Dear Mr. Jain, "India's representation" is something that cannot be just achieved by being on the mailing list alone. If one take the stats, they are transparent as how many members do attend training programmes, AMMs, non-technical events, etc from India. The number is far less when compared to the membership that India has. So, unless that is done, the participation cannot be said to be significant and at the same time, if you just consider this mailing list itself, the participation is only "need" basis. 2 years of EC man years was achieved with the efforts and activity that was known to you very well. At the same time, activities and achievements during the same are also known to fellow-members in India. If I may ask a question, why a subsequent attempt was not made? Why the representation was not made consistent? Ofcourse, with India forming NIR, the representation would be more difficult for a reason that the number of votes would fall down to just few as the members keep migrating from RIR to NIR. I am not able to visualise the kind of representation that would be possible then in the policy frame work, ofcourse that which may impact India too and also the said "representation" you mentioned in your mail. I foresee that the participation then would be meager spectator and nothing anything more than that! You are worried about forms at APNIC. Honestly, in the last two years, especially after relinquishing my position at EC, I have worked with six large ISPs helping them comply to the basic obligations such as assignment windows, reverse dns updations, etc and they strictly follow the same today. All it required was not training but create interest in trying to understand and comply the same. As such, APNIC procedures are not at all difficult and detailed help pages are available for every activity. The current "MyAPNIC" page is far friendly than the earlier one. Ofcourse, it is known fact that we have discussed earlier as how many people do have access to MyAPNIC with any member company? Regarding "say" by others, just for the record, APNIC has large non-ISP members from India too. In many of the meetings, representatives from such members were also seen and they have participated in all the activities during AMM. I remember, some of them whom we both have met too in three different meetings of APNIC. IPv6 is not a "space technology". This was discussed and debated many times in India itself. Unfortunately, the perception of the users is different as we have seen that they always raise with a question, "why should I invest on IPv6 now?". Ofcourse, to change this, it has nothing with either APNIC or local agencies like ISPAI etc doing some thing or not, but it is something that the operators / organisations should realize that they may miss the "opportunity"! I have seen all the required publicity for IPv6 till now, but takers have not yet realized the missing opportunity. They still believe that world exists with IPv4 for long! While your thoughts are just as elderly as how they are always, the point of "open-policy" and "community" driven / participated systems is the need for the day, no matter what the system that may evolve around Internet is! Many countries have established such systems both ways and it did not take long for them to realize to align with the fraternity thoughts. Ofcourse, if not, the disaster is not "technical" but "functional". Greetings, Kusumba S Brajesh jain wrote: Dear Mr Kusumba, I am curious to know of India's representation and say in APNIC matters in last 10 years or so. Of more than 100 EC man years, just2 man years from India? There are numerous other committees /panels. What is India's participation here ? I am seeking this information to prove wrong my understanding that India stakeholder's say is near NIL. Let me just add that I am not at all saying that APNIC is responsible for this. I remember huge struggle in IPv4 addresses and DNS understanding 10 years ago. Yes APNIC allocated addresses if form is filled correctly. But how to fill forms and correctly? This called for getting information from here and there and over long time and with struggle. Now take IPv6 addresses and need for the same for last 6 years. I can assure you that even IPV6 address header is understood only by handful stakeholders in India. And this small set of persons who understand IPv6 is among the Software companies in India who are doing development work for world's leading hardware/software/firmware companies. And unfortunately, they donot have a say in APNIC, as it exists today. I am convinced that if India misses out IPv6 understanding and does not deploy in time (It is late already), India would surely further lag behind in Internet usage. With best wishes, Brajesh C Jain -----Original Message----- From: apnic-talk-bounces at lists dot apnic dot net [mailto:apnic-talk-bounces at lists dot apnic dot net] On Behalf Of apnic-talk-request at lists dot apnic dot net Sent: 24 November 2009 08:58 To: apnic-talk at lists dot apnic dot net Subject: apnic-talk Digest, Vol 67, Issue 44 Send apnic-talk mailing list submissions to apnic-talk at lists dot apnic dot net To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/apnic-talk or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to apnic-talk-request at lists dot apnic dot net You can reach the person managing the list at apnic-talk-owner at lists dot apnic dot net When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of apnic-talk digest..." Today's Topics: 1. Re: [Apnic-announce] Application for India NIR - Call for Comments (Vebtel - Kusumba S) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2009 08:52:11 +0530 From: Vebtel - Kusumba S <kusumba at vebtel dot com> Subject: Re: [apnic-talk] [Apnic-announce] Application for India NIR - Call for Comments To: kramvir singh <krmvrsngh61 at gmail dot com> Cc: apnic-talk at lists dot apnic dot net Message-ID: 4B0B5163.2020603 at vebtel dot com"><4B0B5163.2020603 at vebtel dot com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252" Ofcourse, as long as: All one may understand here is that the members of NIXI are ISPs and registrars. Whereas, members for NIR are Corporates, Independent Companies (not necessarily are peering to any ISP that is member of NIXI), Defence establishments, Financial Institutions, IT companies, Manufacturing companies, Educational institutions etc who have nothing to do with NIXI. So, the "need" neither addressed them nor the "cause" explains the same since the only document that is available talks about NIXI / ISPAI / DoT / TRAI.... Also, if NIXI has to form the NIR, I don't see a situation where NIXI will alter its board for the cause of NIR to include other members of NIR! Hence, neutrality cannot be achieved since the dominance is of NIXI members, unless a separate Section 25 is established as "by members", "for member" and "to members". --- You may have read over this ten times... but thats the point! I am sure you know the current composition of members of APNIC from India. *Kusumba S* kramvir singh wrote:When I referred to 'you' not there, it also meant 'we' are not there. But your neutrality point is well meaning. My concern was only one - not having NIR, which also you have clarified. We all want NIR in India. On Mon, Nov 23, 2009 at 6:44 PM, kramvir singh <krmvrsngh61 at gmail dot com <mailto:krmvrsngh61 at gmail dot com>> wrote: If Neutrality is the only concern then I think NIXI should clarify this. However, if you are not there does not mean Neutrality is not there. Greetings, On Mon, Nov 23, 2009 at 6:25 PM, Vebtel - Kusumba S <kusumba at vebtel dot com <mailto:kusumba at vebtel dot com>> wrote: Check my comments below: kramvir singh wrote:Thank You for acknowledging that NIR in India shall be formed.Kusumba S >>> Please correct... there is no acknowledgment and at the same time there is no objection! No objection cannot be attributed to acknowledgment. As I clarified in my last mail, unless the documents and neutrality is established, it is difficult to get convinced. When I say neutrality, it is "by members", "for member" and "to members" from top of the organization to the ground. Without which, it is never neutral but a compromise for no reason.The detailed response of Desi and others are not helping you as your objective is outsourcing of APNIC. This outsourcing, I agree is not being talked by community and that?s why you are finding the discussion void.Kusumba S >>> NIR did not raise outsourcing issue. As again, you may have missed, I have mentioned this in detail about two years back!Please help the community with your inputs on what was your plan and objectives for NIR, as your statements suggest that you only know and others do not know.Please shower your blessings on the lesser mortals like us too!Kusumba S >>> Ofcourse, would have been the first to do it when I find neutrality. As a matter of fact, may be you are not aware of history when the first NIR thought-process-documentation was made. The basic application itself is not complying the above three requirements "by members", "for member" and "to members", so it does not qualify my view. Greetings, *Kusumba S*On Mon, Nov 23, 2009 at 5:39 PM, Vebtel - Kusumba S <kusumba at vebtel dot com <mailto:kusumba at vebtel dot com>> wrote: While I appreciate your reasoning, the concerns will not be addressed till such time the documents are published and made public. No one, including me said that NIR in India should not be formed! However, the reasons attributed to it and the comments on the mails represented that there is no clarity on the formation of