Re: [sig-nir] prop-054: NIR operational policy document revision

  • To: sig-nir at lists dot apnic dot net
  • Subject: Re: [sig-nir] prop-054: NIR operational policy document revision
  • From: Terry Manderson <terry at apnic dot net>
  • Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2008 13:13:47 +1000
  • Delivered-to: sig-nir at mailman dot apnic dot net
  • In-reply-to: <47BEB41E.1090308 at apnic dot net>
  • List-archive: <http://mailman.apnic.net/mailing-lists/sig-nir>
  • List-help: <mailto:sig-nir-request@lists.apnic.net?subject=help>
  • List-id: "APNIC SIG for National Internet Registries \(NIRs\)" <sig-nir.lists.apnic.net>
  • List-post: <mailto:sig-nir@lists.apnic.net>
  • List-subscribe: <http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-nir>, <mailto:sig-nir-request@lists.apnic.net?subject=subscribe>
  • List-unsubscribe: <http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-nir>, <mailto:sig-nir-request@lists.apnic.net?subject=unsubscribe>
  • References: <12EFCED1-A71E-4BD8-A6B7-EF31422AB54D@apnic.net> <47BE3CC3.8000409@nic.ad.jp> <EC4981E8-A31B-4273-AB2C-2983BFA2EE33@apnic.net> <47BEB153.2020002@nic.ad.jp> <47BEB41E.1090308@apnic.net>
      • Are there any further comments on this?
      George M. will be presenting the proposal on behalf of Sanjaya and Myself tomorrow, and I would like to update the slides as necessary. 
      
Cheers
Terry

On 22/02/2008, at 9:38 PM, Sanjaya wrote:
      Just to clarify, that paragraph was not proposed to be included in the policy document. Shin, are you suggesting that we should add a clause in the policy 
      document that state a minimum implementation time frame?
      We don't think it is necessary to put any implementation time frame in the 
      policy document because it's a high level document. We never know what
      technology will come in the future, and how long implementation should take. As Terry said, some could be implemented fairly quickly, others may take a few 
      years to implement.

Cheers,
Sanjaya

Shin Yamasaki wrote:

      Terry,
      My intention is having more room if necessary in addition to the minumum 
      6-month notice period, so dropping the paragraph makes me feel losing
the bottom line.

Shin

-------- Original Message --------
      Subject: Re: [sig-nir] prop-054: NIR operational policy document revision 
      From: Terry Manderson <terry at apnic dot net>
To: Izumi Okutani <izumi at nic dot ad dot jp>
CC: sig-nir at lists dot apnic dot net
Date: Fri Feb 22 2008 15:29:56 GMT+0900


      Izumi and All,
      Actually, we have been discussing this internally and we have come to 
      the conclusion that the 6 month issue is in the "disadvantages"
section and does not get reflected in the policy document itself.

Given that we are actually trying to make the situation less
prescriptive for both NIR and APNIC alike, how about we simply drop
the commitment paragraph:

      To ensure that NIRs have enough time to adapt to the changes,
      the APNIC Secretariat will commit to a six-month notice period
      between announcing changes to the system and expected
      implementation by NIRs.

Our intention was to soften the issue that the NIR may have to make
changes to their systems.
      It also was suggested that for some small changes in operation a month 
      might be sufficient or for larger concerns a much longer time
required. The point being that we will discuss changes with you well
in advance.

Cheers
Terry

On 22/02/2008, at 1:08 PM, Izumi Okutani wrote:


      Do you have further comments on Terry's response, Shin?

Comments on other NIR are also welcome.
      Feel free to express questions, comments, or even a simple expression 
      of support is also a useful input :-).

izumi

Terry Manderson wrote:

      Hi Shin,


      Shin wrote:
- Do you support moving the technical descriptions of managing
      reverse DNS zone out of 'Operational policies for National Internet 
      Registries in the APNIC region' and onto the APNIC website?
Currently I cannot find the equivalent part of section 3.4 of
APNIC-103-v001 in the web page stated in the proposal:
http://www.apnic.net/services/dns_guide.html
      Unless APNIC clearly describes all required procedures in the page before Policy SIG in APNIC 25, it is difficult to support this part. 
      The best I could bend backward is that APNIC posts the content of
the addendum to the web page to this mailing list.
      Without that, it could be blind approval for non-existent procedure. 
      I will endeavour to create a draft of that page, or furnish the
      information that will be provided on that url to the list before the 
      meeting.

However you can expect that it would simply reflect the preferred
methods for updating the DNS, those being MyAPNIC and the XML/REST
API. We clearly need to be careful about releasing the API
information
as it isn't yet a member wide service.


      In the Disadvantages: part in the Pros/Cons section, | To ensure
that NIRs have enough time to adapt to the changes, | the APNIC
Secretariat will commit to a six-month notice period | between
      announcing changes to the system and expected | implementation 
      by NIRs.
      I prefer to change this to: To ensure that NIRs have enough time to adapt to the changes, the APNIC Secretariat will commit to at least 
      six-month notice period  between announcing changes to the system
and expected implementation by NIRs.
      Given that our development process is transparent, such that we are 
      quite overt about upcoming work in the secretariat that may affect
the
      NIRs. I'm guessing that your concern directly relates to your ability 
      implement in 6 months assuming that you hadn't heard of it
previously.
So in applying this to future (not already scheduled) changes..

How does this sound as an alternative?
-----
      To ensure that NIRs have enough time to be both aware of the changes 
      and adapt their systems to the changes, the APNIC Secretariat will
commit to the following notice periods:
	1) Notification of development or work-in-progress of three(3) to
Six(6) months, prior to:
	2) A six(6) month notice period to implementation by the NIR.
-----


      The notice period can be extended upon request  from APNIC or an
NIR.

      I think I would find this acceptable if the request came with
supporting reasons why the request needs to be extended, such that
the
      reason for extension is in the best interests of the common good for 
      continuous improvement or a direct conflict with another APNIC
operational change at that time.

Cheers
Terry
--
      Terry Manderson email: terry at apnic dot net Network Operations Manager, APNIC sip: info at voip dot apnic dot net http://www.apnic.net phone: +61 7 3858 3100 
      

_______________________________________________
sig-nir mailing list
sig-nir at lists dot apnic dot net
http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-nir

      --
Terry Manderson                         email:      terry at apnic dot net
Network Operations Manager, APNIC       sip:    info at voip dot apnic dot net
http://www.apnic.net                    phone:      +61 7 3858 3100


_______________________________________________
sig-nir mailing list
sig-nir at lists dot apnic dot net
http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-nir

      _______________________________________________
sig-nir mailing list
sig-nir at lists dot apnic dot net
http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-nir

      
--
Terry Manderson                         email:      terry at apnic dot net
Network Operations Manager, APNIC       sip:    info at voip dot apnic dot net
http://www.apnic.net                    phone:      +61 7 3858 3100