Minutes of APNIC Annual Member Meeting Singapore International Convention and Exhibition Centre (SICEC) Suntec City, Singapore 6 March 1999 Agenda 8:00 Breakfast and Registration 8:45 Meeting Opening and Welcome: Toru Takahashi, Chair of APNIC EC 9:00 APNIC Annual Report - Director General - Administration - Member Services - Technical Services - Executive Council 10:30 Proposal: Fee Structure 11:00 Coffee Break 11:15 Member Business - Questions and Comments 12:15 Voting and EC Election - EC Candidate Introductions - Questions - Voting 13:00 Lunch, with Small Group Discussions 14:30 Reports from Small Groups - Questions and Comments 15:45 Coffee Break 16:00 Other Reports - Regional Registries - Policy Development - IPv6 Registry Status - Documentation Process - Questions and comments 17:45 Closing Remarks, Next Meeting 18:00 Meeting Close 19:00 APNIC-Sponsored Reception AP* [Meeting commenced 9am] Welcome from Chair - Toru Takahashi Listed achievements for 1998, including move from Tokyo to Brisbane; recruitment of new Director General; response to Internet governance issues such as ASO in ICANN; and renewal of official documents. Spoke of the challenges APNIC will face in 1999: growth in Internet users; more IP address requests; transition from IPv4 to IPv6 allocation; maintaining fair treatment for all members; fair structure for voting; and increase in world wide cooperation with other RIRs. Outlined his hopes: stable day to day operation; comprehensive documents; clear policy; time gains; consensus; code of conduct. What is needed both now and in the future: overcoming problems of ignorance; more awareness to members and users; more efforts for ASO; cooperation with rest of AP. Introduction to meeting from Director General - Paul Wilson Welcome and opening comments. Explained the agenda. Introduced APNIC senior staff: Kyoko Day, Business Manager; Anne Lord, Member Services Manager; and Paul Gampe, Technical Manager. Lloyd Parker (Freehill Holingdale and Page Solicitors) and Dr John Earls (KPMG Consulting). Daniel Karrenberg and Mirjam Kuehne (RIPE NCC). Thanks and credits to JPNIC who hosted and assisted APNIC over many years. Thanks to all the other members who have shown hospitality to APNIC throughout 1998. Presentation of Annual Report Paul Wilson [see presentation at http://www.apnic.net/presentations/AMM98/98dg-report/index.htm] Kyoko Day - Administration Report [see presentation at http://www.apnic.net/presentations/AMM98/fin-report/index.htm] Anne Lord - Member Services Report [see presentation at http://www.apnic.net/presentations/AMM98/memb-services/index.htm] Paul Gampe - Technical Services Report [see presentation at http://www.apnic.net/presentations/AMM98/tech-services/index.htm] EC Report Che-Hoo Cheng - Secretary This is the first EC report for APNIC. We should keep this as tradition. [see presentation at http://www.apnic.net/presentations/AMM98/ec-report/index.htm] [end of APNIC reports] Paul Wilson: Voting will take place after coffee break so that votes can be counted before end of day. Proposal for Fee Structure Presentation given. [see presentation at http://www.apnic.net/presentations/AMM98/fee-proposal/index.htm] Paul Wilson: Explained that the structure is more comprehensively explained in the meeting handout. Comments from floor Matthias Koerber: Strong objection to this matter being raised without any notice to the membership, especially with it being voted on today. Suggested that membership should have at least two weeks to discuss this within their organisation. Paul Wilson: (In absence of the Chair) explained that the objection is a procedural matter that could be discussed after the coffee break. Document Revision Process Gerard Ross - Technical Writer [see presentation at http://www.apnic.net/presentations/AMM98/doc-revision/index.htm] Member Business (Including questions and comments on the Annual Report presentations, and any other business) Paul Wilson - introduction to session. Dr John Earls, KPMG - Member Survey project KPMG is one of the big five financial auditing consulting services throughout the world. Have provided financial and other advice to APNIC for some time. APNIC are trying to develop a sound business plan for the future. Want clear indication of what members want, so have commissioned a formal, independent Member Survey. Dr Earls has extensive experience in surveys of this type. Often, people may be unwilling to speak openly. Therefore, survey is confidential - nothing sourced back to originator. Member survey document is on website. Interested in hearing from people who are non-members too. People welcome to respond in their own language. Open Floor Yoshihiro Obata: Queried the relationship between current income and proposed budget, as