Randy Bush wrote:
sure. could you please clarify the following? i could be confused, as
usual, but i could not really understand if/how you responded directly
to the following:
my worry is that this proposal may be vulnerable to the attack
(please excuse internet security geek terminology) that 42 people
get into a room and vote, unanimously of course, that they are an
nir.
I believe the problem here is that we appear to be trying to solve two
problems with one proposal, and accomplishing neither.
Kusumba appears to be attempting to mitigate a situation where a
government is a deciding factor in how an NIR is created. There appears
to be a suggestion that said government may not represent the majority
of either APNIC Members or even Internet users within a given country.
With this in mind Kusumba has put forward a proposal to lessen the power
that a government would have in the establishment of an NIR.
There is however an opposing view. The view that there may be some
countries where a non-government entity establishes and NIR. If this
is done with no government involvement, then it also possible that it
will lack and credibility, respect or legitimacy from the wider
community within that country.
As you can see we have two situations which are not being addressed by
either current policy or proposal 60 as it stands. This is not
surprising as we live in a region with a large number of different
government systems.
I believe what is needed here is not to exclude governments from the NIR
establishment process, but the formation of a set of checks and balances
to guard against the sort of abuse of power which Kusumba seems to be
suggesting exists in some markets. This would also minimise the
possibility that a non-government entity could form an NIR with no
legitimacy from the local community and government.
If there was no agreement between the local community and the government
then the status quo (administration by APNIC) would remain. In essence
the process remains failsafe.
All that remains to be done is to develop these checks and balances. I
feel that moving forward along those lines will bring everyone to
consensus rather than looking to exclude government involvement.
Regards
Dean Pemberton