Hi Jordi,
You can always bring any topic to apnic-talk mailing list for discussion.
Not everything has to be discussed on policy-sig mailing list.

And somehow I’m not receiving your emails sent to the policy-sig mailing
list :)

On Tue, 14 May 2019 at 11:15 pm, Srinivas Chendi <su...@apnic.net> wrote:

> Hi Jordi,
>
> Thanks for your contribution to this discussion so far.
>
> As per the SIG Guidelines, Policy SIG Chair is responsible to accept or
> reject a proposal and to check if it is in scope of the active SIG charter.
>
> Please refer to the section 2.4 of SIG Guidelines
> https://www.apnic.net/community/participate/sigs/sig-guidelines/
>
> <snip>
> Accept or reject proposals for discussion at the forthcoming SIG (and
> suggest an alternative forum if the topic is not relevant to that
> particular SIG) [1]
>
> [1] The Chair may decide that a proposal is not suitable for discussion
> at the forthcoming SIG session if:
>
>      The proposal is out of scope for the SIG
>      The proposal is insufficiently developed to be the basis for a
> useful discussion
>      The agenda has already been filled by topics of greater priority
> </snip>
>
> Regards
> Sunny
>
> On 14/05/2019 8:11 pm, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ wrote:
> > I’m not interpreting the PDP as part of that, however, I’m fine if the
> > staff confirms that it is in-scope according to their understanding.
> >
> > We have a recent experience of policies (resource hijacking is a policy
> > violation) being declared out-of-scope in ARIN by the AC. I know the PDP
> > is very different, but let’s make sure we don’t have this situation
> > replicated in other APNIC.
> >
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Jordi
> >
> > El 11/5/19 18:05, "Owen DeLong" <o...@delong.com
> > <mailto:o...@delong.com>> escribió:
> >
> >
> > On May 11, 2019, at 06:13, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ
> > <jordi.pa...@consulintel.es <mailto:jordi.pa...@consulintel.es>> wrote:
> >
> >     Just to make it clear. Do you believe that the PDP update is out of
> >     the scope?
> >
> > No
> >
> >
> >
> >     I think that the PDP is not related to resource management, but the
> >     “self-management” of the way the community discusses the resource
> >     management and agree on the way it should be managed.
> >
> > The pdp is absolutely related to the management of resources in that it
> > is the process by which we develop those policies.
> >
> >
> >
> >     And for me as more we restrict the wording, more risks to wrongly
> >     get things that today are in-scope, to be left out.
> >
> > Agreed. However, in my view, your proposal is not less restrictive, just
> > more verbose.
> >
> > Owen
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >     Regards,
> >
> >     Jordi
> >
> >     El 11/5/19 1:27, "Owen DeLong" <o...@delong.com
> >     <mailto:o...@delong.com>> escribió:
> >
> >     That’s not more generic, Jordi, it’s just more words.
> >
> >     There’s nothing within the scope of the policy manual or its updates
> >     that doesn’t relate to the management and use of internet address
> >     resources.
> >
> >     Owen
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >         On May 10, 2019, at 09:30 , JORDI PALET MARTINEZ
> >         <jordi.pa...@consulintel.es <mailto:jordi.pa...@consulintel.es>>
> >         wrote:
> >
> >         Hi Paul, all,
> >
> >         I feel that this proposed charter is not good enough.
> >
> >         Let me try to explain it.
> >
> >         In RIPE we have a WG for every kind of “topic”, for example,
> >         addressing, abuse, routing, etc. The PDP updates are discussed
> >         in the “plenary” (we have recent small update and this was not
> >         really clear).
> >
> >         However, in all the other regions, all the “topics” are within
> >         the same “unique” WG. There is an exception for ARIN (if I’m
> >         correct) where the PDP is not part of this “policy discussion
> >         group”.
> >
> >         The proposed charter, may fail to cover for example the PDP
> >         update, but I feel there are many other topics that may be in
> >         the future in the same situation.
> >
> >         So why not something more generic in the line of:
> >
> >         “The Policy SIG charter is to develop policies which relate to
> >         the management and use of Internet address resources within the
> >         Asia Pacific region, including any topics under the scope of the
> >         Policy manual or updates of it”.
> >
> >
> >         Regards,
> >
> >         Jordi
> >
> >         El 9/5/19 23:51, "Paul Wilson"
> >         <sig-policy-boun...@lists.apnic.net
> >         <mailto:sig-policy-boun...@lists.apnic.net>en nombre
> >         depwil...@apnic.net <mailto:pwil...@apnic.net>> escribió:
> >
> >         Dear Sumon and all,
> >
> >         To reduce confusion over ISP/LIR/etc terminology, perhaps the
> >         charter could be stated more simply, along these lines:
> >
> >         “The Policy SIG charter is to develop policies which relate to
> >         the management and use of Internet address resources within the
> >         Asia Pacific region. …”
> >
> >         My 2c, with best regards,
> >
> >
>  ________________________________________________________________________
> >         Paul Wilson, Director-General, APNIC d...@apnic.net
> >         <mailto:d...@apnic.net>
> >         http://www.apnic.net <http://www.apnic.net/>@apnicdg
> >
> >         On 9 May 2019, at 19:53, Sumon Ahmed Sabir wrote:
> >
> >             Thank you very much Aftab and Owen for your constructive