reported in Administration report and fee structure proposal. Especially regarding confederation income, before and after in the fee structure proposal. Paul Wilson: The examples given in the fee structure proposal don't take into account membership growth, confederation fees, or start-up fees. Purpose was to provide a simple comparison between the two fee structures. Kyoko Day: These figures of the restructure, plus projected start up and confederation fees come up to the budgeted figure. Yoshihiro Obata: Clarified question: expenses for 1999 are not much different from 1998. But wages are a large part of expenses, and that will go up more with all the proposed new staff. Asked how budget copes with this. Geoff Huston: Further clarifying the question. Last year APNIC spent US$700,000, this year spent AU$1.5million, which is about US$800,000. Question is: 'It's fine to hire all these staff, but how are we paying for it?' Answer is: consultancy fees down, legal costs down, travel costs down, sundry costs down. Then changed subject to a membership issue: explained that there is a 20% drop out rate, indicating that 20% of services view APNIC as fee for service organisation. Most of effort goes in the initial interface with APNIC. The result is that long term members are subsidising the fee-for-service members. He believes this is unfair and wrong and asked that the next AGM votes on the proposal that once you cease to be a member you cease to have any rights to the address space and AS numbers etc assigned by APNIC. Once you stop being a member, you stop having a claim to resources. Matthias Koerber: Agreed with most of Geoff's comments. Asked for detail on extent of cross-subsidisation. Paul Wilson: There is some data available on this point. Of the 462 members who have been members of APNIC, a substantial number still have holdings recorded in database. Geoff Huston: Membership needs to think about this now, and move in the future to change it. An alternative would be to change to a fee for service model, but he explained that it would create a high barrier to entry, and stop new members getting in. Paul McNulty: Resources should be considered more of a leased resource, rather than an owned resource. Membership is, therefore, required for use. Paul Wilson: APNIC has attempted to clarify that in the recent drafts of the policy document. Matthias Koerber: Needs to be incentive to actively stop members going away, give them time to consider their decision. Chris Chaundy: Bridges have been burnt with IPv4 - can't really apply rules retrospectively. But serious action is required with IPv6 so as to start with clean slate. Paul Wilson: This is being discussed. Matthias Koerber: Comment on IPv6 policy draft. Concerned about slow start and renumbering problems that may arise if sub-TLA assignments are reclaimed. Urged against keeping this in the draft. Renumbering isn't easy. Daniel Karrenberg: All the registries are thinking in leasing terms as IPv6 is concerned. Don't agree that IPv4 bridges have been burnt. Registries have long asserted that assignment is made as long as the original reasons are still valid. RIPE NCC is also reinforcing the importance of member fees, not service fees. Actively going after members who aren't paying. Threats to stop serving in-addr.arpa reverse mapping seem to have a good effect. On IPv6 comment from Mathias, he explained that he doubts Registries' ability to make policies which allow people to keep address space allocations indefinitely. Renumbering is easier in IPv6. Yoshihiro Obata: Expressed hope that there is not too much complexity in the membership structure. Proposed not allocating IPv6 on commercial basis until all agree on a structure on IPv6 and IPv4. (unidentified) from Pacific Internet: APNIC should get back addresses which aren't registered. Asked if there are any APNIC tools or developments to make collecting net information easier? Paul Gampe: APNIC has a very limited toolset internally. Are developing interfaces to database, and tools to improve our own workflow. Some of these will be useful for membership too. Che-Hoo Cheng: Raised the issue of the proposed fee structure. Yoshihiro Obata: Called for minutes of EC meeting on the proposal to be made available. Geoff Huston: EC concerned about the flux in membership from large to small. Proposal is simply to ensure the financial stability of APNIC. It isn't "their APNIC" [EC members], it is "our APNIC" [all members]. Matthias Koerber: Agreed with the proposal, but said it was too rushed and a problem for members not attending. Said members who had fees raised without their knowledge would not think it was "their APNIC". Proposed that vote be carried out by e-mail, PGP signed, backed up in