AP* Retreat, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
22 February 2004
Venue: State Room, Palace of the Golden Horses, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

Participants: Abhisak Chulya, Atsushi Endo, Azmah Abd Malik, Bill Manning, Che-Hoo Cheng, David Harris, Edmon Chung, Gaurab Raj Upadhaya, Gihas Dias, Hiro Hotta, Ian Chiang, Izumi Aizu, James Seng, Jeonghye Choi, Kanchana Kanchanasut, Kazunori Konishi, Kilnam Chon, Ole J. Jacobsen, Paul Wilson, Pensri A., Philip Smith, Shinichiro Deki, Suguru Yamaguchi, Suresh Ramasubramanian, Tommy Matsumoto, Yoo Ji Yul

Breakfast meeting @ Carousel Restaurant at 8:00

The agenda was reviewed and revised. The funding models were discussed and it was agreed that the contribution at the gate (to cover the meeting expenses) should be at 50USD and encouragement should be made so that affordable contributors would contribute more (at 100USD).

Meeting commenced at 9:15.

The meeting started with greetings from co-chaired persons, Izumi Aizu and Abhisak Chulya. Abhisak proceeded to the agenda.

1.	Roll Call
	Abhisak invited the participants to introduce individually.
2.	AP* organizations and meeting reports
2.1	APAN by Kilnam Chon
	APAN has been very active in intersection of Asia and Pacific. APAN is making a very good progress on getting members in South Asia. Sri Lanka joined APAN last year so as Bangladesh. India joined APAN in February 2004. Now, APAN is working on Nepal and Pakistan. Pakistan is very tough in many ways. Asian and European satellites cannot do much coverage to Pakistan. Once APAN can go through with Nepal and Pakistan, then the remaining countries will be Indonesia and Vietnam. APAN is pretty much in a good shape. Beyond, Central Asia and West Asia are much covered by European’s effort because they are much closer to Europe than APAN in many ways. The good news is that countries in South Asia are pretty much APAN’s member now.
2.2	APCAUCE by JH Choi
	The presenter updated major events for APCAUCE in 2003. 2nd APCAUCE Workshop was held in Taipei in February 2003 at APRICOT 2003 and the 3rd APCAUCE Workshop was held in Busan in August 2003 at 16th APAN Meetings. APCAUCE committee was recognized on August 2003 and also the coordination committee was presented by each economy. APCAUCE Members: CAUCE.AU – Feb 1999 CAUCE India – Jan 2002 CAUCE Malaysia – Mar 2003 CAUCE Korea – May 2003 It was announced that CAUCE NZ and CAUCE HK will join APCAUCE very soon. The 4th APCAUCE Workshop during APRICOT 2004 will be organized, with a one-day tutorial on Feb 24th and a conference on Feb 26th. The 5th APCAUCE Workshop will be held in July 2004. The place is still under discussion. Some issues to be addressed during the committee meeting on Feb 26th are as follows: possible move of one APCAUCE location from APAN to SANOG registration of APCAUCE as a non-profit society, tentative location will in Hong Kong, and identification of chairpersons for CAUCE NZ and CAUCE HK.

