Dear Skeeve, For b) I Âwanted to know APNIC position being taken. Do you feel
that Security is not part of Internet deliberations. Whole Netmundial has arisen out of Security and snooping. EC
does not seem to be coming out with very transparent process. I hope there is consensus in EC about the view taken by APNIC
even if transparently not sharable to the members. I still am looking for EC view. You may give your view on this. On c) Please tell me the basis of present charge why 190%. NIRs
also need to extend services to its members and payment to APNIC is the major
expense. This point was very well discussed in AMM and EC acknowledged
the same and agreed to look at the same. With regards Brajesh Jain From: Naresh Ajwani
[mailto:ajwaninaresh at gmail dot com] Dear Skeve, While Brajesh reverts to u on both your queries over his queries vide points
b) & c), I hope that u had read the Montevideo statement. For your
convenience, I am pasting the excerpt from wikipedia as under: " The Montevideo Statement on the Future of Internet
Cooperation was released on 7 October 2013 by the leaders of a number of
organizations involved in coordinating the Internet's global technical
infrastructure. The statement was signed by the heads of the Internet
Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN), the Internet
Engineering Task Force, the Internet Architecture Board, the World
Wide Web Consortium, theInternet Society, and the five regional Internet
address registries (African Network Information Center, American
Registry for Internet Numbers, Asia-Pacific Network Information
Centre, Latin America and Caribbean Internet Addresses Registry,
and RÃseaux IP EuropÃens Network Coordination Centre). In large part, the
statement is seen as a response to the ongoing NSA surveillance scandal. The leaders made four main points: They reinforced the importance of globally coherent Internet operations, and
warned against Internet fragmentation at a national level. They expressed
strong concern over the undermining of the trust and confidence of Internet
users globally due to recent revelations of pervasive monitoring and surveillance....." Yet if u have query on point b) of Brajesh, it wud reinforce my question
about the plan before signing it. I remember you raising such questions when I was advocating for the
reforms in Apnic election processes, I am glad that you are doing it again but
such response shud be given by the signatory of the statement or EC whom even
Brajesh had asked. îî Regards & best wishes Naresh Ajwani Brajesh Jain, I am interested how you see b) as APNIC's responsibility? Also, re c) Why do you think the fees are too much? ...Skeeve Skeeve Stevens - eintellego Networks Pty Ltd Phone: 1300 239 038; Cell +61 (0)414 753 383 ; skype://skeeve facebook.com/eintellegonetworks ; linkedin.com/in/skeeve twitter.com/theispguy ;
blog: www.theispguy.com The Experts Who The Experts Call Brajesh
Jain, I
am interested how you see b) as APNIC's responsibility? Also,
re c) Why do you think the fees are too much?
...Skeeve Skeeve
Stevens - eintellego
Networks Pty Ltd skeeve at eintellegonetworks dot com ; www.eintellegonetworks.com Phone: 1300 239 038; Cell +61 (0)414 753 383
; skype://skeeve facebook.com/eintellegonetworks ; linkedin.com/in/skeeve twitter.com/theispguy ; blog: www.theispguy.com The Experts Who The Experts Call Juniper - Cisco - Cloud - Consulting - IPv4
Brokering On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 4:06 PM, B C Jain <brajesh.jain at spectranet dot in>
wrote: Dear EC and all,
|