Re: [apnic-talk] ICANN 49 event wrapup

    • To: APNIC TALK <apnic-talk at lists dot apnic dot net>
    • Subject: Re: [apnic-talk] ICANN 49 event wrapup
    • From: Rajesh Chharia <rc at cjnet4u dot com>
    • Date: Sun, 27 Apr 2014 21:10:07 +0530
    • Cc: Skeeve Stevens <skeeve at eintellegonetworks dot com>
    • Delivered-to: apnic-talk at mailman dot apnic dot net
    • In-reply-to: <>
    • List-archive: <>
    • List-help: <>
    • List-id: General discussions on APNIC <>
    • List-post: <>
    • List-subscribe: <>, <>
    • List-unsubscribe: <>, <>
      • Dear Skeeve,

        Its not fair to take debates to insult any Country. Every country including yours has its own problem, without loosing a cricket match ;-). 

        Hanif's view point is that we should review the location of APNIC, which is currently limited to Australia. In no way that is anything against Australia or can instigate someone to feel so offended.

        Globally, same discussion has been going for ICANN. Do you think friends of ICANN are turning this debate to insult the sovereignties ? 

        Why can’t APNIC has an regional office in Islamabad or Dakha ? I think Hanif has taken up this discussion and to refer Aftab Siddiqui here is to sow difference between fellow countrymen and anyone can see through it.

        I feel instead of diverting this debate to such low level is not expected from you atleast. I have been seeing this concern for very long now and every time you have been responding which looks alike that APNIC has some problem here, I dont think that is the actual case. Its a strong body and need to have outreach program.

        Dear Hanif, advantage of such outreach program is for LEA as well as for the members also as its our LEA is well informed, it would be less botheration for we ISP's.  Similarly, you are also right that training program are required in emerging economies.

        I am sure Paul and Akinori are competent to explain you the same. I sincerely apologise for any inadvertent nasty remark to your post. 

        Please raise all concern at APNIC talk and be assured that APNIC as well as members would be responding positively. 

        Best Regards,
        Rajesh Chharia
        +91 98110 38188

        On 27-Apr-2014, at 18:43 pm, Skeeve Stevens <skeeve at eintellegonetworks dot com> wrote:


        I think you need to talk to some of your fellow countrymen who have attended the APNIC meetings and seem to more clearly understand the value of APNIC, its operations and why it does what it does - better than you do.

        Pakistan is a dangerous place... you cannot deny that.  My senior engineers here in Australia are from Pakistan and even they advise me that I should not travel to Pakistan as the chance of a negative incident against a white westerner is high... simply because we are white and they may assume we are American.  I have not been there, but I do trust the dozen people I know from Pakistan who say that it isn't wise to go to many of the areas in that country.

        APNIC used to be based in Japan, now Australia, maybe in the future somewhere else... who knows.  But I think your assumption that the EC are biased is in your own mind as those with backgrounds from Australia, Nepal, China, Japan, Korea, Hong Kong, Taiwan are represented - with Australia, apart from the DG only have one (1) position.  If anything, China (and related countries) are more represented than others.  So please don't say that Oceania is over represented.  Every single member of the EC has earned their position by being a valued member of Internet community.  

        Even the staff of APNIC itself is significantly represented by those other than white Australia background.

        Pakistan also too has some great representatives in Internet Governance such as Aftab Siddiqui.  As someone who is very much involved in the community and comes to the meetings, perhaps you should raise your concerns with him. 

        The EC represent the ENTIRE region... including yours.  They have 56 (54 active I think) economies across a large geographic area.  It is funny those who have an issue only ever seem to have one about their own country not getting looked after enough.

        I suggest your criticism that the EC/APNIC is Oceania or Australian biased is not based in any reality, and if you have an issue, I'd suggest to actually come to a meeting and talk to people.  You seem quite anti-Australia... maybe this is just a Cricket thing... are you still upset about the 5-0 loss in 2010? ;-)


        Skeeve Stevens - eintellego Networks Pty Ltd
        The Experts Who The Experts Call
        Juniper - Cisco - Cloud - Consulting - IPv4 Brokering

        On Sun, Apr 27, 2014 at 5:08 PM, <haquehanif at hushmail dot com> wrote:

        On Saturday, 26 April 2014 at 4:19 PM, "Skeeve Stevens" <skeeve at eintellegonetworks dot com> wrote:
        >I rely on APNIC and its EC to consider the entire
        >community/regions needs
        >as opposed to a vocal minority... even if that minority was just
        >me yelling
        >about something.  We choose an EC whose roles transcend their home
        >and become for the good of everyone they represent.

