[Bp_ipv6] Following today's discussion

Miwa Fujii miwa at apnic.net
Fri Oct 30 03:42:05 EDT 2015


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
>>> 
>>
>



More information about the Bp_ipv6 mailing list