writing. Pointed to paragraph 28 of the By-Laws. Che-Hoo Cheng: Said he expected that all members should come to the member meeting. Matthias Koerber: Agreed but explained that the Asian crisis makes it difficult for companies to decide their budgets and business plans. Agreed with proposal but disagrees with procedure. Che-Hoo Cheng: Called for a straw poll to determine how fee proposal would be voted for. Lloyd Parker: Question is for vote: Should we vote on this proposal today, or not vote today? If no vote today, e-mail will be sent to members for vote after the meeting. Matthias Koerber: Clause 28 of By-laws requires PGP. Doubts that membership is ready for that yet. Lloyd Parker: Amended question. If no vote now then it will be done by normal mail. Matthias Koerber: Asked for clarification on whether membership category 'Z' in fee proposal will be entitled to vote? Paul Wilson: They are entitled to have vote, because they are valid members of APNIC (though they may not have yet received an allocation). Typically these will be new members. [Vote taken on straw poll. Majority in favour of a later vote.] Paul Wilson: Secretariat will prepare a proposal and send it by mail. Secretariat and the EC are very keen to get this issue resolved as soon as possible. EC voting Nominations received for: Srisakdi Charmonman (Thailand), Xing Li (China), Kuo-Wei Wu (Taiwan), Raymond Lee (Taiwan), Oh Kwang Sok (Korea), Tommi Chen (Malaysia), John Milburn (Korea). Each nominee spoke briefly about why they wanted to be EC member. John Milburn withdrew following questions as to why he was listed as being from Korea [Paul Wilson explained that it was because he works in Korea for a Korean organisation]. Voting forms distributed. Forms to be completed and returned to John Earls and Lloyd Parker by 1:45pm. Group sessions Paul Wilson encouraged members to form into interest groups over lunch break. Report back this afternoon. Election Results One member had misunderstood the voting procedure and sought to enter a late voting paper. This vote was not accepted, but it was revealed by Lloyd Parker that it would not have affected the results. Debate followed as to whether all vote counts should be announced. Paul Wilson: EC meeting decided that those not elected should not have to be embarrassed by announcement of low votes. Yoshihiro Obata: Claimed change to procedure may have affected how some would vote. Said it should have been explained first. Toru Takahashi: Election procedure is decided by EC, and EC asked the legal representative to handle it. EC election results are: Xing Li: 86 votes Kuo-Wei Wu: 67 votes Tommi Chen: 61 votes Oh Kwang Sok: 35 votes Toru Takahashi: Welcomed new members. New members made brief speeches accepting their positions. Reports from Small Groups [speaker unidentified in notes] - APNIC fees and membership structure Most people felt there is room to increase entry fee a little bit higher. For new membership a lot of resources are required in education, set-up, etc. Second point is about changing the voluntary status of the category; for some ISPs the expenditure could be quite significant. Asked if the price differentiation between categories could be narrowed. Also, asked if a discount or other reward should be introduced for continued membership. Naomasa Maruyama - APNIC advisory and working group structure Better to have advisory committee on APNIC structure (10 to 12 people) advising EC. APNIC must run in an atmosphere of public trust, so it is very important to have advisory committee so that members and people outside the membership can give their expertise on certain issues. There should be working groups under this advisory committee. All members must work for the public good, not behave for their own interest. Also, want APNIC to having more relationship with other entities, such as APNG, and to use people from these entities on the advisory committee. It is desirable that this advisory committee have face to face meetings three times each year. Cost to be funded by APNIC itself. Philip Smith - IPv6 document Of interest to the registries, transit providers are not defined, customers not defined, so definitions need to be given. Also, worth noting that already there are 4500 AS numbers originating networks on the Internet today and 1608 AS numbers providing a transit service today. Matthias Koerber - General concerns Need more public announcement of warnings and procedures before meetings. Put voting procedures into By-laws. EC minutes should be published before AMM if possible, so that people can find out what was discussed. Section 28 of By-laws is worrying as it allows a small number of members to get together and force changes - there should be provision for veto by whole membership. Finally, rather than proposing the fee changes as per this morning, the reasons should be explained to the membership by e-mail in good time. Before every vote in a face to face meeting, the assembly should be asked whether they understand the voting procedures. Other Reports RIPE NCC - Mirjam Kuehne [see presentation at http://www.ripe.net/meetings/pres/apnic99amm-mir] ARIN report - (Anne Lord presenting on behalf of ARIN) ARIN have end user category as well as ISP category. 