13th APNIC Open Policy Meeting

APNIC Member Meeting

Friday 7 March, Queen Sirikit National Convention Center, Bangkok

Minutes

Meeting commenced: 09:15

Chair: Che-Hoo Cheng

The Director General (DG), Paul Wilson, introduced the meeting and thanked the sponsor for this meeting, TWNIC. The DG explained the agenda and outlined the procedure and times for the Executive Council election.

Contents

1. APNIC Annual Report
2. Executive Council report
3. APNIC forward plan and budget
4. MyAPNIC project update
5. Questions and discussions about APNIC reports
6. EC election preparations and candidate speeches

SIG & NIR Meeting reports

7. Database SIG
8. Reverse DNS SIG
9. Routing SIG
10. IX SIG
11. IPv6 SIG
12. Address policy
13. NIR Meeting
14. Address Council elections

RIR reports

15. ARIN status report
16. RIPE NCC status report
17. LACNIC status report
18. AfriNIC status report
19. EC election result
20. Next meeting
21. Closing words

Presentations

APNIC Annual Report

[Presentation]

Paul Wilson

• This presentation provided a summary of the main issues in the Annual Report for 2001.
• It was noted that membership growth has slowed down, to a large extent due to mergers and acquisitions. Factors which may influence growth rates in 2002 were discussed.
• There was an overview of resource allocation rates, including the fact that APNIC allocated more IPv4 addresses than RIPE NCC in 2001; a review of the distribution of allocations; and the observation that ASN requests have slowed down.
• It was noted that there has been a strong increase in the demand on services, including whois, web, and ftp, and that other ticketed requests have also grown.
• There was a general review of developments in 2001, including various policy developments, growth and consolidation, membership structure, training activities, communication, global coordination, technical upgrades, projects, the member/stakeholder survey, and meetings.
• A summary of the consolidated financial reports was presented. It was noted that an exchange rate benefit to APNIC contributed to a reduction in budgeted expenses. It was also noted that sponsorship reduced the cost of training services. It was noted that revenue was slightly higher than predicted.

Questions and discussion

No further discussions at this time.

Top

Executive Council report

[Presentation]

Che-Hoo Cheng, EC Chair

• This presentation summarised the composition, role, and activities of the EC in 2001. In particular, the report noted the areas of policy oversight; financial and fiscal oversight; the new membership agreement; the document review policy; membership fee structure; NIRs; and the ICANN contract.
• There was an overview of the KPMG survey of APNIC members and stakeholders, and of the EC's response to the survey report.
• The issue of the Address Council (AC) election process was discussed. It was noted that the current election process for the AC election gives a strong advantage to the host country. The EC has suggested some possible solutions, including establishing a nominating committee, or setting up an individual membership and restricting the vote to members (with proxy voting possible). There was a request for this issue to be discussed later in this AMM.

Questions and discussion

No further discussions at this time.

Top

APNIC forward plan and budget

Paul Wilson

• This presentation provided an overview of APNIC's priorities for 2002 in the following areas: staff development, helpdesk, account management, quality certification, web based support materials, meeting development, multilingual services, training, publications, infrastructure development.
• The presentation also introduced the intention to investigate sub-regional liaison efforts.
• The presentation provided an overview of APNIC's strategic development of a distributed service model.
• There was a discussion of APNIC's intention to investigate ways of increasing research and development work in the region.
• There was discussion of issues relating to legacy transfer activities and global database harmonisation.
• The presentation reviewed the factors that influence the budget process and provided an overview of the budgetary projections for 2002.

Questions and discussion

No further discussions at this time.

Top

MyAPNIC project update

[Presentation]

Sanjaya, APNIC

• This presentation updated the progress of the MyAPNIC project, including new features, future plans, and a demonstration. The presentation described the five service areas in MyAPNIC, namely: resource management, administration, training, messaging, and security. There was also a brief overview of the relation of MyAPNIC to the IPv6 resource management system being developed in Japan.

Questions and discussion

• It was noted that the development platform for this project is Linux, with Perl programming and a MySQL database.
• It was noted that full deployment is expected by August 2002.
• It was explained that APNIC is working with the NIRs to develop a common framework for an IPv6 management system. It was noted that it is planned to demonstrate a prototype of this project at APNIC 14.
• An ARIN representative noted that they are very interested in the progress of the MyAPNIC project.

Top

Questions and discussions about APNIC reports

No further discussions.

