[Bp_ipv6] Following today's discussion

Susan Chalmers susan at chalmers.associates
Sun Nov 1 11:40:44 EST 2015


Thank you kindly, Miwa.
Michael, Wim and I are working to finalize everything today. The draft
should be posted tomorrow!

Sincerely,
Susan



Susan Chalmers
susan at chalmers.associates

*CHALMERS* & ASSOCIATES
http://chalmers.associates

On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 11:18 PM, Miwa Fujii <miwa at apnic.net> wrote:

> Dear Susan,
>
> Here is the final texts from two orgs in Japan.  Both of them wish to be
> anonymous.
>
> Hope this helps.
>
> Thank you.
>
> miwa
>
> From: Susan Chalmers <susan at chalmers.associates>
> Date: Saturday, 31 October 2015 9:24 am
> To: Miwa Fujii <miwa at apnic.net>
> Cc: Izumi Okutani <izumi at nic.ad.jp>, IGF BPFs <bp_ipv6 at intgovforum.org>
> Subject: Re: [Bp_ipv6] Following today's discussion
>
> Thank you, Miwa. We'll see how it goes!
> We'll need to edit the text into the document before it is due on Monday.
> If we do not make this deadline, then your colleagues can always submit
> comments via the public platform.
>
> Thanks for all of your efforts in this regard.
>
> Sincerely,
> Susan
>
>
>
> Susan Chalmers
> susan at chalmers.associates
>
> *CHALMERS* & ASSOCIATES
> http://chalmers.associates
>
> On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 3:42 AM, Miwa Fujii <miwa at apnic.net> wrote:
>
>> Hi Susan,
>>
>> I am waiting for the final input from two Japanese orgs with IPv6 (both
>> with anonymous status) .  I think I should receive emails from them at any
>> time soon.  Once I receive final texts, I will forward them asap but I may
>> miss the deadline slightly.   Just a heads-up.
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>> miwa
>>
>> On 28/10/2015 6:31 pm, "Miwa Fujii" <miwa at apnic.net> wrote:
>>
>> >Hi Izumi,
>> >
>> >Thanks for your clarification. Much appreciated.
>> >
>> >Miwa
>> >
>> >On 28/10/2015 6:15 pm, "Izumi Okutani" <izumi at nic.ad.jp> wrote:
>> >
>> >>Hi Miwa,
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>Thanks for sharing the questions. It's good to clarify them for the
>> >>others in this list as well.
>> >>
>> >>> - Will be the name of the organisation listed in the doc?
>> >>
>> >>The name of the organisation which is involved the case studies are
>> >>usually put on the document to acknowledge their work. It also gives
>> >>readers more clear picture.
>> >>However it is not a must if requested otherwise.
>> >>
>> >>> - If you list the org names (that contributed IPv6 information) in the
>> >>> doc, will it be part of the list of “contributors”?
>> >>
>> >>As you can from the current document for public comment, the source of
>> >>information is appended at the end under "APPENDIX".
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> http://review.intgovforum.org/igf-2015/best-practice-forums/creating-an-e
>> >>n
>> >>abling-environment-for-ipv6-adoption/
>> >>
>> >>I think this can either be you Miwa or the organisation itself,
>> depending
>> >>on what the contributors prefer.
>> >>
>> >>If they want to know whether there will be a section on thanking the
>> >>contributors, I don't recall we've discussed it.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>> - If necessary, will it be possible to provide input with anonymous
>> >>>status?
>> >>
>> >>Certainly. It is possible to contribute with anonymous status.
>> >>
>> >>If they have a particular request on how they want to disclose (or not
>> >>disclose their names), feel free to let us know.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>That is my understanding on the discussions we've had in the group.
>> >>Susan or anyone else, please feel free to chime in if there is anything
>> >>to add/have a different understanding.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>Izumi
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>On 2015/10/28 13:40, Miwa Fujii wrote:
>> >>> Hi Suzan and Izumi,
>> >>>
>> >>> I got further questions as below from a Japanese org that I have
>> sought
>> >>> their input.
>> >>>
>> >>> - Will be the name of the organisation listed in the doc?
>> >>> - If you list the org names (that contributed IPv6 information) in the
>> >>> doc, will it be part of the list of “contributors”?
>> >>> - If necessary, will it be possible to provide input with anonymous
>> >>>status?
>> >>>
>> >>> I am not exactly sure about the intention of the second inquiry but I
>> >>> assume they are interested in how/where you will list their name in
>> the
>> >>> doc.
>> >>>
>> >>> I’d appreciate your input.
>> >>>
>> >>> Thanks,
>> >>>
>> >>> miwa
>> >>>
>> >>> On 27/10/2015 5:06 pm, "Bp_ipv6 on behalf of Miwa Fujii"
>> >>> <bp_ipv6-bounces at intgovforum.org on behalf of miwa at apnic.net> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>>> Hi Izumi,
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Thanks for your clarification.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Miwa
>> >>>>
>> >>>> On 27/10/2015 4:59 pm, "Izumi Okutani" <izumi at nic.ad.jp> wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>>> Hi Miwa,
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Thank you for your help in reaching out to private sectors in Japan.
>> >>>>> I'm sure Susan will get back to you with a comprehensive response -
>> >>>>>my
>> >>>>> response while waiting for her time zone to be online.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>> - Whom do you submit this document?
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> The final document will be produced by a consultant engaged by the
>> >>>>>IGF
>> >>>>> Secretariat based on the discussions within our group.
>> >>>>> Our consultant is Wim Degezelle. It will then be published on the
>> IGF
>> >>>>> microwebsite for the Best Practices.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Best Practices documents from 2014 may give you some idea (listed in
>> >>>>> "Categories") :
>> >>>>> http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/documents/best-practice-forums
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>> - Will this document be distributed worldwide?
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Yes, that's the idea, to be distributed worldwide.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> - Discussed at the IGF in João Pessoa, Brazil with global
>> >>>>>participants
>> >>>>> (10 to 13 November )
>> >>>>> - Published on the IGF micro website available for anyone to see.
>> >>>>> - We reach out to bodies/organisations in various regions. They can
>> >>>>>help
>> >>>>> us proactively share with their respective stakeholders.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>> - How do you distribute this document?
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> As described about, we reach out to various bodies/organisations
>> >>>>>after
>> >>>>> posting on the IGF microsite.
>> >>>>> The group hasn't yet discussed the specific list of organisations to
>> >>>>> reach out.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Whether this is just for online sharing, or we would like to have
