Why does that matter? Since he is contributing to the discussion, I think that we should assume that he is part of the global multi-stakeholder community.
Best Richard
Sent from Samsung Mobile
-------- Original message --------
From: MAEMURA Akinori
Date:16/10/2014 19:32 (GMT+01:00)
To: andrew.dul@quark.net,ianaxfer@apnic.net
Subject: Re: [IANAxfer@apnic] APNIC IANA Process - Status Update
Paul and Pablo, two questions
Do you know who is Andrew Dul? I think it a valid question. How do you think we should respond to it?
Akinori
(2014/10/17 2:04), Andrew Dul wrote: > On 10/16/2014 9:35 AM, MAEMURA Akinori wrote: >> Hi Richard, >> >> (2014/10/17 0:38), Richard Hill wrote: >>> Please see below. >>> >>> Thanks and best, >>> Richard >>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: MAEMURA Akinori [mailto:maem@nic.ad.jp] >>>> Sent: mercredi, 15. octobre 2014 19:42 >>>> To: gurcharya@gmail.com; rhill@hill-a.ch >>>> Cc: mueller@syr.edu; IANAxfer@apnic.net >>>> Subject: Re: [IANAxfer@apnic] APNIC IANA Process - Status Update >>>> >>>> >>>> Dear Acharya, >>>> >>>> | > I'm also curious to know whether the APNIC staff proposal >>>> presented during >>>> | > APNIC-38 has been accepted as the final proposal? I gather from the >>>> | > transcripts that the APNIC staff proposal was met with >>>> silence during the >>>> | > conference - and that this silence was taken to be as full >>>> consensus. >>>> >>>> Masato as the Moderator, at the last part of the session, >>>> took good care to study the sentiment of the floor, >>>> which doesn't appear on the script. >>>> >>>> It was sufficient time to wait for any last minute objection, >>>> and quite natural to be regarded as a consensus, in my sense. >>>> >>>> "full consensus" sounds something hard, and might be not >>>> the case for this, but it is my understanding that we have >>>> obtained sufficient consensus for that simple proposal, >>>> with which we can move it forward. >>> Does this mean that that proposal has been approved? What about the >>> comments that wre made on this mailing, in particular: >>> >>> >>> http://mailman.apnic.net/mailing-lists/ianaxfer/archive/2014/09/msg00003.html >> It doesn't mean the proposal was approved as the final version. >> But I think it is enough to move forward for further consideration. >> >> Your message referred above is appreciated as raised an important point. >> Again, the discussion in Brisbane is in the early stage, I am happy we >> were successful to get the support for the simple principle with which >> we can go ahead, and many details are to be discussed. >> >> As we don't have much time, we should expedite the discussion. >> > What process is APNIC going to follow? How will the comments both from > the in-person meeting and the mailing list be taken into account? Who > is going to update the draft to be inclusive of those comments? When is > the next draft going to be published? > > Andrew > _______________________________________________ > IANAxfer mailing list > IANAxfer@apnic.net > http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/ianaxfer
_______________________________________________ IANAxfer mailing list IANAxfer@apnic.net http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/ianaxfer