NIR since there is no evidence of alignment with International community and best practices. Some additional comments even raised doubts if NIR is being looked as a "problem-solving" solution or "community participation" system for India. Added to that are the "emotions" of angular momentums and tendencies of something going off the tangent that allows one to think if there is a defined system for establishing, running, managing and consistently ensuring protection of global resources and procedures through or at NIR in India, if formed. To rule out all this, all you could do is, establish those simple procedural documents and make things clear. If you intend not to do, for whatever the reason you wish to attribute to such as "criteria", "compliance", etc etc etc... , this discussion is void! Ofcourse, irrespective of anything here, APNIC can always look at outsourcing or relocating some of the operations to cost effective countries, something that I mentioned two years back too! Greetings, *Kusumba S * kramvir singh wrote:All your earlier mails have been responded by Desi/ Mutthuswamy / Brajesh and others in details. Looks to me that you have missed out. However please feel free to point out if any concern has not been responded. NIR is not the solution of all woes but NIR is an opportunity for addressing few of them! Whenever anyone would do things on their own, the learning?s, importance, implementation are entirely different. Mutthuswamy has also tried to explain the same in his mail. Similarly Desi?s response on routers from Japan. You need to have your objectives clear. Is it your concern on APNIC revenue or one time your interest for NIR without Govt. endorsement which was dropped by APNIC community. If it is APNIC's revenue, then it is not only because of India NIR , it is also due to the other 6 NIRs. In Andy?s words ?This is no reason to reject NIR for India ?. If it is due to drop of your proposal due to drop of endorsement, this itself is enough for us to understand that NIR is required. Dear brother, hope your all concerns are addressed. If not, be positive to get it addressed when NIR comes to India! On Mon, Nov 23, 2009 at 4:51 PM, kramvir singh <krmvrsngh61 at gmail dot com <mailto:krmvrsngh61 at gmail dot com>> wrote: Good, you have stopped referring yourself as - "we/community". This ?I? shall be addressed. The right to publishing the document is with APNIC and they have done it.Please connect to their initial communication and you will have all the details. I am sure your so- claimed point already made, would get further clarity. On Mon, Nov 23, 2009 at 4:39 PM, Vebtel - Kusumba S <kusumba at vebtel dot com <mailto:kusumba at vebtel dot com>> wrote: I think the way I would look at this in the respect of others here, ignore this! Thats not the point to debate with you! The point is already made clear in my earlier mail and if one has clarity on those things, publish the same and thats it! Nothing to talk! *Kusumba S* kramvir singh wrote:Hey, I find the entire response deviating . In your mail I have noticed that you have referred yourself as ?we? and ?community? whereas in my understanding I am not able to place you in any community in India?.so please do not impose your individual views as community views! NIXI has applied for NIR so the discussion should be nation or at the most regional only. I have nowhere referred anything about language , IP, financial constraints etc?. How my understanding the same would help me in understanding which community you come from? I appreciate your view point on outsourcing from APNIC, but how it gets relevant on this APNIC talk is a surprise for me! In community instead of preaching and patronizing , please contribute in a positive manner. In the morning I have seen mails of Andy, Gaurav, Naresh and Philip which were very positive and talking about brasstrack. Community representatives like Desi ,Mutthuswamy and Brajesh are responding well. And hope they also check on your community affiliation. In brief,which community you belong & referring is still not clear. Thanks for the only kind word in your mail ? Brother! On Mon, Nov 23, 2009 at 3:47 PM, Vebtel - Kusumba S <kusumba at vebtel dot com <mailto:kusumba at vebtel dot com>> wrote: Hey, This is the exact problem you seem to be having! You only know two countries in entire Asia Pacific region! On Internet resources that are global resources, one cannot demonstrate "regional" problems and claim a stake in there, no matter even if you were to be from either of the countries you mentioned below! Further, as long as you learn to talk "community" language, you will not talk problems like "language", "no ip addresses", "financial constraints", "upstream non-operation", etc.... community facilitates you to handle them already and you will