[email protected]
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [apnic-talk] Community Statement to ITU

Subject: Re: [apnic-talk] Community Statement to ITU
From: Kurt Erik Lindqvist
Date: Fri, 5 Mar 2010 07:23:28 +0100
As suggested yesterday I think point two should be replaced and I  
believe the wording bill suggest addresses my concerns.

- kurtis -

On 5 mar 2010, at 05.24, Bill Woodcock <[email protected]> wrote:

> On Mar 4, 2010, at 7:57 PM, James Spenceley wrote:
>> 1.     The proposal for a parallel address management system  
>> involves significant risks and therefore requires a clear problem  
>> statement, complete explanation of its details, and a thorough risk  
>> analysis of its consequence.  The NAv6 paper satisfies none of  
>> these requirements. Therefore, the NAv6 proposal, the paper itself  
>> cannot be considered as a substantial basis for discussion at the  
>> ITU IPv6 Group's work.
>> 2.     Since concern about potential IPv6 exhaustion appears to be  
>> one of the fundamental concerns behind the ITUâs studies into IPv6 
>> , we suggest that the ITU conduct a study on this.
>> 3.     We ask the ITU's IPv6 Group follow the example of the  
>> Internet community and the IGF process and make its documents and  
>> records available publicly, so that all Internet stakeholders can  
>> participate in deliberations which could have global ramifications.  
>> We ask ITU Member States and Sector Members to recall the Tunis  
>> Agendaâs call for a multi-stakeholder approach to Internet governa 
>> nce and call on the ITU to support the current multi-stakeholder s 
>> ystem of address management.
> Regarding point 2 in the "Action" list, I think we should not  
> suggest that the ITU to conduct such a study, since that will  
> prolong the situation needlessly.
> I suggest that we retain the gist of the point but move it under the  
> existing paragraph in the section headed  "Equitable distribution".
> Here's some suggested text:
> "This community believes there are no exhaustion issues associated  
> with IPv6 and calls on recognised Industry experts to conduct a  
> formal study into projections for IPv6 exhaustion to clarify this."
> This text add or change the statement, but simply moves to where it  
> fits best - with the Internet experts qualified to conduct the  
> research.
>                                -Bill
> _______________________________________________
> apnic-talk mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/apnic-talk
apnic-talk mailing list
[email protected]
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>