Thanks Leo for your info on various registry.
To all, the various registry information will be included in the
calculation.
I'm noting divergence in the desired level of detail.
The detailed report is needed for transparency and research purposes (2
people)
Of those who don't want detailed report (4 people), 3 are concerned with
APNIC spending its limited resource producing the report. One saw the
risk of misuse.
I propose to produce a summarised daily public report first (with
graph). We will look for a minimum effort and secure way to fulfill the
research needs, but this comes later. Let me know how you feel about
this approach. Thanks.
Cheers,
________________________________________________________________________
Sanjaya email: sanjaya@apnic.net
Services Director, APNIC sip: sanjaya@voip.apnic.net
http://www.apnic.net phone: +61 7 3858 3100
________________________________________________________________________
* Sent by email to save paper. Print only if necessary.
On 3/12/2010 11:15 AM, Hannigan, Martin wrote:
On 12/2/10 8:07 PM, "Andy Linton"asjl@lpnz.org wrote:
On 3/12/10 Fri, Dec 3, 13:13, Terry Manderson wrote:
Hi Andy,
I was also pleased to see these figures.
But the request for the detail is not for micromanagement of the
APNIC staff. Far from it.
It is about transparency of registry data. The data partly exists
already, but in my mind is incomplete.
This closes the loop and provides any researchers (like me) with a
valuable set of authoritative information regarding the RIR/NIR
pools. These pools are currently a black box.
Terry,
Thanks for the clarification. If there are people like yourself who can
make use of more detailed information and it can be made available in a
straightforward manner then I see no reason to withhold it either.
+1, and I'd like to hear about "various registries" as asked. Is it in the
inventory now? If not, when?
Best,
-M<
sig-policy mailing list
sig-policy@lists.apnic.net
http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy