> On 07-Sep-2022, at 14:19, [email protected] wrote: > > Hi Brett, > > Somehow, I actually responded to your last point before reading it in my > previous email. > > I think is really bad that the EC takes decisions that belong to the > community, unless the community is being called for considering a proposal. I > don’t think it happened, and actually instead, when I submitted a proposal, > it was rejected. The EC, the chairs and the community should learn a lesson > from this. This is not the only instance where APNIC EC has decided the policies without even consulting with community. > > And yes, the EC decision is binding for the staff, unless we make a policy > proposal to disallow the EC decision(s) or even change the bylaws. Too late > anyway for this meeting. > > And to be clear, I’ve not talked to the EC about this proposal, neither the > one I submmited about a year ago. I was already considering this as a result > of the staff presentation on several issues with policies. > > Regards, > Jordi > > @jordipalet > > > > > > El 29/8/22, 13:17, "Brett O'Hara" <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> > escribió: > > Thanks for your clarification Vivek. > > Text of the Resolution is as follows; > > Resolution 2021-09: The EC resolved that all historical resource holders will > need to become, or remain, a Member or Non-member of APNIC on and from [1 > January 2023], in order to continue to receive registry services from APNIC. > > Interpretation from the secretariat via Vivek is that this implies all > unclaimed historical records will be placed in reserved status, regardless of > being advertised or not, and subject to ROA AS0 under 5.1.4 on the 1st of > January 2023. > > I see prop-147 is an interpretation of EC resolution 2021-09 and attempts to > clarify this within the Policy. > > My first question is procedural and governance related. Can or should the > secretariat implement the EC resolution without the Policy being updated? > > If the EC could be considered an effective co-sponsor of this proposal, my > previous comments now have a broader audience. > > Does the EC still believe the date they set on EC Resolution 2021-09 is still > reasonable given the progress of the HRM process and the current impact to > the potential 193k+ ((175 in progress + 581 no response)* 256 minimum size) > active Internet endpoints and how does the Policy SIG address the EC for > their response on this consideration? > > Regards, > Brett > > On Mon, Aug 29, 2022 at 6:15 PM Vivek Nigam <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> Hi Aftab, >> >> APNIC creates RPKI ROAs with origin AS0 for all undelegated address space >> (marked as “Available” and “Reserved” in the delegated-apnic-extended-latest >> stats file. It may be worth noting that APNIC publishes these AS0 ROAs in a >> different Trust Anchor (AS0 TAL) and recommends its Members use APNIC AS0 >> TAL as a routing information service only. >> >> https://www.apnic.net/community/security/resource-certification/apnic-limitations-of-liability-for-rpki-2/ >> >> <https://www.apnic.net/community/security/resource-certification/apnic-limitations-of-liability-for-rpki-2/> >> >> Hi Jordi, >> >> > If I understood correctly the implications of the EC decision, *if* tis >> > policy proposal doesn’t go thru they will become reserved anyway. >> > >> > Could the staff confirm that? >> >> Yes, as per the EC resolution 2021-09, all historical resource holders will >> need to become, or remain, a member or non-member of APNIC on and from 1 >> January 2023, in order to continue to receive registry services from APNIC. >> Any historical resources that are not managed under an APNIC account from 1 >> January 2023 will be removed from whois and placed into “Reserved” status. >> >> Our understanding is that your proposal is to address the actions that need >> to be taken 12 months after these resources have been placed into reserved >> status. >> >> Thanks >> Vivek >> >> From: Aftab Siddiqui <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>> >> Date: Saturday, 27 August 2022 at 2:30 pm >> To: JORDI PALET MARTINEZ <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>> >> Cc: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>, Brett >> O'Hara <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> >> Subject: [sig-policy] Re: prop-147-v001: Historical Resources Management >> >> Hi Jordi, >> I absolutely concur with Brett and Andrew, they have already mentioned the >> reasoning very clearly. I don't support this policy right now and maybe we >> can review the status in 12 months and have another constructive discussion. >> >> Also, it would be a right time to have a clear policy from APNIC to clarify >> what and when any (available + reserved) resource goes into AS0 TAL. >> >> Regards, >> >> Aftab A. Siddiqui >> >> >> On Sat, 27 Aug 2022 at 14:21, Brett O'Hara <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >>> Hi Jordi and SIG >>> >>> The implication of your proposal, by 5.1.4, is that by putting them in >>> Reserved status, APNIC will assign them RPKI ROA AS0 and deny them routing >>> on the Internet. You will then allow them 12 months grace after you have >>> denied their operation to officially claim them. Your update from 6 to 12 >>> months has not allowed APNIC any more time to contact custodians. >>> >>> I agree with Andrew that the current impact is too large and too damaging >>> to internet end point users in your proposed time frame. >>> >>> I believe APNIC members should asess the progress of the HRM project in 12 >>> months time and consider your proposal then, rather than mandating in a >>> policy final date in this cycle, despite your afore mentioned risks. >>> >>> Regards, >>> Brett >>> >>> On Fri, Aug 26, 2022 at 10:19 PM JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via sig-policy >>> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >>>> Hi Andrew, all, >>>> >>>> I see it otherwise. >>>> >>>> We are providing APNIC one year to resolve the remaining cases. If we >>>> don’t have this policy on January 1st 2023, all those addresses will be >>>> “frozen” into reserved status. >>>> >>>> Please note this: >>>> >>>> “The recent EC resolution (22nd February 2022), imply that historical >>>> resource holders in the APNIC region would need to become Members or >>>> Non-Members by 1st January 2023 in order to receive registration services. >>>> Failing this, historical resource registration will no longer be published >>>> in the APNIC Whois Database and said resources will be placed into >>>> reserved status.” >>>> >>>> Failing to reach consensus on this proposal (suggestions to improve it, of >>>> course, are welcome, as we can publish new versions in the next few days), >>>> means that we can’t change the situation up to a new alternative proposal >>>> reach consensus, which could happen around March 2023, or may be September >>>> 2023. Till then those resources are “lost” in the wild. >>>> >>>> Resources in the wild could be more easily hijacked or used for all kind >>>> of malicious activities. Do you think the community should accept that >>>> risk? >>>> >>>> In the impact analysis of the first version, APNIC indicated that 6 months >>>> may be too short, and 12 months will be safer, so we opted for keeping the >>>> 12 months option only. Do you have any data that suggest that APNIC will >>>> be unable to complete the project in the next year? >>>> >>>> >>>> Regards, >>>> Jordi >>>> >>>> @jordipalet >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> El 26/8/22, 2:56, "Andrew Yager" <[email protected] >>>> <mailto:[email protected]>> escribió: >>>> >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> Thanks for this data vivek. >>>> >>>> On the basis of this I cannot suggest this proposal can be accepted - the >>>> impact is too large. >>>> >>>> Certainly we, as a community, and APNIC as a whole, need to look at what >>>> can be done to assist these prefixes coming "into the fold" - but with 581 >>>> still with no response, and 175 "not yet done" - the risk of this proposal >>>> having adverse consequences on the routing table is too great. >>>> >>>> Andrew >>>> >>>> >>>> On Fri, 26 Aug 2022 at 17:45, Vivek Nigam <[email protected] >>>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >>>>> Hi Andrew, >>>>> >>>>> Please see my responses below. >>>>> >>>>> > a) the number of legacy resources currently in use (as in, visible in >>>>> > the global table), but not yet claimed through this process >>>>> >>>>> We started this project in February this year and identified 3932 >>>>> historical IPv4 prefixes that were not managed under an APNIC account. >>>>> 885 of these prefixes are currently visible in the routing table. >>>>> Following if the breakdown of these 885 prefixes. >>>>> >>>>> Retained by custodian: 81 >>>>> These prefixes have successfully been claimed and are managed under >>>>> active APNIC accounts now. >>>>> >>>>> Being claimed by custodian: 175 >>>>> We are in contact with the potential custodians and they are in the >>>>> process of claiming these prefixes. >>>>> >>>>> No response: 581 >>>>> We have sent emails to the custodians but have not got a response as yet. >>>>> We are in the process to find alternate contacts by contacting the ASN >>>>> announcing these prefixes. >>>>> >>>>> Yet to contact: 44 >>>>> No valid contact