Re: [apnic-talk] IANA Globalization Progress
I thank Mr Maemura for taking time to respond on behalf of EC. As expressed
by him towards the end
that these are his views but EC broadly shares the same. Hope EC agrees with
these views.
I also raised this in AMM at Petaling Jaya. I request EC/Secretariat to
elaborate on the below points
a) APNIC delegation stand on various issues at the forthcoming meetings. And
the basis of arriving at the same.
Hope in clear language.
b) Specifically, what are the views APNIC delegation would take on Security
risk and snooping issues. Basically most appropriate solution is that
content considered objectionable by a Sovereign should be removed at the
source wherever it is hosted. And how this would be achieved by
Multistakeholder approach.
c) Also I request EC to consider reduction of IP charges from NIRs. And very
strongly support that there is need for increased effort as a mission by
APNIC to increase IPv6 usage.
With regards
Brajesh 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 MAEMURA Akinori
Sent: 19 March 2014 12:42
To: myamanis at japan-telecom dot com; pranesh at cis-india dot org; tony at apnic dot net
Cc: apnic-talk at lists dot apnic dot net
Subject: Re: [apnic-talk] IANA Globalization Progress
Dear Masato, Pranesh and everyone,
I know this is very late response for your request for the EC to clarify.
Apologies.
At Mon, 17 Mar 2014 15:41:35 -0700
In message <CF4CC73D.85D7D%myamanis at japan-telecom dot com>
"Re: [apnic-talk] IANA Globalization Progress"
"Masato Yamanishi <myamanis at japan-telecom dot com>" wrote:
| Pranesh and All,
|
| While I'm not new to APNIC, I have same question/concern.
| Can EC clarify it?
|
Montevideo Statement was crafted among the I* CEOs in the situation, as Tony
has already told, with very limited time allowance with very quick moves at
that time, and so was the I*'s reaction to NTIA statement.
Technically speaking on the basis of our governing provisions, the Executive
Council has function to act on behalf of the Members in the interval between
AGMs, and to manage the activities, functions and affairs of APNIC.
More practically, the EC represents the Membership to manage APNIC's
activity, and need to comply the will of the Membership, sometimes with the
broader community.
We have the power to authorise the activity by DG and Secretariat for the
Membership, but need to synchronise our thought on the authorization with
the Membership.
That is why we set a timeslot to discuss the Internet Governance issue in
the AMM this time, after we announced our support for Montevideo Statement
in January.
It was great to see very active discussion there, and that it triggered the
continued discussion on line.
As Masato points out, now Paul is more engaged in the activity of
coordination among our fellow organizations and ITU arena, which is based on
the EC's authorization. We authorize becuase we think it needed.
I understand it looks like politics game with little thing, if not nothing,
to do with Members' own business.
However from the viewpoint of a company whose business is serving community
with Internet Resource, one of which is APNIC, it is really important to
address the risk of unwanted non-viable arrangement and to have people with
other stakes understand our position.
Moreover, as already mentioned, the forthcoming couple of years are quite
crucial stage for us to keep our healthy business environment.
That's why we authorize these activities by Secretariat, and what we need to
have you understand.
As we have many things to come, Director General and the EC will have more
communication each other to consider these actions, than we have already
been doing.
I know, through my own business, that how Internet Governance issues are
difficult for people (e.g. of tech community) to realize, I am still on the
way to find how I can couple the issue we confront adequately with
community's interest.
The EC needs to have the Membership's support with well-informed consent,
and of course we need to change our thought just in case we found it was not
of the Membership and community, and I hope the current discussion will
valuable for the purpose.
Sincerely,
MAEMURA Akinori, my own hat on, but I am sure the EC well sheres these
points
| Rgs,
| Masato Yamanishi
|
|
|
| On 14/03/14 23:01, "Pranesh Prakash" <pranesh at cis-india dot org> wrote:
|
| >Tony Smith [2014-03-14 21:42]:
| >> As I'm sure you appreciate, the news from the US has just arrived this
| >>morning and a lot of the details are still coming to light. We're
| >>planning to prepare something that explains what this development means
| >>in more detail when more information is confirmed.
| >
| >I'm sorry, but I'm new to APNIC's lists.
| >
| >Was there any consultation within APNIC before APNIC's leader's name was
| >added to this statement? Could you also point me towards the community
| >consultation / mailing list discussions that took place before the
| >Montevideo Declaration was signed as something APNIC endorsed?
| >
| >> But for now, we wanted to alert everyone to this news and the fact
| >>consultation will begin in our region in Singapore.
| >
| >Could you outline the intra-APNIC consultations (i.e., not the ICANN
| >consultations about which ICANN's published a document) that will take
| >place with regard to this? Which mailing list will these discussions be
| >directed towards?
| >
| >--
| >Pranesh Prakash
| >Policy Director, Centre for Internet and Society
| >T: +91 80 40926283 | W: http://cis-india.org
| >-------------------
| >Access to Knowledge Fellow, Information Society Project, Yale Law School
| >M: +1 520 314 7147 | W: http://yaleisp.org
| >PGP ID: 0x1D5C5F07 | Twitter: https://twitter.com/pranesh_prakash
| >
|
|
| _______________________________________________
| apnic-talk mailing list
| 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
http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/apnic-talk