known if you are part of that community for the "cause" and not for "need". So, hope that clarifies, which part of community I belong to brother! * Kusumba S * kramvir singh wrote:Which country are you from , India or Pakistan? If India, please clarify which Internet community you represent as, you have mentioned in your mail you have been saying ?we/community?? On Sun, Nov 22, 2009 at 10:29 PM, kramvir singh <krmvrsngh61 at gmail dot com <mailto:krmvrsngh61 at gmail dot com>> wrote: ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: *Vebtel - Kusumba S* <kusumba at vebtel dot com <mailto:kusumba at vebtel dot com>> Date: Sun, Nov 22, 2009 at 8:19 PM Subject: Re: [apnic-talk] [Apnic-announce] Application for India NIR - Call for Comments To: apnic-talk at lists dot apnic dot net <mailto:apnic-talk at lists dot apnic dot net> Dear Colleagues, I think this thread is running no where since the "need" and "cause" are way apart and are not justified. So, as I see, here is what I think the least expected here, ofcourse resulting in what I have explained in "activity 2" here: *Activity 1:* 1) The applicant makes the application public here. 2) The applicant demonstrates endorsement and adoption of open policy frame work by doing the following: i) publish documentation for composition of the proposed company ii) publish documentation for composition of the proposed board, stake holding, election process of the board, election of the CEO / Chair / Secretary / Treasurer iii) publish documentation detailing voting policy and voting rights for both members and non members iv) publish documentation for making policy proposals, policy framework, policy endorsements and policy management v) publish documentation for decision management cycle, board functioning and member participation vi) publish process for financial management, financial decision power, funding structure and budget vii) publish documentation detailing process management such as "resource requests", "change requests", "whois updates", "object management", etc viii) demonstrate the capability of managing the operations of NIR by showcasing the proposed team structure, roles and functions definitions ix) publish document detailing the roles of members, non - members, interest groups and community participation finally, ix) an undertaking that the resource allocation will be free and open as per the above frame work and the same shall not be inter linked or related to any other compliances and process of either licensing or regulations. The same need to be adopted into the "Articles of Association" and "Memorandum of Association" of the proposed company, which I guess will be an independent section 25 (not for profit) company without stake holding by any other existing companies. *Activity 2:* 1) If NIR in India is formed, the revenues of APNIC will be impacted significantly. I am not sure if there is a way out there, but here is what I propose: i) APNIC should start considering outsourcing some of their operations to least operational-cost countries like India, that helps them to reduce the operational costs including real estate costs, staff costs, communication costs, etc. ii) APNIC may publish financial projections for next three years with two options: a) continue operations as-is and the impact with Indian NIR (considering about 70% of the Indian members will move to Indian NIR in next one year) b) outsource or relocate some of the operations to low-operational cost countries and analyse the impact on the financial situation. I am confident that the answers for all the above will make the community be assured that things are the way as needed. Greetings, *Kusumba S www.linkedin.com/in/kusumba <http://www.linkedin.com/in/kusumba> *_______________________________________________apnic-talk mailing list apnic-talk at lists dot apnic dot net <mailto:apnic-talk at lists dot apnic dot net>http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/apnic-talk_______________________________________________ apnic-talk mailing list apnic-talk at lists dot apnic dot net <mailto:apnic-talk at lists dot apnic dot net>http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/apnic-talk-------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.apnic.net/mailing-lists/apnic-talk/attachments/20091124/e32a5 24d/attachment.html ------------------------------ _______________________________________________ apnic-talk mailing list apnic-talk at lists dot apnic dot net http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/apnic-talk End of apnic-talk Digest, Vol 67, Issue 44 ****************************************** _______________________________________________ apnic-talk mailing list apnic-talk at lists dot apnic dot net http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/apnic-talk
|