information available in whois. We are in the process to >>>>> look for alternate contacts via publicly available searches as well as >>>>> contacting the ASN announcing these prefixes. >>>>> >>>>> No longer needed: 4 >>>>> The custodians have informed us they no longer need these prefixes. We >>>>> are in the process to contact the ASN announcing these prefixes to check >>>>> why they are announcing them. >>>>> >>>>> > b) the number of legacy resource claims that have been attempted but >>>>> > not successfully justified >>>>> >>>>> So far we have not formally rejected any claims. Where a claimant does >>>>> not provide sufficient information to support their claim, we do not >>>>> reject the claim but rather advise them we will need more information in >>>>> order to properly assess it. We have 3 pending cases where we have >>>>> requested additional supporting information and one case where the >>>>> custodian has refused to setup an APNIC account. We will continue to >>>>> assist them with their claims through the year. >>>>> >>>>> Thanks >>>>> Vivek >>>>> >>>>> From: Srinivas (Sunny) Chendi <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> >>>>> Date: Wednesday, 24 August 2022 at 6:02 pm >>>>> To: Andrew Yager <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>, JORDI >>>>> PALET MARTINEZ <[email protected] >>>>> <mailto:[email protected]>> >>>>> Cc: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >>>>> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> >>>>> Subject: [sig-policy] Re: prop-147-v001: Historical Resources Management >>>>> >>>>> Dear Andrew, >>>>> >>>>> Thank you for requesting data. >>>>> We will do our best to provide it as soon as possible. >>>>> >>>>> Regards, >>>>> Sunny >>>>> APNIC Secretariat >>>>> >>>>> On 24/08/2022 4:03 pm, Andrew Yager wrote: >>>>>> Is there any data indicating: >>>>>> >>>>>> a) the number of legacy resources currently in use (as in, visible in >>>>>> the global table), but not yet claimed through this process >>>>>> b) the number of legacy resource claims that have been attempted but not >>>>>> successfully justified >>>>>> >>>>>> I am aware that this has remained a topic of concern for a number of >>>>>> APNIC members and technical engineers, and many have been working with >>>>>> APNIC to try and resolve resource allocations with various degrees of >>>>>> success. >>>>>> >>>>>> Andrew >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Wed, 24 Aug 2022 at 09:36, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via sig-policy >>>>>> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >>>>>>> Hi Sunny, all, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Just summited a new proposal version amending the editorial inputs and >>>>>>> also adding the following text: >>>>>>> “Furthermore, from 1st January 2023, all historical resources need to >>>>>>> be maintained in a current APNIC account. In the event of an account >>>>>>> closure, the historical resource will be placed in a quarantine period >>>>>>> and then made available for re-delegation similar to current resources.” >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Also, in order to facilitate the job, I agree that will be safer to >>>>>>> move to a single option with 12 months, so I’ve deleted the “2 choices” >>>>>>> in the new version. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Regards, >>>>>>> Jordi >>>>>>> >>>>>>> @jordipalet >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> El 23/8/22, 6:51, "Srinivas (Sunny) Chendi" <[email protected] >>>>>>> <mailto:[email protected]>> escribió: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Hi all, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> This is the secretariat's impact assessment for prop-147-v001, which is >>>>>>> also >>>>>>> available on the proposal page. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> http://www.apnic.net/policy/proposals/prop-147 >>>>>>> <http://www.apnic.net/policy/proposals/prop-147> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> APNIC understands that this proposal suggests that historical IPv4 >>>>>>> resources be justified and claimed, or that they be made available to >>>>>>> other organizations that require them. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> APNIC also notes the deletion of Section 4.2.1. Recovery of unused >>>>>>> historical resources. As reported to the community at APNIC 50, this >>>>>>> may no longer be applicable once the project is completed, possibly by >>>>>>> the end of 2022. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> https://conference.apnic.net/50/assets/files/APCS790/Reclaiming-unused-IPv4.pdf >>>>>>> >>>>>>> <https://conference.apnic.net/50/assets/files/APCS790/Reclaiming-unused-IPv4.pdf> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Recommendations: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> For consistency of language and to align with the current policy >>>>>>> document, the reference to "available pool" could be changed to "free >>>>>>> pool". Also the reference to "original resource holder" and "original >>>>>>> custodians" could be changed to "custodian/s". >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Given the number of uncontactable resource holders, the 12-month option >>>>>>> would be safer for APNIC to implement, as some historical resource >>>>>>> holders may not be aware of the changes to the treatment of historical >>>>>>> resources until they are placed into reserved status on January 1, 2023. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Clarification: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> This proposal only addresses historical resources that have not been >>>>>>> claimed by January 1st, 2023. It does not specify what happens to the >>>>>>> historical resources that are claimed, but the Member or Non-Member >>>>>>> account is not renewed after January 1, 2023. These resources will be >>>>>>> considered historical and may remain in reserve status indefinitely. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Regards, >>>>>>> Sunny >>>>>>> APNIC Secretariat >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On 11/08/2022 4:59 pm, chku wrote: >>>>>>>> Dear SIG members, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The proposal "prop-147: Historical Resources Management" has been >>>>>>>> sent to the Policy SIG for review. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> It will be presented at the Open Policy Meeting (OPM) at APNIC 54 on >>>>>>>> Thursday, 15 September 2022. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> https://conference.apnic.net/54/program/schedule/#/day/8 >>>>>>>> <https://conference.apnic.net/54/program/schedule/#/day/8> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> We invite you to review and comment on the proposal on the mailing >>>>>>>> list >>>>>>>> before the OPM. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The comment period on the mailing list before the OPM is an important >>>>>>>> part of the Policy Development Process (PDP). We encourage you to >>>>>>>> express your views on the proposal: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> - Do you support or oppose this proposal? >>>>>>>> - Does this proposal solve a problem you are experiencing? If so, >>>>>>>> tell the community about your situation. >>>>>>>> - Do you see any disadvantages in this proposal? >>>>>>>> - Is there anything in the proposal that is not clear? >>>>>>>> - What changes could be made to this proposal to make it more >>>>>>>> effective? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Information about this proposal is appended below as well as available >>>>>>>> at: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> http://www.apnic.net/policy/proposals/prop-147 >>>>>>>> <http://www.apnic.net/policy/proposals/prop-147> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Regards, >>>>>>>> Bertrand, Shaila, and Ching-Heng >>>>>>>> APNIC Policy SIG Chairs >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> prop-147-v001: Historical Resources Management >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Proposer: Jordi Palet Martinez ([email protected] >>>>>>>> <mailto:[email protected]>) >>>>>>>> Anupam Agrawal ([email protected] >>>>>>>> <mailto:[email protected]>) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> 1. Problem statement >>>>>>>> -------------------- >>>>>>>> Section 4.2.1 is outdated and only looking for very old non-routed >>>>>>>> resources. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The recent EC resolution (22nd February 2022), imply that historical >>>>>>>> resource holders in the APNIC region would need to become Members or >>>>>>>> Non-Members by 1st January 2023 in order to receive registration >>>>>>>> services. Failing this, historical resource registration will no >>>>>>>> longer be published in the APNIC Whois Database and said resources >>>>>>>> will be placed into reserved status. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Given the continued need for IPv4 addresses, it would seem illogical >>>>>>>> to keep these unused historical resources in reserve indefinitely. >>>>>>>> Alternatively, these resources can be used in a way that is >>>>>>>> sufficiently justified in accordance with existing policies, allowing >>>>>>>> other organizations to benefit from them during the IPv6 transition. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> 2. Objective of policy change >>>>>>>> ----------------------------- >>>>>>>> Ensure that historical IPv4 resources are justified and claimed, or >>>>>>>> that they are available for other organizations that require them. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> If the resources are marked as reserved, the original holders may >>>>>>>> reclaim them with a valid justification, when APNIC failed to contact >>>>>>>> them for whatever reason. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> One example of a valid justification is the case where an organization >>>>>>>> is actually using them internally and there are valid reasons to >>>>>>>> instead use RFC1918 space, however the space is not routed. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> To give the original resource holders more time to reclaim them, we >>>>>>>> propose two time-frames for the community discussion and >>>>>>>> consideration: 6 months and 12 months. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> 3. Situation in other regions >>>>>>>> ----------------------------- >>>>>>>> In other RIRs legacy resources lose their legacy status when the RSA >>>>>>>> is signed (upon receiving other resources), so they become under the >>>>>>>> regular monitoring. In other cases, there is nothing specified by >>>>>>>> policies. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> 4. Proposed policy solution >>>>>>>> --------------------------- >>>>>>>> Proposed policy solution (option 6-months): >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Actual text: >>>>>>>> 4.2.1. Recovery of unused historical resources (remove) >>>>>>>> To recover these globally un-routed resources and place them back in >>>>>>>> the free pool for re-delegation, APNIC will contact networks >>>>>>>> responsible for historical address space in the APNIC region that has >>>>>>>> not been globally routed since 1 January 1998. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> To recover un-routed historical AS numbers, APNIC will contact >>>>>>>> networks responsible for resources not globally used for a reasonable >>>>>>>> period of time. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Proposed text: >>>>>>>> 4.3. Historical Resources Management >>>>>>>> Historical resources that have not been claimed by the original >>>>>>>> resource holder will be deleted from the APNIC Whois database after >>>>>>>> 1st January 2023, and marked as reserved. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Historical resources marked as reserved have an additional six (6) >>>>>>>> months to be claimed by their original custodians. After that, APNIC >>>>>>>> will add these resources to the available pool for re-delegation. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Proposed policy solution (option 12-months): >>>>>>>> Actual text: >>>>>>>> 4.2.1. Recovery of unused historical resources (remove) >>>>>>>> To recover these globally un-routed resources and place them back in >>>>>>>> the free pool for re-delegation, APNIC will contact networks >>>>>>>> responsible for historical address space in the APNIC region that has >>>>>>>> not been globally routed since 1 January 1998. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> To recover un-routed historical AS numbers, APNIC will contact >>>>>>>> networks responsible for resources not globally used for a reasonable >>>>>>>> period of time. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Proposed text: >>>>>>>> 4.3. Historical Resources Management >>>>>>>> Historical resources that have not been claimed by the original >>>>>>>> resource holder will be deleted from the APNIC Whois database after >>>>>>>> 1st January 2023, and marked as reserved. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Historical resources marked as reserved have an additional twelve (12) >>>>>>>> months to be claimed by their original custodians. After that, APNIC >>>>>>>> will add these resources to the available pool for re-delegation. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> 5. Advantages / Disadvantages >>>>>>>> ----------------------------- >>>>>>>> Advantages: >>>>>>>> Fulfilling the objective above indicated. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Disadvantages: >>>>>>>> None. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> 6. Impact on resource holders >>>>>>>> ----------------------------- >>>>>>>> None. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> 7. References >>>>>>>> ------------- >>>>>>>> None. >>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>> sig-policy - https://mailman.apnic.net/[email protected]/ >>>>>>>> <https://mailman.apnic.net/[email protected]/> >>>>>>>> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] >>>>>>>> <mailto:[email protected]> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> >>>>>>> _______________________________________________________________________ >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Srinivas (Sunny) Chendi (he/him) >>>>>>> Senior Advisor - Policy and Community Development >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Asia Pacific Network Information Centre (APNIC) | Tel: +61 7 3858 3100 >>>>>>> PO Box 3646 South Brisbane, QLD 4101 Australia | Fax: +61 7 3858 3199 >>>>>>> 6 Cordelia Street, South Brisbane, QLD | http://www.apnic.net >>>>>>> <http://www.apnic.net/> >>>>>>> _______________________________________________________________________ >>>>>>> >>>>>>> NOTICE: This email message is for the sole use of the intended >>>>>>> recipient(s) >>>>>>> and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any >>>>>>> unauthorized >>>>>>> review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not >>>>>>> the >>>>>>> intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply email and >>>>>>> destroy all >>>>>>> copies of the original message. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> _______________________________________________ sig-policy - >>>>>>> https://mailman.apnic.net/[email protected]/ >>>>>>> <https://mailman.apnic.net/[email protected]/> To unsubscribe >>>>>>> send an email to [email protected] >>>>>>> <mailto:[email protected]> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> ********************************************** >>>>>>> IPv4 is over >>>>>>> Are you ready for the new Internet ? >>>>>>> http://www.theipv6company.com >>>>>>> <https://aus01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.theipv6company.com%2F&data=05%7C01%7C%7C3740ddd1234b48b408be08da87e4d1ad%7C127d8d0d7ccf473dab096e44ad752ded%7C0%7C0%7C637971714095792757%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=lEVBTEkXEvuYhVUWR7YWdA%2BhTITV8RybFUsAKy%2FrKM8%3D&reserved=0> >>>>>>> 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 - https://mailman.apnic.net/[email protected]/ >>>>>>> <https://mailman.apnic.net/[email protected]/> >>>>>>> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] >>>>>>> <mailto:[email protected]> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________________________________ >>>>> >>>>> Srinivas (Sunny) Chendi (he/him) >>>>> Senior Advisor - Policy and Community Development >>>>> >>>>> Asia Pacific Network Information Centre (APNIC) | Tel: +61 7 3858 3100 >>>>> PO Box 3646 South Brisbane, QLD 4101 Australia | Fax: +61 7 3858 3199 >>>>> 6 Cordelia Street, South Brisbane, QLD | http://www.apnic.net >>>>> <http://www.apnic.net/> >>>>> _______________________________________________________________________ >>>>> >>>>> NOTICE: This email message is for the sole use of the intended >>>>> recipient(s) >>>>> and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized >>>>> review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the >>>>> intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply email and destroy >>>>> all >>>>> copies of the original message. >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> ********************************************** >>>> IPv4 is over >>>> Are you ready for the new Internet ? >>>> http://www.theipv6company.com >>>> <https://aus01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.theipv6company.com%2F&data=05%7C01%7C%7C3740ddd1234b48b408be08da87e4d1ad%7C127d8d0d7ccf473dab096e44ad752ded%7C0%7C0%7C637971714095792757%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=lEVBTEkXEvuYhVUWR7YWdA%2BhTITV8RybFUsAKy%2FrKM8%3D&reserved=0> >>>> 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 - https://mailman.apnic.net/[email protected]/ >>>> <https://mailman.apnic.net/[email protected]/> >>>> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] >>>> <mailto:[email protected]> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> sig-policy - https://mailman.apnic.net/[email protected]/ >>> <https://mailman.apnic.net/[email protected]/> >>> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] >>> <mailto:[email protected]> > ********************************************** > 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 - https://mailman.apnic.net/[email protected]/ > <https://mailman.apnic.net/[email protected]/> > To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>
_______________________________________________ sig-policy - https://mailman.apnic.net/[email protected]/ To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