Top

EC election preparations and candidate speeches

Paul Wilson

• The EC election procedures were described. It was noted that three positions on the EC are open for election, with the terms of Geoff Huston, Che-Hoo Cheng, and Akinori Maemura all expiring at this meeting.
• There was a presentation noting that the candidates elected at this meeting are to hold their positions until 2004. There was an explanation of the voting method and it was noted that the restructure of the membership raises the question of modifying the voting procedure. It was noted that the EC had resolved that the voting system should not be modified without full membership consultation.
• The instructions for the ballot papers were explained.
• The nominees were introduced:

Che-Hoo Cheng

• The candidate addressed the AMM. He outlined his background and experience. He expressed his desire to continue serving the membership.

H. S. Gupta

• The candidate was not present.

Geoff Huston

• The candidate addressed the AMM. He outlined his background and experience. He discussed his view of the EC, which is to operate on behalf of the membership and serve its needs.

Akinori Maemura

• The candidate addressed the AMM and explained the normal usage of his name. He outlined his background and experience. He noted that only his mother calls him Akinori. He provided details of the contributions to the industry in Japan and the broader region, as a member of the JPNIC IP Address Working Group and as Chair of the APNIC NIR meeting. He expressed his desire to use his position on the EC to encourage more participation within the region.

Indira Pramana

• The candidate was not present.

Budi Rahardjo

• The candidate was not present, but Pandji Choesin spoke on his behalf. He noted that following recent conversations, the candidate has withdrawn his nomination.

Questions and discussion

• The DG again described the voting procedures and noted that the deadline for submission of ballots is 14:30 in the marked ballot box.
• There was a call for volunteers to assist in the supervision of the election and the counting and reporting of votes. The following individuals volunteered: Evi Nemeth, Adam Peake, Barbara Roseman, Joanna Tso, MH Cheon.

[Break 12:10 - 13:35]

The DG reviewed the agenda for the current session and again reminded the participants of the deadline for voting.

Top

SIG & NIR Meeting reports

Database SIG

[Presentation]

George Michaelson, APNIC (on behalf of SIG Chair, Xing Li)

• The presenter summarised each of the topics discussed during the SIG.
• It was noted that with regard to the proposal to assign an AS origin attribute to inetnum object in APNIC database, the SIG had decided to refer this discussion back to the mailing list for further consideration.
• It was noted that there were no consensus items from this SIG to report to the AMM.

Questions and discussion

No further discussions.

Top

Reverse DNS SIG

[Presentation]

George Michaelson, APNIC (on behalf of SIG Chair, Paul Gampe)

• The presenter summarised each of the topics discussed during the SIG.
• It was noted that the SIG raised the following action items
• APNIC should issue a statement of impact to the community explaining the delay in resolving the legacy transfer from ARIN and should begin work to progress the transfer;
• A working group should be formed to prepare a recommendation on deploying i18n DNS;
• APNIC should investigate notifying ip6.int domain object holders of the support for ip6.arpa and should post a statement about support for ip6.arpa to broader APNIC community; and
• This SIG and APNIC should investigate how to support DNSSEC in APNIC's reverse domain object and in zone management procedures.
• It was noted that there were no consensus items relating to policy changes to report to the AMM.

Questions and discussion

No further discussions.

Top

Routing SIG

[Presentation]

Philip Smith, Cisco

• The presenter summarised each of the topics discussed during the SIG.
• It was noted that the SIG did not reach any conclusions on the proposal that NIRs should operate IRRs.
• It was noted that the SIG was very well attended and contained interesting content.

Questions and discussion

• It was noted that both the Routing and DB SIGs discussed IRRs. It was suggested that some work needs to be done, perhaps by the Chairs, to ensure that topics are presented in the appropriate SIG. It was also suggested that it may sometimes be appropriate to hold combined sessions of these SIGs.

Top

IX SIG

[Presentation]

Philip Smith, Cisco

• The presenter noted that this was a new SIG, being held for the first time.
• It was reported that Philip Smith had volunteered as interim chair and was appointed as official Chair during the session.
• It was noted that the Exchange Point reports were very useful and informative and that participation in this SIG demonstrated a great interest in IX activities in this region.

Top

IPv6 SIG

[Presentation]

Tomihiro Fujisaki, NTT

• The presenter summarised each of the topics discussed during the SIG, which primarily focused on updates and status reports of IPv6 operations in various parts of the region, especially Japan and Taiwan.

