifi calling. The address it was NATed
>> to was the same range so it appears their test is for 1918 space
>> on the client.
>> 
>> I'm not saying HULU is the same, I've never has access to it,
>> but companies cook up some wierd ideas of what is accepable for
>> client access. I've still got no idea why having a public IP makes
>> it unnaceptable to make phone calls where their coverage is poor.
>> 
>> brandon

Re: Hulu / ESPN: Commercial IP Address

[Christian de Larrinaga]

Brandon, That is odd. Might this be an artefact of cellular carriers
being fixated on revenue protection of their inter carrier rates. Are
they (wrongly) assuming a public IP might be a grey market termination
risk onto their networks?

best

Christian

Brandon Butterworth wrote:
>
> On Sat Oct 13, 2018 at 02:39:37PM -0400, Daniel Corbe wrote:
>>
>> I had a customer with a similar issue.   I statically assigned them a 
>> different IP and it didn???t resolve it.   The problem turned out to be
>> tied  to their Hulu account.
>
>
> I had a similar issue with wifi calling on O2 in the UK. it
> worked on some wifi but not others. After pressing O2 support
> for quite some time they admitted "you're on commercial IP space
> which we don't support" but would say no more.
>
> After a little puzzling I realised the working wifis were
> NATed to 1918 so I added NAT to one that wasn't working and the
> phone registered OK for wifi calling. The address it was NATed
> to was the same range so it appears their test is for 1918 space
> on the client.
>
> I'm not saying HULU is the same, I've never has access to it,
> but companies cook up some wierd ideas of what is accepable for
> client access. I've still got no idea why having a public IP makes
> it unnaceptable to make phone calls where their coverage is poor.
>
> brandon

Re: Hulu / ESPN: Commercial IP Address

[Brandon Butterworth]

On Sat Oct 13, 2018 at 02:39:37PM -0400, Daniel Corbe wrote:
> I had a customer with a similar issue.   I statically assigned them a  
> different IP and it didn???t resolve it.   The problem turned out to be 
> tied  to their Hulu account.

I had a similar issue with wifi calling on O2 in the UK. it
worked on some wifi but not others. After pressing O2 support
for quite some time they admitted "you're on commercial IP space
which we don't support" but would say no more.

After a little puzzling I realised the working wifis were
NATed to 1918 so I added NAT to one that wasn't working and the
phone registered OK for wifi calling. The address it was NATed
to was the same range so it appears their test is for 1918 space
on the client.

I'm not saying HULU is the same, I've never has access to it,
but companies cook up some wierd ideas of what is accepable for
client access. I've still got no idea why having a public IP makes
it unnaceptable to make phone calls where their coverage is poor.

brandon

Fwd: [apops] APRICOT 2019 Call for Presentations

[Mark Tinka]

FYI - APRICOT 2019 Call for Presentations. Thanks.

Mark.

 Forwarded Message 
Subject:[apops] APRICOT 2019 Call for Presentations
Date:   Fri, 12 Oct 2018 14:43:08 +1000
From:   Philip Smith 
To: ap...@apops.net



Hi everyone,

The call for presentations for APRICOT 2019 has been published - we are
all looking forward to receiving your presentation and tutorial
proposals and welcoming you to APRICOT 2019 in Daejeon, Korea, in February.

Thanks!

Mark, Marijana, Philip
APRICOT 2019 PC Chairs
--

Asia Pacific Regional Internet Conference on Operational Technologies
(APRICOT)
25th - 28th February 2019, Daejeon, Korea
https://2019.apricot.net

CALL FOR PAPERS
===

The APRICOT 2019 Programme Committee is now seeking contributions for
Presentations and Tutorials for the APRICOT 2019 Conference.

We are looking for presenters who would:

- Offer a technical tutorial on an appropriate topic;
- Participate in the technical conference sessions as a speaker;
- Convene and chair panel sessions of relevant topics;
- Lead informal Birds of Feather break out sessions.

