[sig-policy] revised: prop-060

  • To: Policy SIG <sig-policy at apnic dot net>
  • Subject: [sig-policy] revised: prop-060
  • From: Randy Bush <randy at psg dot com>
  • Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2008 08:46:18 +1200
  • Delivered-to: sig-policy at mailman dot apnic dot net
  • List-archive: <http://mailman.apnic.net/mailing-lists/sig-policy>
  • List-help: <mailto:sig-policy-request@lists.apnic.net?subject=help>
  • List-id: APNIC SIG on resource management policy <sig-policy.lists.apnic.net>
  • List-post: <mailto:sig-policy@lists.apnic.net>
  • List-subscribe: <http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy>, <mailto:sig-policy-request@lists.apnic.net?subject=subscribe>
  • List-unsubscribe: <http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy>, <mailto:sig-policy-request@lists.apnic.net?subject=unsubscribe>
  • User-agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.16 (Macintosh/20080707)
    • 
      Version 2 of the proposal 'Change in the criteria for the recognition of
      NIRs in the APNIC region' has been sent to the Policy SIG for review. It
      will be presented at the Policy SIG at APNIC 26 in Christchurch, New
      Zealand, 25-29 August 2008.
      
      The proposal's history can be found at:
      
             http://www.apnic.net/policy/proposals/prop-060-v002.html
      
      This new version of the proposal contains a shortened section 2,
      "Summary of current problem" and removes points 1, 2, 4, 6 and 7 from
      section 4, "Details of the proposal".
      
      This revised proposal will be discussed in the Policy SIG this morning.
      We encourage you to express your views on the proposal:
      
             - Do you support or oppose this proposal?
      
             - Does this proposal solve a problem you are experiencing? If so,
               tell the community about your situation.
      
             - Do you see any disadvantages in this proposal?
      
             - Is there anything in the proposal that is not clear?
      
             - What changes could be made to this proposal to make it more
               effective?
      
      
      randy and jian
      
      ________________________________________________________________________
      
      prop-060-v002:  Change in the criteria for the recognition of NIRs in
                      the APNIC region
      ________________________________________________________________________
      
      
      Author:    Kusumba Sridhar
                 <kusumba at vebtel dot com>
      
      Version:   2
      
      Date:      28 August 2008
      
      
      1.  Introduction
      ----------------
      
      This is a proposal to update the criteria for recognising new National
      Internet Registries (NIRs) in the APNIC region.
      
      The current criteria are described in the following policy document:
      
          APNIC-104: Criteria for the recognition of NIRs in the APNIC region
          http://www.apnic.net/policy/nir-criteria.html
      
      
      2.  Summary of current problem
      ------------------------------
      
      The existing Policy frame work was last published on 1st December 2002
      and the same was not re-visited since then. There has been significant
      change in the Political, Economic and Operational situations in various
      economies, especially the growing economies. The very structure of
      Internet and its Resources has changed in several economies. The
      industry participation has also grown significantly leading Internet to
      be as ubiquitous as any other resource like Electricity, Water, Shelter
      etc., In such a situation, it is important that the very industry
      decides the future and applicability of the Internet resources and also
      controls them through a community friendly environment. The Government,
      while taking a neutral position, is required to support such resources
      but must refrain from controlling the same.
      
      The current NIR recognizing criteria requires any Industry
      representation to have endorsement of the proposal from the Government
      agency (Section 3.1) that is responsible for Internet related activities
      including issuing licenses to ISPs etc in a respective country. APNIC
      considers any application without such endorsement as "in-complete"
      proposal and will not forward to the Executive Council for processing or
      approving a NIR.
      
      However, in a situation where such proposal is originated by a unit or
      division or department of the Government, such proposal could go through
      since the Government endorsement is easily or sometimes automatically
      available to them. This is also applicable for National Information
      Centers, Internet Exchanges etc., that are largely and many times fully
      controlled and manned by the Government.
      
      It is not automatic agreement that a NIC in any country could be the
      "first-choice" to form NIR by the Policy. However, in a situation where
      it is important for the "Internet" itself to move towards a
      free-regulatory World, unfortunately in the several growing economies it
      is noticed that Internet is still largely manned by the Government. The
      readers may kindly appreciate the difference between "controlling" and
      "manning". Due to several Security, Economic and Political reasons, it
      may be required that Internet is controlled in such economies.
      
      Due to this, Government has taken control of Infrastructure networks
      such as NIC, IXPs etc., with participation of Industry up to an extent
      that it is a meager contributing-participation and not decisive-
      participation in certain economies.
      
          1. Government represented agencies will be having control on
             Internet Resource allocation in the economy, if such NIR is
             formed by Government controlled agency.
      
          2. Policy only indicates but may not restrict Government to enforce
             rules to obtain resources from NIR and not APNIC directly.
      
          3. Government under the ambit of  National Security may demonstrate
             the need for the Service Providers to only obtain resources from
             regional NIR and not from APNIC despite the policy indication.
      
          4. Member or User community may loose opportunity to grow the
             networks largely due to very reason that they may need to obtain
             Internet resources only from such NIR and the regulator who is
             also directly associated with such NIRs or Policy makers, may
             dismiss or delay such allocation requests against any pending
             issue or matter concerned to that Service provider and the
             government or Regulator.
      
          5. Despite NIR proposal being sent through a Government controlled
             agency, the EC may have right to reject such proposal if it has
             noticed suitable objections from members. However, in the current
             policy criteria, the scope of such objections is only "external"
             and not within the policy framework or work flow.
      
      
      3.   Situation in other RIRs
      ----------------------------
      
      ARIN, RIPE and AfriNIC do not have NIRs. LACNIC has NIRs but does not
      have a policy document for the recognition of new NIRs.
      
      
      4.   Details of the proposal
      ----------------------------
      
      Proposed changes in the policy:
      
         1. Any NIR application must be put on voting process, both through
            Online Voting and Voting at AMM and must achieve support.
      
                               OR
      
         2. Any NIR application must be put on voting process, both through
            Online Voting and Voting at AMM and must achieve at least 75%
            support from the members within that Economy. In such a case,
            voting is open only for members from that Economy.
      
         3. Section 3.2.2 must mention that the Board composition of the NIR
            must have majority representation from Members, followed by
            Academic or Research Organizations etc. The Government or its
            participating agencies must have minor role compared to other
            representations on the Board of NIR.
      
      
      5.   Advantages and disadvantages of the proposal
      -------------------------------------------------
      
      There are several advantages of adopting such policy:
      
         1. Neutrality which is inline to "Open Policy" levels while
            considering a NIR proposal.
      
         2. Mandates Global Policies for creating Free Access to Internet
            Resources.
      
         3. Improves participation by membership community in Internet
            Development.
      
         4. Removes the Conditional Policy barriers in several countries where
            the Governments cannot impose such conditional terms for
            obtaining resources.
      
      There are no disadvantages by adopting the policy.
      
      
      6.   Effect on APNIC
      --------------------
      
      APNIC members would be benefited by such policy since they don't have to
      fear for undergoing conditional allocations of resources. At the
      same time, membership communities in several countries, if eligible by
      this policy, will be able to form NIR that is community controlled
      rather than any incumbent or Government controlled NIR.
      
      
      7.   Effect on NIRs
      -------------------
      
      There is no effect on NIRs.