[Rigf_program] Definition of 'AP region'

Fri Mar 29 07:44:19 HKT 2013

I support Edmon's proposal here, in principle at least.

But I think some definition or guidance on the region is going to be necessary, because a completely "inclusive" approach could include the ICANN region going west, and the APEC region going east - a very big region.

The APNIC boundaries are historical and entirely geographical (without the political issues that Kieth pointed out).  They may be convenient for this purpose, but there may be alternatives.

There is also no reason to reference "APNIC" in the definition.  Instead we could describe it as follows:

South and Central Asia
East and South East Asia
Oceania and western Pacific Islands

Paul.

On 29/03/2013, at 4:31 AM, Edmon Chung <edmon at registry.asia> wrote:

> I would like to offer a suggestion... which perhaps not many people like because it is messy...
> For our purposes, I feel we could consider being inclusive rather than exclusive.  That is, to resist the restriction of participation, but rather, to invite participation from anyone who believes they belong.
> 
> Since I do not think we need to "represent" anyone, I do not think we need an exclusive approach.  My belief is that this is an open forum and those who care enough for Asia Pacific are encouraged to participate.  The concept of "Asia Pacific" evolves over time... our focus should be to share knowledge and make the Asia Pacific Internet Governance work better through collaboration.  I personally do not see the need to "define" a hard borderline for participation.
> 
> But that is just my opinion... and I will happily accept that it may be a minority view :-)
> 
> Edmon
> 
> 
> 
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: rigf_secretariat-bounces at ap.rigf.asia [mailto:rigf_secretariat-
>> bounces at ap.rigf.asia] On Behalf Of Keith Davidson
>> Sent: Friday, March 29, 2013 1:42 AM
>> To: rigf_program at ap.rigf.asia
>> Subject: Re: [Rigf_program] Definition of 'AP region'
>> 
>> Thanks Adam,
>> 
>> I think the reason for this was that we were aware of the establishment of
>> the Arab IGF and their initial meeting which was held last year, so the APNIC
>> defined region gave a pretty clear boundary...
>> 
>> One of the issues we have in this regard is that under the ICANN ccNSO rules
>> is that the Pacific Islands like American Samoa are considered to be part of
>> North America, and Tahiti and New Caledonia are considered to be part of
>> Europe. Yet they distinctly are Pacific Islands. And so in organising our sub-
>> regional PacificIGF, I had wanted to avoid these odd demarcation lines and
>> use the geographic location as the determinant factor in deciding what the
>> sub-region was. Again, I think the APNIC regional boundaries are better than
>> the ICANN ccNSO politically motivated boundaries.
>> 
>> Just incidentally, APTLD has a fluid option, allowing countries who are on the
>> immediate border of the ICANN ccNSO defined AP region to choose to belong
>> to APTLD or elsewhere - so it is possible that USA / Canada / Central and
>> Southern Americas countries who have borders in the Pacific ocean etc could
>> choose to belong to APTLD.
>> 
>> Maybe we could apply the same flexibility to our approach for the APrIGF? It
>> would seem preferable to allow the greatest amount of flexibility of choice
>> for individual countries and territories to opt in or opt out of participation?
>> 
>> 
>> Cheers
>> 
>> Keith
>> On 28/03/2013 11:43 p.m., Adam Peake wrote:
>>> Hi
>>> 
>>> Please see
>>> <http://www.apnic.net/about-APNIC/organization/apnics-region>
>>> 
>>> The group decided to adopt the APNIC's definition of the region during
>>> discussions at the end of last year.  I don't recall all what was said
>>> now...
>>> 
>>> ICANN's region goes east to Iran. Other intergovernmental org
>>> definitions include the pacific rim countries (from Canada/Alaska to
>>> Chile).
>>> 
>>> I think this definition is quite logical and avoids duplication with
>>> other IGFs rather than excludes, but I could be wrong.
>>> 
>>> Best,
>>> 
>>> Adam
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Thu, Mar 28, 2013 at 7:37 PM, Fouad Bajwa <fouadbajwa at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>>> AP leaves a vacuum to South Asian countries and that has remained a
>>>> contentious issue.
>>>> 
>>>> Fouad
>>>> 
>>>> On Thu, Mar 28, 2013 at 3:35 PM, HiroHOTTA <hotta at jprs.co.jp> wrote:
>>>>> In the draft of Operating Principles document, AP region is defined
>>>>> as "the economies covered by APNIC".  This difinition is different
>>>>> from that of ICANN or APTLD.  I don't have specific preference at
>>>>> this moment, but I'd like to know the background why APNIC
>>>>> definition is selected.  Also, I'd like to confirm there is no
>>>>> vacuum between the areas defined by APrIGF and by other regional IGF
>>>>> organizations (such as Arab IGF).
>>>>> 
>>>>> (I believe this must have already been desicussed, but le me ask)
>>>>> 
>>>>> Hiro
>>>>> 
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Rigf_program mailing list
>>>>> Rigf_program at ap.rigf.asia
>>>>> https://mailman.dotasia.org/mailman/listinfo/rigf_program
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> --
>>>> Regards.
>>>> --------------------------
>>>> Fouad Bajwa
>>>> ICT4D and Internet Governance Advisor My Blog: Internet's Governance:
>>>> http://internetsgovernance.blogspot.com/
>>>> Follow my Tweets: http://twitter.com/fouadbajwa
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Rigf_program mailing list
>>>> Rigf_program at ap.rigf.asia
>>>> https://mailman.dotasia.org/mailman/listinfo/rigf_program
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Rigf_program mailing list
>>> Rigf_program at ap.rigf.asia
>>> https://mailman.dotasia.org/mailman/listinfo/rigf_program
>>> .
>>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Rigf_program mailing list
>> Rigf_program at ap.rigf.asia
>> https://mailman.dotasia.org/mailman/listinfo/rigf_program
>> _______________________________________________
>> Rigf_secretariat mailing list
>> Rigf_secretariat at ap.rigf.asia
>> https://mailman.dotasia.org/mailman/listinfo/rigf_secretariat
>> -----
>> No virus found in this message.
>> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>> Version: 2013.0.2904 / Virus Database: 2641/6209 - Release Date: 03/27/13
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Rigf_program mailing list
> Rigf_program at ap.rigf.asia
> https://mailman.dotasia.org/mailman/listinfo/rigf_program

_______________________________________________
Rigf_program mailing list
Rigf_program at ap.rigf.asia
https://mailman.dotasia.org/mailman/listinfo/rigf_program