Please submit on-line at:

http://papers.apricot.net/user/login.php?event=79

CONFERENCE MILESTONES
-

Call for Papers Opens:   Now
Draft Program Published: As Papers Confirmed
Final Deadline for Submissions:  25 January 2019
Final Program Published:  1 February 2019
Final Slides Received:   15 February 2019

*NOTE THAT REGARDLESS OF DEADLINES, SLOTS ARE FILLED ON A FIRST COME,
FIRST SERVED BASIS*

PROGRAMME CONTENT
-

The APRICOT Conference Programme consists of three parts, these being
the Peering Forum, Tutorials, and Conference Tracks.

Topics proposed must be relevant to Internet Operations and Technologies:

- IPv4 / IPv6 Routing and Operations
- Internet backbone operations
- Peering, Interconnects and IXPs
- Content Distribution Network technology & operations
- Research on Internet Operations and Deployment
- Network security (NSP-SEC, DDoS, Anti-Spam, Anti-Malware)
- IPv6 deployment on fixed and Wireless/Cellular networks
- DNS / DNSSEC
- Access and Transport Technologies, including Cable/DSL, LTE/5G,
  wireless, metro ethernet, fibre, segment routing
- Software Defined Networking / Network Function Virtualisaton
- Content & Service Delivery (Multicast, Voice, Video, "telepresence",
  Gaming) and Cloud Computing


CfP SUBMISSION
--

Draft slides for both tutorials and conference sessions MUST be
provided with CfP submissions otherwise the submission will be
rejected immediately.  For work in progress, the most current
information available at time of submission is acceptable.

All draft and complete slides must be submitted in PDF format only.
Slides must be of original work, with all company confidential marks
removed.

Final slides are to be provided by the specified deadline for
publication on the APRICOT website.

Prospective presenters should note that the majority of speaking slots
will be filled well before the final submission deadline.  The PC may,
at their discretion, retain a limited number of slots up to the final
submission deadline for presentations that are exceptionally timely,
important, or of critical operational importance.  Every year we turn
away submissions, due to filling up all available programme slots
before the deadline.  Presenters should endeavour to get material into
the PC sooner rather than later.

Any questions or concerns should be addressed to the Programme
Committee by e-mail at:

pc-chairs at apricot.net

We look forward to receiving your presentation proposals.

Mark Tinka, Marijana Novakovic & Philip Smith
Co-Chairs, APRICOT 2019 Programme Committee
--
___
apops mailing list
ap...@apops.net
https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/apops
Website: www.apops.net
.

Fwd: [apops] APRICOT 2019 PC call for volunteers

[Mark Tinka]

FYI.

Mark.


 Forwarded Message 
Subject:[apops] APRICOT 2019 PC call for volunteers
Date:   Mon, 8 Oct 2018 20:26:42 +1000
From:   Philip Smith 
To: ap...@apops.net



Hi everyone,

The APRICOT 2019 Programme Committee is responsible for the
solicitation and selection of suitable presentation and tutorial
content for the APRICOT 2019 conference (https://2019.apricot.net/).

The APRICOT PC Chairs are now seeking nominations from the community
to join the APRICOT 2019 PC to assist with the development of the
programme for APRICOT 2019.

Eligible PC candidates are those who have attended APRICOT conferences
in the recent past, have broad technical knowledge of Internet
operations, and have reasonable familiarity with the format of APRICOT
conferences.  Having constructive opinions and ideas about how the
programme content might be improved is of high value too.  PC members
are expected to work actively to solicit content and review
submissions for technical merit.  The PC meets by conference call,
weekly in frequency during the three months prior to APRICOT.

If you are interested in joining the PC and meet the above eligibility
criteria, please send a brief note to "pc-chairs at apricot.net".  The
note should include affiliation (if any) and contact details
(including e-mail address), and a brief description of why you would
make a good addition to the PC.  PC members who are active,
successfully solicit content, contribute to regular PC meetings and
submit reviews receive complimentary registration for APRICOT 2019.

The PC Chairs will accept nominations received by 17:00 UTC+8 on
Monday 22nd October, 2018, and will announce the new PC shortly
thereafter.

Many thanks!

Mark Tinka, Marijana Novakovic & Philip Smith
APRICOT 2019 PC Chairs
--
___
apops mailing list
ap...@apops.net
https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/apops
Website: www.apops.net
.