>> >>>>>some
>> >>>>> face to face opportunities to present them in any other forums than
>> >>>>>IGF,
>> >>>>> hasn't been discussed, including its needs.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>> - Who will receive the document?
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> IGF secretariat will receive the document, but they publish it on
>> the
>> >>>>> website is open for anyone to read.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> If you mean the target reader, one of the stakeholders identified is
>> >>>>> governments.
>> >>>>> The section on the private sector would serve as a good reference to
>> >>>>> those who are considering to makde a decision on IPv6 deployment in
>> >>>>>their
>> >>>>> networks as well.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Do people see anyone else to add?
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Given the government is considered as one of the readers, I suspect
>> >>>>>it
>> >>>>> would make sense to consider governmental organisations as a
>> >>>>>potential
>> >>>>> target of outreach.
>> >>>>> Also to national and regional IGFs are where most key update on the
>> >>>>> global IGF are shared.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Suggestions are certainly welcome, if you know any
>> >>>>> community/body/organization who would find value in having this
>> >>>>>document
>> >>>>> shared.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> I hope this helps!
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Izumi
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> On 2015/10/27 9:20, Miwa Fujii wrote:
>> >>>>>> Hi Susan,
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> Hi Susan,
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> I¹ve asked some of orgs in Japan that have already implemented IPv6
>> >>>>>>to
>> >>>>>> provide short texts on 4) Lessen leant from the private sector.
>> They
>> >>>>>>are
>> >>>>>> putting the request through the Internal decision making process,
>> >>>>>>and I
>> >>>>>> got the following questions.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> - Whom do you submit this document?
>> >>>>>> - Will this document be distributed worldwide?
>> >>>>>> - How do you distribute this document?
>> >>>>>> - Who will receive the document?
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> I¹d appreciate your input.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> Thanks.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> miwa
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> From: Bp_ipv6
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>><bp_ipv6-bounces at intgovforum.org<mailto:
>> bp_ipv6-bounces at intgovforum.o
>> >>>>>>r
>> >>>>>>g>
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>> on behalf of Susan Chalmers
>> >>>>>> <susan at chalmers.associates<mailto:susan at chalmers.associates>>
>> >>>>>> Date: Thursday, 22 October 2015 10:39 am
>> >>>>>> To: IGF BPFs
>> >>>>>><bp_ipv6 at intgovforum.org<mailto:bp_ipv6 at intgovforum.org>>
>> >>>>>> Subject: [Bp_ipv6] Following today's discussion
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> Greetings,
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> During today's call we addressed a few structural elements of the
>> >>>>>> paper, including highlighting the similarities in best practices
>> >>>>>>between
>> >>>>>> ISPs and content providers, and acknowledging that enterprises are
>> a
>> >>>>>> different story.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> We also decided to remove the case study section due to time
>> >>>>>> constraints, and to emphasize in the conclusion that the efforts of
>> >>>>>>all
>> >>>>>> stakeholders combine to produce the best possible output, as
>> opposed
>> >>>>>> groups acting independently.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> Lastly, we decided to add a brief section on research and education
>> >>>>>> networks.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> Taking this into account, I've rearranged the outline, provided
>> >>>>>>below.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> Thanks to everyone for their contributions today.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> Sincerely,
>> >>>>>> Susan
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> 4)Lessons from the Private Sector
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> In this section we look at best practices identified within private
>> >>>>>> sector organisations, beginning with ISPs and content providers,
>> and
>> >>>>>> ending with enterprises.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> A.ISPs and content providers
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> i)Review existing infrastructure
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> ii)Determine whether vendors are IPv6-ready
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> iii)Training for employees
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> iv)Deploy public-facing IPv6 services
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> v)Migrate to IPv6 on internal networks
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> vi)Set internal deadlines
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> vii)Reach out to customers
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> viii)Consider different approaches to pricing (for ISPs)
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> ix)Plan for the unexpected
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> B.Enterprises
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> 5)Research and Education Networks (NRENs)
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> A.About NRENs (including University service provider relationship)
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> B.Examples
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> i) CERNET
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> ii)Š.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> iii)Š.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> v)Š.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> Susan Chalmers
>> >>>>>> susan at chalmers.associates<mailto:susan at chalmers.associates>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> CHALMERS & ASSOCIATES
>> >>>>>> http://chalmers.associates
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________
>> >>>>>> Bp_ipv6 mailing list
>> >>>>>> Bp_ipv6 at intgovforum.org
>> >>>>>> http://intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/bp_ipv6_intgovforum.org
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> _______________________________________________
>> >>>> Bp_ipv6 mailing list
>> >>>> Bp_ipv6 at intgovforum.org
>> >>>> http://intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/bp_ipv6_intgovforum.org
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >
>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://intgovforum.org/pipermail/bp_ipv6_intgovforum.org/attachments/20151101/6438d62c/attachment.html>


More information about the Bp_ipv6 mailing list