APNIC CEOs' Meeting

Monday 30 August 2004, Sheraton Nadi, Fiji

Meeting commenced 2:00 pm

Chair: Paul Wilson, APNIC

The Chair introduced the session and explained the agenda.


  1. Welcome and opening remarks
  2. APNIC business model
  3. Internet HRD and training
  4. APNIC resource status
  5. Internet governance
  1. Welcome and opening remarks

  2. Presentation [pdf | ppt]

    The Chair opened the meeting. He thanked the attendees and welcomed their participation. He noted that APNIC is being co-located with PITA.

    He introduced Maui Sanford, President of PITA who described PITA's operations and structure and noted areas in which he hopes PITA and the APNIC community may be able to cooperate in future.

    PW then introduced Akinori Maemura, Chair of the APNIC Executive Council. AM spoke of how he became involved in the Internet, how the Internet has grown in recent years, and the importance of APNIC's role in ensuring stable Internet operations.

    PW explained how the decision has been made to broaden the audience of the APNIC Open Policy Meetings. He noted that this CEOs' Meeting is intended to discuss high level strategic issues.

    Attendees introduced themselves and explained their interest in the meeting.

    The Chair explained the agenda.


  3. APNIC business model

  4. Paul Wilson, APNIC Director General

    Presentation [pdf | ppt]

    This presentation explained the formation, history, structure, and operations of APNIC. There was also a detailed description of APNIC's membership structure and financial model.


    • There was a question about the voluntary services of APNIC to the community. It was explained that APNIC does provide certain services to the mutual benefit of the community. As examples, it was noted that APNIC cross-subsidises training courses; publishes the Apster newsletter; provides resources for ISPs on the web site; and spends substantial amounts on root server deployment.

    [Break 3:20pm - 3:50pm]

    The Chair reopened the meeting and encouraged feedback from the participants on any issues they wished to discuss.

    There was a question about how to improve the management of ccTLD issues. It was explained that APNIC is not generally involved in ccTLD management issues which require an entirely different administrative format. However, it was noted that APNIC is becoming involved with some training and outreach activities in cooperation with the ccTLD community.


  5. Internet HRD and Training

  6. John H'ng, APNIC Training Manager

    Presentation [pdf | ppt]

    This presentation observed the role of training in modern businesses. The presenter then discussed the nature and scope of APNIC's training program.


    • It was noted that training may not be perceived as highly in Thailand as it appeared to be in the surveys quoted. It was suggested that issues of timing and cultural awareness may need to be taken into account when scheduling training.
    • There was an explanation of modern techniques in online training delivery.
    • It was explained that APNIC primarily uses its own staff as trainers but does sometimes collaborate with external trainers to provide specialised course material.
    • APNIC does localise training material where possible. There are about 15 nationalities and cultures on staff who are able to assist.


  7. APNIC resource status

  8. Son Tran, APNIC Resource Services Manager

    Presentation [pdf | ppt]

    The presentation provided an overview of the system of global management of IP addresses, followed by a detailed explanation of APNIC's allocation and registration practices, and a breakdown of the current APNIC resource status.


    • There was a question about IPv8. It was explained that within the accepted standards process only IPv4 and IPv6 exist as standards.
    • There was a discussion about the implications for networks in relation to IP addresses that are being used for illegal purposes. It was noted that it appears that ISPs have been generally accepted as common carriers that are not liable for the traffic. However, it was also noted that in relation to spam, there have been advances on that position. Now, various industry players and some governments hold ISPs accountable for the conduct of their customers. It was suggested that making a carrier accountable for content could raise many socially unacceptable issues. It was suggested that the forefront for fighting spam and other abuses is not the law enforcement authorities but rather the industry itself. The common carrier approach, therefore, is no longer viable for ISPs, as peer and industry pressure forces ISPs to be accountable for the behaviour of their customers.
    • There was a call for ISPs to share their experience of dealing with IP addresses that are being used for abusive purposes.


  9. Internet governance

  10. Paul Wilson, APNIC Director General

    Presentation [pdf | ppt]

    This was a discussion of the issues surrounding the concept of Internet governance. The term Internet governance does not have a single clear definition and there are many debates as to what issues are properly to be considered governance issues. In particular, issues of technical coordination are of interest to APNIC. The ongoing UN World Summit on the Information Society is currently focussing a great deal of attention on Internet governance issues. In this context, the RIRs have recently formed the Number Resource Organization (NRO) as a common point of contact to the global RIR communities.


    • Sharil Tarmizi from the ICANN Board reported that shortly after the ICANN meeting in Kuala Lumpur, the US government confirmed that there will be no further MoUs with ICANN. He also noted that it is common for there to be a variety of positions on Internet governance even within a single government.
    • There was a discussion of the concept of ownership of IP addresses. IP addresses are generally believed to remain as public property, although this has never been properly tested in court. It was explained that IP addresses were originally taken to be attributes of the network, rather than identities. The industry position is that IP addresses are available when they are needed, but when they are not needed, they should be handed back. There may still be some grey legal areas in relation to old allocations.
    • It was noted that some governments are now legislating in relation to IP address allocation, seeing IP addresses as a public resource.
    • There was discussion of the legality of black lists. It was noted that there had been some minor cases dealing with related issues, but there appears to be no firm precedent yet.
    • It was also noted that there are many scams and other behaviours that are testing legal frameworks. It was suggested that these could be seen as simply new behaviours that could be subject to existing laws and frameworks.
    • There was a question of possible dialogues between the addressing community and the WTO. It was noted that a lot of the organisations expressing interests in Internet governance may not yet have a good understanding of existing structures. Again, it was stressed that it is common for ministries within a single government to express completely different positions on ICT issues. This highlights the importance of governments formulating an ICT strategy.

    Closing remarks

    • It was noted that there had been discussions of holding future CEOs' meetings in more of a workshop fashion. The Chair encouraged any feedback for how to develop this event in future.

Meeting closed: 6.25 pm

Noted by Gerard Ross


Minutes | Other meetings

Top of page
Programme | SIGs | HM consultation | Social events | Sponsorship | APNIC meetings | APNIC 18 home | APNIC home
Last modified: Monday, 14-Mar-2016 10:52:32 EST | © 1999 - 2021 APNIC Pty. Ltd.
Contact us | Privacy statement