50,000 /24s have been issued. This is about a /8, compared with RIPE at /9 and APNIC at /10. Total of 950 ASNs issued in the year. ARIN have recently lowered their minimum allocation from /19 to /20 following advisory council recommendation. ARIN launched a routing registry from 8 February. Can subscribe to the list at 'subscribe arin-rr-wg'. More info on web pages at www.arin.net. IPv6 Overview - Steve Deering Explained 'Aggregatable Global Unicast Format'. To the first level, IPv6 addressing works the same as IPv4 address, with CIDR-like routing. Explained meaning behind Interface ID, SLA ID fixed boundary, TLA ID, and NLA ID. TLA ID is major backbone service provider. Reserved field allows growth of TLA field, or growth of the NLA field to deal with larger numbers of customers of backbone service providers. Boot strapping process proposed TLA number 1 as being special, with different boundaries giving subTLAs and a smaller NLA space. This allows start up process. Differences between v4 and v6. All IPv6 nodes are designed to support multiple addresses per interface. For example if someone is multihomed, they can have address space from more than one service provider assigned to the interface. Support for renumbering, with timeouts on old addresses. This technology helps renumbering, but it doesn't solve the renumbering problem. What is not automated is where IP addresses are used outside the IP layer, such as configuration, filters, etc. Almost every vendor has a IPv6 stack in some state of implementation. Now is the right time to learn and pay attention to IPv6. Matthias Koerber: Asked what incentives where in place for people to develop applications for IPv6. Steve Deering: Microsoft and Compaq are updating applications they ship to support IPv6. But some applications that assume addresses are globally unique (NAT for example) don't work. However networks can translate between v6 and v4. May not provide advanced features of v6, but can get a transition. Paul Wilson: Encourage everyone to provide feedback to the process. Had a registry meeting this week. Look at the documents on the web site. APNIC Policy Development Paul Wilson: Encouraged members to visit web site, and provide feedback. It also provides answers to some of the issues raised today. APNIC Legal and Tax Status APNIC Pty Ltd was registered in Australia 5 February 1998. ACN 081 528 010. Non-profit status confirmed by AoA (Articles of Association). One aim was to create a structure identical to APNIC Ltd, except where required by law to differ. Documents available on website (www.apnic.net/corpdocs) APNIC received an interim Australian Taxation Office Ruling that member funds are considered 'mutual'; the final ruling was received on October 1998. There are some constraints on fee structure. What is not included in that ruling is the fee-for-service structure, hence APNIC's desire not to go down that route. Questions Paul Wilson: Lloyd Parker from Freehills Solicitors to discuss questions and issues about the structure. (No questions.) ICANN ASO Developments - Geoff Huston ICANN asked regional registries to put forward a proposal for the ASO. APNIC felt timetable was unduly rushed and we needed time to discuss. On Wednesday evening there was an open meeting with interested parties, including CIX who had also put in a proposal for an ASO. National agendas and social policies are as important as any architectural issues. (No Questions) Country Reports Taiwan - Kuo-Wei-Wu [see presentation at http://www.apnic.net/presentations/AMM98/tw-report/index.htm ] Korea - Seung Min Lee [see presentation at http://is.nic.or.kr/regist/ip/new/9903status/index.htm] Japan - Naomasa Maruyama [Presentation available at ftp.nic.ad.jp/jpnic/publication/presentations/OV199903.ppt.] End of Country Reports Questions Yoshihiro Obata: Question about policy documents, and how IPv6 addresses are going to be allocated to the membership. Paul Wilson: Not up to the secretariat to make policy unilaterally. In case of IPv6, membership need to inform secretariat of any issues. Agree need to finalise documents as quickly as possible, but can't give a deadline now. Encouraged membership to discuss issues on apnic-talk mailing list, or approach the EC more formally. Yoshihiro Obata: Not concerned by the date as much as by the procedure. Only chance to discuss the policy documents on e-mail, nothing else. IPv6 document doesn't state whether address space will be allocated to APNIC members or non-members. Paul Wilson: APNIC takes the document review process seriously. With respect to IPv6, there is no intention to do anything incompatible with the existing IPv4 management. No proposal yet; simply trying to finalise the policies at a global level. The expectation is that an APNIC member receives IPv6 allocations as they receive IPv4 allocations. Fee structure discussed this morning is intended to apply to Ipv6 as well as Ipv4. Yoshihiro Obata: Concerned about whether EC was representative of members. Che-Hoo Cheng: For major decisions EC wants more input from the members. EC is happy to receive comments. More EC members now, so better representation than previously. Paul Wilson: Thanked all for coming and for the support throughout the year. Special thanks to the staff of APNIC. Explained he is still new as DG and has been learning a great deal over the last few months. Learned a great deal today, and looks forward to the next meeting. Toru Takahashi: Thanked the EC alternates, Professor Goto and Pindar Wong. Closed the meeting. [Meeting concluded 6pm] ****************************************************** List of attendees: Surname Given Name Organization ********* ************ ************** Agrawal Dileep WorldLink Communications Arano Takashi JPNIC Azmah Azmah Abdul Malik MIMOS BERHAD Beldona Srinathb Cisco Systems Boey Alan Pacific Internet Limited Bowles Eric LINKAGE-HK & INETTECH-KR Chang Sen Pao (Sam) Wherever Tech Computer Co Ltd Charmonman Srisakdi KSC-TH Chaundy Christopher Howard connect.com.au Pty Ltd Chen Jeng-Yi Hitron Technology Inc. Chen Jen-Kuo Hitron Technology Inc. Chen Lih-Shyang TWNIC Chen Nian-Shing TWNIC Chen Tommi The Network Connection Chen Yi-chiung Eastern Tiger Technology Co., Ltd. Cheng Che-Hoo The Chinese Uni of Hong Kong Cheung Ellis Linkage Online Ltd. Chitnis Jaideep ERNET Chong Fong Yoshiko JPNIC Chung Fu-Kuei CHT-D of Chunghwa Telecom Co., Ltd. Colliander Erik Telia Net Registry Contreras Fernando, Jr. IPhil Communications Darjuan Antonio Philippine Long Distance Tel Co Davis Steven Global OnLine Japan, K.K. Disini Joel PH Domain Registry Earls John KPMG Goto Shigeki Waseda University Gray Terry Frontier Global Center Gupta N.K. Dept of Telecommunications Hisa Kazushi KDD HK Huang Kenny Computing Centre of Academia Sinica Huston Geoff Telstra Iwatani Rie JPNIC Jacobsen Ole Cisco Systems Jeganathan Rajeswary Telekom Malaysia berhad Jitjumnong Nitima Office of Info Tech Admin for Edu Devt Karrenberg Daniel RIPE NCC Kendrick Don Telecom New Zealand Khoo Boon Hing SGNIC Pte Ltd Kim Kwangsu KRNIC Klomp Walter Swiftech Automation Pte Ltd Koerber Mathias Singapore Telecom Kuhne Mirjam RIPE NCC KulatumyotinMorragot Internet Thailand co ltd Latona Rick Interland, Inc Lee Agnes SGNIC Lee Judy Hong Kong Telecom Lee Seungmin KRNIC Li Xing CERNET Center Liang Moehadi Swiftech Automation Pte Ltd Lin Paul Wherever Tech Computer Co Ltd Liu Kuo-cheng Eastern Tiger Technology Co., Ltd. Liu Yi-ting Eastern Tiger Technology Co., Ltd. Lopez Domingo Angelo Philippine Long Distance Tel Co Lowe Yoon Run Cisco Systems Mahizzan Mohd Fadzil MIMOS BERHAD Maruyama Naomasa JPNIC McNulty Paul UUNET Mulugu Srinivas Cisco Systems Nantaeng Bunlu samart infonet co.,ltd. Ng Elisa Hong Kong Telecom Nguyen Xuan Cuong VNPT Obata Yoshihiro KDD Corporation Oh Kwangsok KRNIC Ohashi Yumi JPNIC Onai Rikio NTT Software Corp. O'Rourke Damien Frontier Global Center Ouyang Shih-Chiung TWNIC Paraz Miguel IPhil Communications Park Chanki KRNIC Park Taeha Inet, Inc. Qian Hualin Computer Network Info. Center, CAS Quiogue Neil IPhil Communications SamsidarwatiMohd Isa MIMOS BERHAD Sanguanpong Surasak Office of Info Tech Admin for Edu Devt Sanjaya - APJII Saranathan Sridhar Dishnet Ltd Semich J. William Internet Users Society - Niue Singh Prabhat VSNL Siu Timothy CityLine (HK) Limited Smith Philip Cisco Systems Sudtipunyo Chalee samart infornet co.,ltd. Sugiyama Hidetsugu UUNET Sun Wenbing CETIN Syed Ansar ul Haque Cyber Internet Services (Pvt.) Ltd. Takahashi Toru Internet Association of Japan Tamazaki Noriyoshi IRI, Inc Tashiro Shuichi JPNIC Telfer Brett Telecom New Zealand Tint Zaw MPT Tombleson Brian Eagle Group IT (MM-NIC) Tsen Lee-Ming TWNIC Tseng Shian-Shyong TWNIC Uan-on Thanakorn Office of Info Tech Admin for Edu Devt Viriyaut Unnop Office of Info Tech Admin for Edu Devt Vu Hoang Lien VNPT Wang Ho-min Eastern Tiger Technology Co., Ltd. Wiplinger Ronald Wang's Trace Tech Enterprise Co Ltd. Wong Kok Hoou Pacific Internet Limited Wong Pindar APIA Wong William Hong Kong Telecom