Re: Renaming - NIR meeting to NIR SIG

[MAEMURA Akinori <maem@maem.org>]

Vincent,  Thank you very much.

  I can agree with you idea.  The meeting title is one of 
the symbol of substance and change in title may imply change
in substance.

  If there is no other opinion, I'll answer Anne that we 
retain the current name - Open NIR Meeting.


Kind Regards,
Akinori


In message <JPEHLEFKGPDLFPIFGOOKCEBIDAAA.wschen@twnic.net.tw>
   "RE: Renaming - NIR meeting to NIR SIG"
   ""Wen-Sung Chen" <wschen@twnic.net.tw>" wrote:

| Dear All,
| 
| I agree with Paul's concern and suggest to keep  NIR meeting's name at current moment.
| But I also suggest let current NIR members work out  (or revisit) new NIR's criteria proposal 
| and NIR's position papers to formalize NIR's role in the APNIC's bylaws as soon as possible.
| Regards,
| 
| Vincent WS Chen/TWNIC
| 
| > -----Original Message-----
| > From: owner-nir-discuss@lists.apnic.net 
| > [mailto:owner-nir-discuss@lists.apnic.net]On Behalf Of MAEMURA Akinori
| > Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2001 4:30 PM
| > To: nir-discuss@apnic.net
| > Subject: Re: Renaming - NIR meeting to NIR SIG
| > 
| > 
| > Paul,
| > 
| > Thank you for your valuable comment.  It is also reasonable.
| > 
| > I'd like to have more comments, anyone?
| > 
| > Akinori
| > 
| > 
| > In message <004801c1820a$933480e0$2401a8c0@staff.apnic.net>
| >    "RE: Renaming - NIR meeting to NIR SIG"
| >    ""Paul Wilson" <pwilson@apnic.net>" wrote:
| > 
| > | Thanks Maemura san.
| > | 
| > | I do not mind changing the name - this was suggested by Anne Lord for
| > | consistency with the other sessions that are held within the APNIC Open
| > | Policy Meeting, and that is a good goal.  However I have one reservation
| > | about this.
| > | 
| > | We must recognise that the NIR Structure is still not finalised, and it
| > | is very difficult to add new NIRs under these circumstances (as you know
| > | APNIC is not accepting any new NIR/confederation memberships at the
| > | moment).  
| > | 
| > | It the NIR Meeting is declared as a "SIG", this may imply that the NIR
| > | structure is now complete and operational, which is not true.  We all
| > | know there is a lot more work to do, and this should always be made
| > | clear, or else we may find there is extra pressure and expectation
| > | regarding NIRs.
| > | 
| > | Paul.
| > | 
| > | 
| > | > -----Original Message-----
| > | > From: owner-nir-discuss@lists.apnic.net 
| > | > [mailto:owner-nir-discuss@lists.apnic.net] On Behalf Of 
| > | > MAEMURA Akinori
| > | > Sent: Tuesday, 11 December 2001 13:18
| > | > To: nir-discuss@apnic.net
| > | > Subject: Renaming - NIR meeting to NIR SIG
| > | > 
| > | > 
| > | > Folks,
| > | > 
| > | > I was proposed renaming NIR meeting to NIR SIG.
| > | > The point is that NIR Meeting is now fully open to any 
| > | > parties and no significant difference from other SIGs.
| > | > 
| > | > I, as the chair, have no objection and think that is much 
| > | > convenient for meeting operations so I'd like to accept this
| > | > proposal if you agree.
| > | > 
| > | > 
| > | > Please present your opinion regardless positive/supporting
| > | > or negative/objection, to this list.  Thanks in advance.
| > | > 
| > | > 
| > | > Regards,
| > | > -----
| > | > MAEMURA Akinori               JPNIC IP Address Working Group
| > | > 
| > |