> >             feedback. We will definitely consider those views.
> >
> >             If any one has any different perspective please jump in and
> >             share your thoughts.
> >
> >             Sincerely,
> >
> >             Sumon
> >
> >             On Mon, May 6, 2019 at 10:52 AM Owen DeLong <o...@delong.com
> >             <mailto:o...@delong.com>> wrote:
> >
> >                 Aftab, I think you misread the proposed language.
> >
> >                 First, neither the current version nor the proposed
> >                 version refer to members at all, but to the actions of
> >                 the APNIC, NIRs, and ISPs. The one change I think should
> >                 be made there is to replace ISPs with LIRs since not all
> >                 LIRs are technically ISPs, though that is certainly the
> >                 most common case.
> >
> >                 As to your “not limited to” or “services related to
> >                 resources”, I fail to see how that is not addressed by
> >                 the proposed “…and related services”.
> >
> >                 I support the language proposed by Sumon whether or not
> >                 he chooses to take my NIR suggestion.
> >
> >                 Owen
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >                     On May 5, 2019, at 03:21 , Aftab Siddiqui
> >                     <aftab.siddi...@gmail.com
> >                     <mailto:aftab.siddi...@gmail.com>> wrote:
> >
> >                     Thanks Sumon bhai for the initiative,
> >
> >                     <nitpik>
> >
> >                     Revised text suggest that all members/resource
> >                     holders in APNIC are ISPs only, I would suggest to
> >                     make it "APNIC and NIR members or resource holders
> >                     in Asia Pacific region". Because not all members are
> >                     resource holders.
> >
> >                     Secondly, when you start mentioning topics in the
> >                     charter then it may create confusion moving forward
> >                     that only these topics can be covered so how about
> >                     adding "not limited to" or "services related to
> >                     resources" or something like that.
> >
> >                     </nitpik>
> >
> >                     Regards,
> >
> >                     Aftab A. Siddiqui
> >
> >                     On Sun, May 5, 2019 at 4:31 PM Sumon Ahmed Sabir
> >                     <sasa...@gmail.com <mailto:sasa...@gmail.com>>
> wrote:
> >
> >                         Dear Members,
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >                         In the last APNIC meeting in Daejoan there was a
> >                         discussion that there is a perception
> >
> >                         That Policy SIG discusses only about “Address
> >                         Policy”. On the other hand there is a
> understanding
> >
> >                         that Policy SIG covers a wider range of registry
> >                         issues, RPKI or any other topics that requires a
> >
> >                         procedures and rules.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >                         To avoid confusion and to bring clarity in the
> >                         Policy Charter few proposals came in. That
> >                         either we can change the Name of the Policy SIG
> >                         to cover wider range or to amend the Policy-SIG
> >                         Charter to bring clarity about the scope of
> >                         Policy SIG.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >                         After discussions chairs feels that we can make
> >                         some changes in the SIG Charter to bring clarity:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >                         Current SIG Charter
> >
> https://www.apnic.net/community/policy/policy-sig/ says:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >                         ‘The Policy SIG charter is to develop policies
> >                         and procedures which relate to the management and
> >
> >                         use of Internet address resources by APNIC,
> >                         NIRs, and ISPs within the Asia Pacific region.”
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >                         And here is the possible changes proposed:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >                           “The Policy SIG charter is to develop policies
> >                         which relate to the management and use of
> >                         Internet  address resources by APNIC, NIRs,
> >                         and ISPs within the Asia Pacific region.  These
> >                         include policies for resource allocation,
> >                         recovery and transfer, and for resource
> >                         registration within whois, reverse DNS, RPKI and
> >                         related services.”
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >                         Please share your views, comments or suggestions
> >                         in this regard.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >                         Sincerely,
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >                         Sumon, Bertrand and Ching-Heng
> >
> >                         Chairs, Policy-SIG
> >
> >                         *              sig-policy:  APNIC SIG on
> >                         resource management policy           *
