Greetings. The Face to Face organising committee has been following the NZNOG discussion on the "Who owns Netgate?" session of Face to Face with interest. (After feedback this has been re-titled "Who Inherited NZgate? Portability of IP Addresses") We believe that this subject is so important, and one that it is crucial to have ISP and other industry input into, that we wish to offer NZNOG members some alternatives to discuss. 1. Come to the whole Forum as it will be worth your while if only from a networking perspective. Investment: $80 + GST members, $130 + GST non-members.* 2. Attend only the "Who Inherited NZgate? Portability of IP Addresses" session at 11:00am. For this we are prepared to reduce the investment to $40.00 + GST, and lunch is included. You will then not be able to attend the pre-11:00am or post-lunch sessions. 3. We are happy to facilitate a pre-Forum 'NZNOG and interest parties' gathering where the group can work through the issues and then attend Face to Face with the intention of reporting on your proceedings, e.g., concensus (if any), action items, and the like. If you wished to designate a "Reporter" they would have their Forum investment waived as do the other lead speakers. 4. It may be possible to set up a lunchtime round-table "closed door" session for NOG's on the day to talk through issues. The outcome of this could be reported back to Face to Face. This would mean re-arranging the agenda, so if this is your preference we would need a definite commitment soon. Please discuss these options - we do want to accommodate NZNOG if we can. If you decide on option 3 we would need notification of this fairly soon so that we can arrange a venue etc. Also we would need a decision on where you would actually want to hold that session (e.g., Auckland, Wellington etc) If you decided on either 1) or 2) then we could facilitate interested parties being invited to attend a post Forum NZNOG meeting. We have discussed this briefly with Andy Linton and he has indicated a willingness to facilitate/chair such a discussion if it were to be in Wellington. (Andy is strongly against the fourth option). If travel costs are one of the problems for attendance of Face to Face, please let the Society know that too and we'll see if we can be of some assistance on a case by case basis. Cordially For the Organising Committee Sue Leader Executive Director ISOCNZ (The Internet Society of New Zealand Inc) http://www.isocnz.org.nz Email:Exe.Dir(a)ISOCNZ.org.nz Voice: +64-4-801-6256 --------- To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog
On Wed, Nov 04, 1998 at 09:24:03PM +1200, Sue Leader wrote:
The Face to Face organising committee has been following the NZNOG discussion on the "Who owns Netgate?" session of Face to Face with interest. (After feedback this has been re-titled "Who Inherited NZgate? Portability of IP Addresses") We believe that this subject is so important, and one that it is crucial to have ISP and other industry input into, that we wish to offer NZNOG members some alternatives to discuss.
[snip! snip!]
As I have already mentioned to Sue, I have too many other things on and
can't spare a day to travel down to Wellington.
The session sounds like a fine idea however; I do share Andy's reservations
about whether a closed session is appropriate though, since the real
opportunity ISOCNZ has to add value to the discussions likes in the
education of the user community - keeping them out of a closed room isn't
going to help this much :)
I plan to have my revised draft finished (well, started :) in the next
couple of days, and I will post that to the list.
In the interests of the user community, it might make sense to draft a
smaller, more simple document which just explains the issues of address
delegation and ownership from non-NZGATE (i.e. provider-aggregatable)
blocks. If a large number of ISPs are happy to sign their names to it,
it would be a good document to publicise at the ISOCNZ meeting.
The idea of this new document is, of course, to clarify matters for users,
and to avoid the same provider-independence confusion that we have with
the NZGATE blocks. The document could be extended in the future once we
have collective agreement on how the NZGATE block delegations fit into the
equation.
If people think this is worth doing, I can have a stab at a first draft --
however, anybody else who is keen to do it instead is more than welcome ;)
Joe
--
Joe Abley
participants (2)
-
Joe Abley -
Sue Leader