Questions and discussion

• It was noted that there may be scope for APNIC to compile reports of experience from Japan and other areas, and to help make this practical information available for other forums. It was suggested that this could be an appropriate role for the SIG, but that there would be a role for APNIC to help coordinate that.

Top

Address policy

[Presentation]

Takashi Arano, Asia Global Crossing

• The presenter reported that the SIG was very well attended and produced lively discussion. He summarised each of the topics discussed during the SIG.
• It was noted that the most significant topic discussed was the progress of the IPv6 policy draft. The proposals to amend this draft were discussed in detail. The main areas discussed related to the initial criteria, the use of HD ratio, and the level of registration responsibility appropriate for sub-allocations.
• It was reported that the SIG reached general consensus for the entire global IPv6 draft, with the proposed amendments.
• It was reported that with respect to the ASN policy proposal, there was some disagreement with the provision to make registration of routing policy mandatory. It was noted that there was consensus to accept the policy, subject to the amendment making routing policy registration optional.
• On the subject of the cable/DSL guidelines, it was reported that it was important to finalise this matter without delay. The three items referred from APNIC 12 were again discussed, but the proposals made on these matters were not accepted. In summary, it was reported that the consensus of the SIG was to maintain the original proposal of the Broadband Working Group, but to continue discussion regarding assignment justification.
• There was an action item to revise the draft guideline document and publish it soon.
• The Chair noted that there were fewer proposals in this SIG than in previous ones. He also noted that there is a need to encourage a broader range of presentations, especially from the Asia Pacific region.
• The Chair also suggested that the schedule of this SIG was difficult and that in future it may be better to split the SIG over two days.
• The Chair noted that he needed assistance and asked for volunteers to co-chair the SIG.
• The Chair also asked for people to consider forming other working groups.

Questions and discussion

ASN policy draft

• It was noted that the draft ASN policy forced a contractual relationship between APNIC and the ASN requestor. It was argued that this could change the business models of some providers, who are currently able to provide ASNs to their own customers. The AMM was asked to consider amending the policy to instead make the ASN assignments to LIRs as "non-portable".
• It was noted that the ASN policy draft is still within the document review process and that all comments will be considered prior to the next call for comments.
• There was also a suggestion to implement the proposal but allow ISPs who are currently in the business of providing ASNs to their customers to continue doing so.
• There was an argument that the proposed amendment should not be made, as the nature of ASNs is that they are a portable resource.
• It was clarified that the intention of the amendment would be to allow users to request an ASN either from their provider (on a non-portable basis) or to apply directly from APNIC.
• There was a suggestion to create a working group to deal with this issue; however, it was argued that the issue may be too specific for a dedicated working group. It was decided to deal with this issue by continuing the normal review process and contributing comments to the mailing list.

Cable/DSL proposal

• It was suggested that there are rapid developments in this area and it is important to not make policies that are too technology-specific. However, it was noted that the proposal in question was intended to be made part of a guideline document, not a policy, to allow for greater responsiveness.



There was a presentation of gifts to the SIG Chairs. It was also noted that significant progress had been made in the development of global IPv6 policy and that thanks were due to the group which worked hard to achieve that, led by Arano-san.

Top

NIR Meeting

[Presentation]

Akinori Maemura, Equant

• The presenter described the background to the NIR meeting, noted that this meeting was very well attended, and reviewed the topics which were discussed. The increased cooperation between NIRs and APNIC was noted.
• It was noted that the meeting had resolved to form a working group to progress the development of the NIR document and that the NIR Chair will propose a schedule for this task shortly.
• It was noted that the NIR meeting is open to all, as are the nir-discuss and wg-nir mailing lists.

Questions and discussion

No further discussions.

Top

Address Council elections

Che-Hoo Cheng

• This presentation summarised concerns that the current AC election procedures give too much advantage to the meeting host country. Concerns were also reported regarding the need to ensure that nominees are properly qualified.
• The presentation raised two possibilities:
• Form a nominations committee to nominate appropriately qualified AC candidates
• Extend the APNIC membership structure to allow individual members and then require APNIC membership vote only.
• There was a suggestion of disqualifying the host country from voting, but this was rejected as being unfair.
• It was suggested that individual memberships raise the problems of "At Large" memberships. However, it was also suggested that the nominating committee also raises some political problems.
• There was also a suggestion of establishing some form of web-based pre-registration system.
• It was noted that another suggestion made previously was to open a new APNIC individual membership at a low fee, with voting rights restricted to AC elections only.
• There was also a suggestion of allowing votes only to those who had attended two of the previous two meetings. There was a counter suggestion of making the requirement attendance at one previous APNIC meeting.
• There was a discussion about the validity of a nominating committee.
• There was discussion about whether an individual membership category should attract a fee. It was noted that it would be destructive to allow the perception that APNIC could use such a category for revenue raising. However, it was argued that there should be some fee, although it may be on a strictly cost-recovery basis.
• It was suggested that basing the voting eligibility on prior attendance would be very hard to administer.
• The following options were put to the AMM for consideration:

Nominations

1. Maintain the current system (open nominations by anyone)
2. Use a nominations committee (similar to the IETF structure)

There was consensus to maintain the status quo for nominations

Voting

1. Maintain the status quo (Anyone at meeting can vote)
2. Base criteria on meeting attendance (People can vote if they have attended APNIC meetings, or are an APNIC member)
3. Restrict to APNIC membership (But implement a low-cost individual membership; which could allow for proxy votes)
4. None of the above (The issue needs work, but more thought is required)


• The discussion was deferred to allow participants time to consider the options.

[Break: 15:45 - 16:00]

• The AMM was asked to provide its opinion on the best AC election option. It was noted that, at this stage, the opinion of the AMM is only intended to inform the EC of the membership preference and not to be considered a binding decision.
• There was roughly equal support for options 2 and 3 (and only limited support for options 1 and 4).
• It was noted that the result of this discussion is unclear. It was noted that the AMM appears to be of the opinion that the process needs change, but more work is required to define the best option.

Top

RIR reports

ARIN status report

[Presentation]

Ray Plzak, ARIN

• This presentation provided an update of recent ARIN activities, membership status, Secretariat status, an update of emerging registries, an overview of the ARIN AC election procedure, and details of the next meeting.
• It was noted that the new ARIN web site is due to be launched on 15 March.
• It was announced that a joint ARIN/NANOG meeting is being planned.
• It was mentioned that return on ARIN's investment of its reserve is likely to be invested in outreach activities.
• It was noted that ARIN will soon be providing a formal letter of support for AfriNIC.

Questions and discussion

No further discussions.

Top

RIPE NCC status report

Axel Pawlik, RIPE NCC

• This presentation provided an update of recent RIPE NCC activities, membership status, Secretariat status, an overview of the ARIN AC election procedure, and details of the next meeting.
• It was noted that the membership growth trends in Europe are very similar to those reported for the Asia Pacific region.

Questions and discussion

No further discussions.

Top

LACNIC status report

German Valdez, LACNIC

• This presentation provided an update of the efforts to officially establish LACNIC as an RIR. The presentation dealt with the following: organisations providing support to LACNIC; LACNIC's region and organisational structure; policy framework; transition plans; funding model; and current activities.

Questions and discussion

• An ICANN representative reported that ICANN has decided that at the Accra meeting, ICANN will announce provisional approval for LACNIC's transition plan.
• It was also noted that both RIPE NCC and APNIC have also provided statements of support.

Top

AfriNIC status report

German Valdez, (on behalf of Mouhamet Diop, AfriNIC)

• This presentation provided an update of the efforts to officially establish AfriNIC as an RIR. The presentation dealt with the following: AfriNIC's goals; its operational plan; the Memorandum of Understanding with RIPE NCC; staffing; selection of a host country; communication; meetings; AfriNIC's compliance with the criteria for emerging registries; and current activities.

Questions and discussion

No further discussions.

Top

EC election result

It was announced that 775 votes were cast an that all votes were valid. The successful candidates were as follows:

• Geoff Huston: 709 votes
• Che-Hoo Cheng: 695 votes
• Akinori Maemura: 680 votes

It was noted that the ballot forms had been sealed and would be taken back to the APNIC Secretariat to be destroyed.

Top

Next meeting

It was announced that APNIC 14 will be held in Kita-Kyushu City, Fukuoka, Japan, from 3 - 6 September 2002, hosted by JPNIC.

There was a presentation by JPNIC to provide an overview of the plans for this meeting.

Top

Closing words

TWNIC was thanked for its sponsorship of this meeting.
The local APRICOT hosts were thanked for their support.
The APNIC staff was thanked for their efforts.
Finally, all Chairs, presenters, and participants were thanked for their contribution to this meeting.

Top

Meeting closed: 17:00

Minuted by: Gerard Ross

Top | Minutes