> >                         _______________________________________________
> >                         sig-policy mailing list
> >                         sig-policy@lists.apnic.net
> >                         <mailto:sig-policy@lists.apnic.net>
> >
> https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy
> >
> >                     *              sig-policy:  APNIC SIG on resource
> >                     management policy           *
> >                     _______________________________________________
> >                     sig-policy mailing list
> >                     sig-policy@lists.apnic.net
> >                     <mailto:sig-policy@lists.apnic.net>
> >
> https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy
> >
> >             * sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management policy *
> >             _______________________________________________
> >             sig-policy mailing list
> >             sig-policy@lists.apnic.net <mailto:
> sig-policy@lists.apnic.net>
> >             https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy
> >
> >         * sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management policy *
> >         _______________________________________________ sig-policy
> >         mailing listsig-pol...@lists.apnic.net
> >         <mailto:sig-policy@lists.apnic.net>
> https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy
> >
> >
> >         **********************************************
> >         IPv4 is over
> >         Are you ready for the new Internet ?
> >         http://www.theipv6company.com <http://www.theipv6company.com/>
> >         The IPv6 Company
> >
> >         This electronic message contains information which may be
> >         privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be
> >         for the exclusive use of the individual(s) named above and
> >         further non-explicilty authorized disclosure, copying,
> >         distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if
> >         partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited and
> >         will be considered a criminal offense. If you are not the
> >         intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying,
> >         distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if
> >         partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited,
> >         will be considered a criminal offense, so you must reply to the
> >         original sender to inform about this communication and delete it.
> >
> >         *              sig-policy:  APNIC SIG on resource management
> >         policy           *
> >         _______________________________________________
> >         sig-policy mailing list
> >         sig-policy@lists.apnic.net <mailto:sig-policy@lists.apnic.net>
> >         https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy
> >
> >
> >     **********************************************
> >     IPv4 is over
> >     Are you ready for the new Internet ?
> >     http://www.theipv6company.com
> >     The IPv6 Company
> >
> >     This electronic message contains information which may be privileged
> >     or confidential. The information is intended to be for the exclusive
> >     use of the individual(s) named above and further non-explicilty
> >     authorized disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents
> >     of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is
> >     strictly prohibited and will be considered a criminal offense. If
> >     you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure,
> >     copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information,
> >     even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited,
> >     will be considered a criminal offense, so you must reply to the
> >     original sender to inform about this communication and delete it.
> >
> >
> > **********************************************
> > IPv4 is over
> > Are you ready for the new Internet ?
> > http://www.theipv6company.com
> > The IPv6 Company
> >
> > This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or
> > confidential. The information is intended to be for the exclusive use of
> > the individual(s) named above and further non-explicilty authorized
> > disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this
> > information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly
> > prohibited and will be considered a criminal offense. If you are not the
> > intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution
> > or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including
> > attached files, is strictly prohibited, will be considered a criminal
> > offense, so you must reply to the original sender to inform about this
> > communication and delete it.
> >
> >
> > *              sig-policy:  APNIC SIG on resource management policy
>      *
> > _______________________________________________
> > sig-policy mailing list
> > sig-policy@lists.apnic.net
> > https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy
> >
> *              sig-policy:  APNIC SIG on resource management policy
>    *
> _______________________________________________
> sig-policy mailing list
> sig-policy@lists.apnic.net
> https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy

-- 
Regards,

Aftab A. Siddiqui
*              sig-policy:  APNIC SIG on resource management policy           *
_______________________________________________
sig-policy mailing list
sig-policy@lists.apnic.net
https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy

Reply via email to