        I am yet to understand who the EC is representing. For sure the EC is not representing Members by allowing APNIC staff travel in business class.

        I am also yet to understand if APNIC is for Asia and Oceania or just for Oceania. I think this RIR is for Oceania not Asia.


        1. Located in Australia (Oceania)
        2. Headed by an Australian and 90% of its senior managemnt or the decision makers are from Oceania.
        3. Follows Australian travel adversaries. No trainings or workshops here in Pakistan for last two years.
        4. Contributes to the Australian work force

        So, I think it is an 'Australia' Pacifc Network Information Centre (APNIC) not Asia Pacific RIR.

        >I think rather than accusations of mis-management, I'd spend some
        >talking to members of the EC about why certain decisions are made.
        > Most of
        >them are more than willing to talk to you and give you their
        >perspective -
        >which btw, does not always agree across all EC members...  but
        >most of the
        >time they come to a consensus for the benefit of all members...

        We're talking now and hope the EC pay close attention to this discussion.

        Hanif H Mohd
        Senior Network Consultant
        PKSP, Pakistan

        >*Skeeve Stevens - *eintellego Networks Pty Ltd
        >skeeve at eintellegonetworks dot com ;
        >Phone: 1300 239 038; Cell +61 (0)414 753 383 ; skype://skeeve
        > ;
        > ; blog:
        >The Experts Who The Experts Call
        >Juniper - Cisco - Cloud - Consulting - IPv4 Brokering
        >On Sat, Apr 26, 2014 at 11:26 PM, <haquehanif at hushmail dot com> wrote:
        >> Hi Dave,
        >> Very good point but its a taboo at APNIC to discuss about
        >Members fee and
        >> APNIC (mis) management of funds. APNIC maintains a white list
        >and a black
        >> list of public contacts. You're now in their black list for
        >raising this.
        >> Like many others, this discussion will end up in the no through
        >road. The
        >> Executive council we selected are like the famous three wise
        >> no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil". For our representatives
        >business is
        >> as usual.
        >> APNIC recently started providing training for law enforcement
        >> using Members funds....we did not blessed either. Its a good
        >initiative and
        >> I personally commend APNIC for this. However, these LEAs are
        >> agencies and have big budgets. If LEAs request training APNIC
        >must use LEAs
        >> budget to provide such trainings not Members funds. Its just not
        >> Regards
        >> Hanif H Mohd
        >> Senior Network Consultant
        >> PKSP, Pakistan
        >> On Saturday, 26 April 2014 at 5:44 PM, "Dave Mead"
        ><dave_mead at aim dot com>
        >> wrote:    Paul,
        >>  Your speech at Asia Pacific Internet Leadership Program meeting
        >> utterly disappointing to APNIC Members.
        >> You said, "...Members pay fees to APNIC to support the
        >organisation and
        >> the services and they don't give APNIC a blessing to spend that
        >money in
        >> unlimited fashion on Internet development..."
        >>  Members DID NOT BLESS APNIC to spend the fees on business class
        >> which costs 3 times more than an economy class ticket. The
        >entire senior
        >> management, including your Executve Assistant and those who work
        >for APNIC
        >> as consultants travel in business class contributing to the
        >success of the
        >> airlines but clearly not Internet development in this region.
        >>  Paul, you're leading a not-for-profit organisation not a
        >> entity that you and your senior management can erode member
        >funds for your
        >> comfortable travels across the world. This is just outrageous and
        >> mismanagement of Member funds.
        >>  Members like to see the Executive Council takes note of this
        >and truely
        >> represent the Members to better manage their funds to contribute
        >for the
        >> Internet development in this region. A lot of development work
        >can be done
        >> if the funds are managed effectively not use for personal
        >>  Best
        >>  -Dave Mead
        >> _______________________________________________
        >> apnic-talk mailing list
        >> apnic-talk at lists dot apnic dot net