Dear Gaurav, I welcome the publication of the full draft text for community review. Below are some pointers for the consideration of the Working Group.
1. The scope of the revised draft appears broader than the matters agreed by the Working Group at its 9 June meeting, as reflected in the minutes circulated on 10 June. My understanding is that the agreed work covered definitions of SIG and consensus, defining the SIG lifecycle, term limits for individuals, a process for future SIG Guidelines changes, and an appeals process. It would be helpful if the Working Group could identify which changes implement these agreed matters, which are consequential drafting changes, and which are new proposals. 2. Under both the current and proposed Guidelines, a Working Group is task-specific. Its role should end with presenting recommendations to the body that created it. Accordingly, consensus should be considered through the Joint SIGs forum, rather than determined by the Working Group. 3. Term limits, Chair removal, SIG dissolution, and related changes are independently significant. A participant may support some provisions and object to others. A single consensus call for the entire package may therefore be insufficient; consensus cannot be inferred for the whole package merely because there is broad support for some of its components. 4. The existing concept of a Working Group is rooted in the SIG Guidelines and, in practice, in SIG-led work. What is the rationale for expressly including the APNIC EC as a body able to establish a Working Group under the SIG Guidelines? If this authority is retained, the text should clearly define the WG’s scope, accountability, reporting line, and safeguards against bypassing SIG or wider community consensus. 5. Given the addition of several new definitions and governance concepts, the “Joint SIGs Forum” should also be defined. The Guidelines should clarify its composition, role, how its agenda is set, who chairs it, and how consensus is assessed and recorded. This is particularly important where a Working Group’s work has implications across all SIGs. At the end, the SIGs reflect two fundamental principles: a bottom-up process and community-driven decision-making. My understanding was that this revision was intended to streamline components which, over time, required change to reflect operational reality. However, the exercise now appears to have become a broader constitutional review of the SIG Guidelines. Requesting that these principles be coded in the definition of SIG so that it never gets out of focus. Regards Anupam On Fri, Aug 7, 2026 at 8:30 PM Gaurav Kansal <[email protected]> wrote: > Dear Friends, > > On behalf of the SIG Guidelines Review Working Group, I'm pleased to share > that the revised draft of the SIG Guidelines is now ready for community > review. > > The Working Group has worked through the Guidelines broadly covering Chair > and Co-Chair responsibilities, the SIG formation and dissolution process, > term limits, SIG charters, and a few other areas. > > To help you review the proposed changes, we've prepared the following > documents: > > 1. *Revised draft of SIG Guidelines* – the full proposed text of the > revised Guidelines: > https://ftp.apnic.net/apnic/drafts/apnic-128-v005-draft.txt > 2. *HTML diff view* – a side-by-side comparison highlighting all the > changes between the current Guidelines and the draft version: > https://ftp.apnic.net/apnic/drafts/apnic-128-v005-draft.diff.html > 3. *Redline version* – showing additions and deletions directly within > the draft text for review: > https://ftp.apnic.net/apnic/drafts/apnic-128-v005-draft.redline.html > > > *How to provide feedback:* > > Please reply to this thread on the mailing list with your comments, > questions, or concerns. All feedback is welcome — support, objections, and > suggested edits alike. You're welcome to share feedback any time up to the > Joint SIGs session at APNIC 62 in Mumbai, where the consensus call will > take place. > > If you have any questions or would prefer to discuss anything off-list, > please feel free to reach out to me directly at [email protected]. > > We look forward to your feedback, and to seeing many of you at the Joint > SIGs session in Mumbai. > > Best regards, > Gaurav Kansal > on behalf of the SIG Guidelines Review Working Group > _______________________________________________ > 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]
