Hi Jordi,

You're right! We haven't been able to enable DMARC on our mailman due to a 
number of dependencies and
risks but we are looking into migrating to a new server soon.

Regards
Sunny

On 15/05/2019 1:19 am, Srinivas Chendi wrote:

Thanks Jordi.

FYI, consulting with our technical team about this.

Regards
Sunny

On 15/05/2019 12:20 am, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ wrote:


Hi Aftab,

If you don’t get my emails in the list, it may be due to DMARC. Email
servers (such as mine), using DMARC, may get rejected by clients of
mailing lists if the mailing list is keeping my email instead of using
the list one.

It may happen that the APNIC list is not correctly configured?

In all the other RIRs and IETF, this has been “fixed” in mailman long
time ago.


Regards,

Jordi

El 14/5/19 16:09, "Aftab Siddiqui" 
<aftab.siddi...@gmail.com<mailto:aftab.siddi...@gmail.com>
<mailto:aftab.siddi...@gmail.com><mailto:aftab.siddi...@gmail.com>> escribió:

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<mailto:su...@apnic.net>
<mailto:su...@apnic.net><mailto: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>
    <mailto:o...@delong.com><mailto:o...@delong.com>
     > <mailto:o...@delong.com 
<mailto: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> 
<mailto:jordi.pa...@consulintel.es><mailto:jordi.pa...@consulintel.es>
    <mailto:jordi.pa...@consulintel.es
    <mailto: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>
    <mailto:o...@delong.com><mailto:o...@delong.com>
     >     <mailto:o...@delong.com 
<mailto: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>
    <mailto:jordi.pa...@consulintel.es><mailto:jordi.pa...@consulintel.es>
    <mailto:jordi.pa...@consulintel.es 
<mailto: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>
    
<mailto:sig-policy-boun...@lists.apnic.net><mailto:sig-policy-boun...@lists.apnic.net>
     >         <mailto:sig-policy-boun...@lists.apnic.net
    
<mailto:sig-policy-boun...@lists.apnic.net><mailto:sig-policy-boun...@lists.apnic.net>>en
 nombre
     > depwil...@apnic.net<mailto:depwil...@apnic.net> 
<mailto:depwil...@apnic.net><mailto:depwil...@apnic.net>
    <mailto:pwil...@apnic.net 
<mailto:pwil...@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>
    <mailto:d...@apnic.net><mailto:d...@apnic.net>
     >         <mailto:d...@apnic.net 
<mailto:d...@apnic.net><mailto:d...@apnic.net>>
     > http://www.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> 
<mailto:o...@delong.com><mailto:o...@delong.com>
     >             <mailto:o...@delong.com 
<mailto: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>
    <mailto:aftab.siddi...@gmail.com><mailto:aftab.siddi...@gmail.com>
     >                     <mailto:aftab.siddi...@gmail.com
    <mailto: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> 
<mailto:sasa...@gmail.com><mailto:sasa...@gmail.com>
    <mailto:sasa...@gmail.com 
<mailto: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> 
<mailto:sig-policy@lists.apnic.net><mailto:sig-policy@lists.apnic.net>
     >                         <mailto:sig-policy@lists.apnic.net
    <mailto: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> 
<mailto:sig-policy@lists.apnic.net><mailto:sig-policy@lists.apnic.net>
     >                     <mailto:sig-policy@lists.apnic.net
    <mailto: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> 
<mailto:sig-policy@lists.apnic.net><mailto:sig-policy@lists.apnic.net>
    <mailto:sig-policy@lists.apnic.net 
<mailto: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:listsig-pol...@lists.apnic.net>
    
<mailto:listsig-pol...@lists.apnic.net><mailto:listsig-pol...@lists.apnic.net>
     >         <mailto:sig-policy@lists.apnic.net
    
<mailto: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 
<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> 
<mailto:sig-policy@lists.apnic.net><mailto:sig-policy@lists.apnic.net>
    <mailto:sig-policy@lists.apnic.net 
<mailto: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<mailto:sig-policy@lists.apnic.net> 
<mailto: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> 
<mailto:sig-policy@lists.apnic.net><mailto:sig-policy@lists.apnic.net>
    https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy

--

Regards,

Aftab A. Siddiqui


**********************************************
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<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
https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy

Reply via email to