Hi Philip and Aftab, The WG will get back to you on the provided inputs.
Regards, Gaurav Kansal On Wed, 12 Aug 2026 at 09:33, Philip Smith <[email protected]> wrote: > Thanks for sharing the proposed new guidelines. > > I'd like to echo Aftab's concerns 100%. > > I was one of the community instigators proposing an equivalent to the > RIPE Working Groups for our region back at the start of this century. Of > course, we do not have an equivalent of RIPE here (the closest I suppose > was the long gone APNG - Asia Pacific Networking Group), so the best fit > equivalent was to create Working Groups with administrative support of > APNIC. Our intention very clearly was NOT to create APNIC > sub-committees, but fora for like minded folks to discuss, coming up > with recommendations, best practice, you name it. It was the previous > APNIC DG who requested they be called Special Interest Groups, rather > than Working Groups as we wanted (which I felt neutralised the intent > that we really wanted to do *work* as the RIPE Working Groups do). > > I have serious concerns about giving the APNIC EC any authority to > remove SIG Chairs, or indeed any authority over the SIGs. SIGs are > community gatherings, organised by the community for the community to > discuss topics as per the SIG's area of interest. APNIC provides > administrative support. The SIGs are not convened or created or driven > by APNIC, and the intention has always been that neither the EC nor the > Secretariat have any authority to make changes at their leisure or > pleasure, as the updated guidelines are proposing. > > The wording around "APNIC Conference" needs to be fixed. APNIC 62 > upcoming is, of course an APNIC Conference, but APNIC's meeting held as > part of APRICOT is not an "APNIC Conference". APNIC 63 next year in Hong > Kong is a fully integral part of the APRICOT 2027 Summit which is > organised by APNOG. Also what if the "APNIC Conference" happens, but the > SIG does not meet for that specific event? There is no requirement that > the SIG *must* meet every 6 months, is there? I recommend fixing the > wording; perhaps "SIG Meeting" would be better as it is then very clear > that the Chair or Co-Chair has to attend (in person or online) a > proportion of the SIG Meetings during their tenure of the role. > > Finally, I'm baffled why "APNIC Member" has any relevance for who can or > cannot vote for SIG Chairs. The regular participants of the SIG nominate > and vote for their Chairs - nothing to do with APNIC membership. Over > the years, SIG Chairs have been voted for during the SIG Meeting held > during the APRICOT Summit, as that guarantees the largest attendance of > regular SIG participants, giving the best opportunity for broadest > community input into their specific SIG's content and direction. > > philip > -- > _______________________________________________ > SIG-policy - https://mailman.apnic.net/[email protected]/ > To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] >
_______________________________________________ SIG-policy - https://mailman.apnic.net/[email protected]/ To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
