NIR meeting
Wednesday 26 February 2003, Taipei International Convention Center (TICC), Taipei, Taiwan
Minutes
Meeting commenced: 4:10 pm
Chair: Maemura Akinori
The Chair introduced the meeting. He announced that VNNIC's application for NIR recognition has been accepted. Once the remaining formalities are completed, VNNIC will be formally recognised as an NIR. The Chair welcomed VNNIC to the NIR community.
The Chair explained the need for a co-chair to assist with the coordination of this meeting. A call for nominations had been made and Chia-Nan Hsieh nominated himself to take on the role.
Mr Hsieh addressed the meeting and confirmed his willingness to serve as co-chair.
There were no other candidates. The meeting appointed Chia-Nan Hsieh to be Open NIR Meeting co-Chair.
Contents
- NIR Fee Structure and Voting
- Proposed NIR operated IRR
- Introduction to TWNIC RMS (Resource Management System)
- Other discussions
- NIR Fee Structure and Voting
- It was noted that the fee and voting structure has been with APNIC for a long time and has been the subject of some concern in the past. It was noted that the existing structure was established at time when the Secretariat had no idea how many members each NIR had. Therefore, APNIC evaluated NIR fees on a per-address basis. It was explained that under the new operational policies, APNIC is advised of the status of individual members. It is possible to consider this as a reason for re-evaluating the structure.
There was a request that this discussion be referred to the mailing list.
It was suggested that the current model represents over seven years of protracted negotiations among all members to create a workable and fair system that serves the entire community of APNIC stakeholders. It was suggested that it is not appropriate to only discuss Model A and Model B without also considering the current model.
It was explained that the current model has caused some controversy among NIRs in relation to the voting entitlements. However it was also noted that the current model does represent a consensus reached by all members including the NIRs. It was also explained that it would be a very long and complex process to change the structure again.
It was suggested that if there is unnecessary complication in the existing structure, then it may be desirable to achieve a more logical and simple model. However, it has to be recognised that a very involved process would be required to make such changes. - None
- Proposed NIR operated IRR
- It was confirmed that the purpose of this presentation is to seek consensus that NIRs operate an IRR server. It will take considerably more discussion to develop an operational model.
The proposal suggests criteria, including the number of ASNs assigned, and address ranges allocated by the NIR. It was noted that JPNIC currently holds about 100 route objects. - None
- Introduction to TWNIC RMS (Resource Management System)
- It was explained that Java was used in the TWNIC RMS because of the choice of the Java Smartflow object. It was noted that this had been comprehensively tested.
It was confirmed that the whois database is separated from the RMS database, but that the two are maintained in parallel. - None
- Other discussions
- None
Izumi Okutani, JPNIC
This presentation seeks to initiate discussion about fee and voting structure for NIRs. The current structure was described. It was noted that NIRs do not have an independent voting structure - it is based on the same model as normal memberships. However, the fee structure is different in that it includes per-address fees. She noted that in the existing model, the fee and voting structures are inconsistent.
The presenter proposed alternative models.
Model A views NIRs as agents between members and APNIC. It would assess NIR fees and votes as if the NIR members were actually APNIC members. This model has the advantage of consistent logic, but the disadvantage is that it may not cover realistic costs.
Model B considers NIRs as an organisation that supports APNIC and shares the work. The problem with this model would that it would be difficult to define the fees and roles for an NIR committee.
The presenter asked for feedback on other possible models. She proposed a timeline for conducting this discussion, which would hopefully lead to a proposal to be presented at the next NIR meeting.
Questions and discussion
Action items
Kuniaki Kondo, Intec Netcore/JPNIC IRR Planning Team
This presentation summarised the proposal for IRs to operate IRR servers and mirror with each other according to the IRs' respective levels in the hierarchy.
The presenter described the current status of IRR activities worldwide. He noted that IRR users cannot mirror with all servers and that there are problems with IRR data being out of date. He noted that the RIRs have now commenced IRR operations. This adds value to the service provided to RIR members.
The presenter proposed a method for inter-IR mirroring between APNIC and NIRs.
JPNIC has started a JPIRR service to investigate their model in cooperation with APNIC.
The presenter proposed that NIRs start to operate IRR servers and that these be mirrored with APNIC. NIRs can collect national routing information. The benefit to NIR members is improved searching of routing information. He noted that is a need for more discussion about an NIR operational model.
Questions and discussion
Action items
David Chen, TWNIC
This presentation provided an overview of the development and operation of the TWNIC RMS.
The presenter explained the architecture of the RMS and explained the operational processes involved. He explained the available functions that are available to users.
Questions and discussion
Action items
The Chair raised the issue of making the NIR meeting a SIG. It was explained that when the NIR meeting was first established, it had a lot of business that required a more closed format. However, as the meeting has progressed, it may be appropriate to normalise its structure with that of other SIGs. It was noted that normally a SIG should emerge from BOFs. It was suggested that for all practical purposes, this meeting has been held along those lines. It was noted that if this meeting becomes a SIG, there will still be a need for a separate technical meeting between NIRs and APNIC. However, it was noted that it would be necessary for the technical meeting to report developments to the NIR SIG.
There was a concern that some discussions would not be suitable for an open forum. It was suggested that those topics could be discussed in other places, but that any policy-related issues should remain in an open forum.
It was noted that at the JPNIC Open Policy Meeting it was decided not to implement the APNIC policy which allows LIRs to make non-portable assignments of ASNs to their customers. It was suggested that there should be more reporting of policy decisions made in NIR meetings. It was agreed that NIR policy meeting reports would be very useful in the NIR SIG.
It was noted that in the DB SIG there was a presentation relating to the technical requirements for running a whois database by organisations other than APNIC. It was explained that if there are future connections between other whois databases, then it is essential that common technical requirements are adhered to. It was suggested that this presentation would be important for all NIRs and new NIRs to consider.
The Chair concluded by welcoming VNNIC to the NIR community and Chia-Nan Hsieh as the new NIR co-Chair. He then summarised the topics discussed at this meeting. He encouraged all NIRs to report policy developments to the next NIR meeting. Finally, he asked for feedback on the mailing list regarding the fee and voting structure proposals.
Action items
Meeting closed: 5:50 pm
Minuted by: Gerard Ross
Open action items
- None
