Thank you for your follow-up and for clearly outlining your concerns. The Chairs acknowledge your point regarding the distinction between accepting a proposal for community discussion and scheduling it for presentation at an OPM.
To clarify, the decision was not based on a substantive determination that other proposals were of greater policy importance or priority. It was made collectively based on the information and scheduling advice available to us at the time regarding the limited capacity of the APNIC 62 OPM agenda. There was no intention from the Chairs to prevent the proposal from entering the community discussion process. We recognise that the distinction between mailing-list discussion and OPM scheduling could have been handled more clearly. We are discussing this with the Secretariat to ensure the appropriate process is followed and will provide further clarification accordingly. If needed. Thank you for raising the matter and for your continued engagement with the PDP. Dear Secretariat Team, Please advise us on the next steps regarding the recent proposal and concerns raised. SIG Guidelines allow mailing list discussion of non-OPM proposals or problem statements. To ensure an open, transparent, and community-driven process, the Chairs recommend sending the proposal to the Policy SIG mailing list with a proposal number. Note that mailing list discussion doesn't guarantee APNIC 62 OPM agenda inclusion. Could the Secretariat guide and expedite? We appreciate your ongoing coordination and support. Chairs Policy SIG - Bikram, Shaila and Ching-hang On 14 Aug 2026, at 12:13 PM, Christopher Hawker <[email protected]> wrote: This goes without saying, I second Jon's remarks. * The PDP does not state when a proposal can be sent to the Chairs, * It also does not state that the Chairs can decline a proposal on the basis of OPM scheduling, and * It does not state that a proposal cannot be accepted as a formal proposal, be assigned a proposal number, and published to the mailing list for discussion with presentation of the proposal to take place at a future OPM. I'm extremely disappointed that the Chairs have now on two separate occasions failed to respond to my question about how the Chairs determined what proposals are of a greater priority. Regards, Christopher Hawker _______________________________________________ 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]