2.3	APCERT by Suguru Yamaguchi
	APCERT stands for Asia Pacific Computer Emergency Response Team. It is the regional forum of CSIRT in the Asia Pacific. It is an organization similar to the CERTCC, SingCERT and JPCERT. It was established in February 2003 to work together for Internet Security. It harmonizes other groups within the regions. Other regional forums in North America, Latin America and Europe were also established. There are two reasons in setting up such regional forums: a) to help each other together and b) to discuss issues shared in the region since the global forum (e.g. Forum of Incident Response and Security Teams or FIRST) cannot discuss specific issue of each region. The structure of the group, which is similar to other groups, were discussed: Chair: AusCERT (for 2 years term) Secretariat: JPCERT/CC with support of CERT/CC-KR Members: 15 full members from 13 different countries Full member: CSIRT or equivalent who can manage vulnerability for information on incident related security manners. General member: Liaison, observers and others Basically, APCERT is managed by full members. Annual Conference (co-existing with APRICOT), APSIRC: Asia Pacific Security Incident Response Coordination Conference will be held in KL with APRICOT 2004. APSIRC 2002-2005 will be funded and supported by JPCERT/CC (funding from JP government) because these years are a period for establishing stable funding structure for APCERT’s activities. APCERT Working Groups are Accreditation WG, Finance WG and who is DB WG (working with APNIC) The mechanism is established to share information among full members which is Secure Information Repository managed by APCERT itself. The accreditation process definition: Mutual trust is key idea for CSIRT to work together. Sharing vulnerability information not in the public can be big risk for the Internet itself. Other regional CSIRT forums also have their own accreditation process. APCERT has already started off a dialogue in the lobbying with other stakeholders like APEC and ASEAN e-security group. APCERT realizes that it needs to do more on the awareness program to promote the importance of security management to the region especially countries which do not have CSIRT. It is hoping to accelerate for establishment of CSIRT in each country; more full members in AP regions and more contact points are expected. India and Bangladesh are also in a queue to be members of APCERT. The discussion about involvement from Government for Law enforcement has been discussed many times but not yet has consensus. Model is needed.
Q:	What is the main issue of the APCERT whois DB working group
A:	To keep the contact points of victims and others. APCERT’s member countries are contacting and discussing with APNIC to enable APCERT to use APNIC whois DB directly through APCERT mechanism and sometime ask APNIC to enrich the contents of the DB.
2.4	APIA by Abhisak Chulya
	APIA was established in 1997 as Non-profit trade association and incorporated in Seychelles. It is aimed originally to promote the business interests of Internet-related Service industry in AP region. APIA’s 2003-2004 missions are to ensure the future and stability of APRICOT operation, continue to play a key role in educating and training in AP region and build human resource infrastructure and development of the Internet in AP region. APIA’s Board of Directors comprise of seven members. Abhisak Chulya – Chairman Philip Smith – Vice Chairman Toru Takahashi – Treasurer Ole Jacobsen James Seng Yong Wan Ju (resigned) Kyoko Day (resigned) It was informed that new board elections would be on 25 Feb 2004 and APIA would get full seven members back to come in and help drive APIA. The presenter took an opportunity to thank Mr. Toru Takahashi who has been making very tremendous contribution to APIA in the past. Mr. Toru has stepped down because of his health. Activities for 2003 Successful APRICOT 2003 in Taipei Working with APRICOT Management Committee and Advisory Committee on developing and growing APRICOT Appointing PIKOM as Secretariat Support local host for APRICOT 2004 Alliances with other AP Internet related orgs such as IAJapan, AP* Signing MoUs with APNIC, EuroISPA, eCOM-L@C, SANOG Registering APRICOT Trade Mark (logo and name) in USA and Singapore (with help from James Seng) Merging bank accounts of APIA and APRICOT into one account Participate in CommunicAsia 2004 to promote APRICOT 2005 New membership fee structure that will help setup a fee model in a better way.
	Summary: APIA provides a legal body as an umbrella for APRICOT.
2.5	APRICOT by Philip Smith
The presenter quickly updated some current APRICOT facts and figures:
	6 workshops at APRICOT this year with totally110 participants 750 – 800 registered participants for this year APRICOT main conference 2 days of tutorials with quality focused; 8 tutorials in parallel per day Focus on quality plenary speakers Arrangements and set-ups for APRICOT; social events and wireless network setup
Q:	What is APRICOT’s financial situation?
A:	Not really know but one of the conditions to host APRICOT is "it should be a non-lose maker event". The information from PIKOM so far shows that the incomes are more than the expenses so the account is in the black.
Q:	What is the outlook of the future of APRICOT?
A:	For APRICOT 2005, 4 expressions of interest were received with only 1 bid remain to present the proposal this evening (the bid is from Japan). For 2006, three expressions of interest with 2 bid proposals have been received. The bids are from India and Western Australia.
2.6	APNG by Tommy Matsumoto
	Since August 2003, after last APNG Annual General Meeting, major activities of APNG were To form the firm new org of APNG, To find a very stable APNG Secretariat and To transfer APNG Server from China to Japan APNG has received very good contribution from NTT communications with a web server, system and server site in Tokyo so that APNG has very stable system in JP. Three major activities of APNG were made since Aug 2003 for next two years: APNG Camp – Next Generation Camp Internet History Museum At Large Committee APNG organization chart was presented. The chart is not much different from the chart when Prof Shigeki Goto was the APNG’s chair. Executive Committee Chair: Tommy Matsumoto Vice-Chair: Mao Wei CFO: Rikio Onai Advisory Board (to give the advise support for APNG’s activities): Kilnam Chon, Haruhisa Ishida, Tan Tin Wee, Shigeki Goto, Xing Li, Tommy Matsumoto, Paul Wilson, Vincent Chen, Jun Murai, Toru Takahashi, Abhisak Chulya, Kazunori Konishi Steering Committee Anthony S. Lee, Atsushi Endo, Izumi Aizu, James Seng, Liu Xin, Tacha Park, Tommy Matsumoto, Yoo Ji Yul Secretariat Shin Deki, Masashi Sawada APNG activity committees consists of At-large committee: co-chaired by Yoo Ji Yul and Izumi Aizu Camp committee: chaired by Liu Xin History Committee: chaired by Atsushi Endo APNG is open membership organization. The presenter invited Shin Deki to explain about APNG’s new server and system: Hardware: HP ProLiant DL360 G3 Intel Xeon 3.06GHz / 1GB Mem / 146GB HDD(RAID1) Operating System: RedHat Enterprise Linux AS ver2.1 Web: Apache 1.3.27-6.ent With PHP, Python, Perl Mailing Lists: Mailman 2.1.4 It is possible to have WebUI management. The presenter then said thank you to Mr. Paul Wilson for APNIC’s continuing contribution into APNG activities and continuously contribution for 10,000 USD per year. Financial status of APNG is healthy and Budgetary Plan is being worked. APNG invites funding supports for APNG activities and APNG Camp fellowship program to invite participants from developing countries to join APNG Camp Finally, the presenter explained APNG Schedule in 2004 and 2005: 23 Feb 2004 will be the next APNG AGM 5th APNG Camp will be held during 2-5 July 2004 in conjunction with 18th APAN in Cairns 6th APNG Camp will be in conjunction with 20th APAN in Taipei in 2005
2.7	APNIC by Paul Wilson
	The presenter gave a few highlights on APNIC.
	APNIC membership is continuously climbing very steadily and just very slightly accelerating. Just under 900 members currently and expected to be around 1,000 at the end of this year. IPv4 addresses are also continuing quite rapidly and never really slow down in terms of overall trend during last couple of years. APNIC has been making some continuing large allocations to substantial number of large networks operating around the region. Training Courses Three Core Courses (1 day): Internet Resource Management I Internet Resource Management II Internet Resource Management Essentials Technical Courses DNS Practical Workshop (2 day) DNS Advanced Workshop (4 days) IRR Tutorial with hands-on Lab (1 day) The Training collaborations with SOI-Asia for on-line video delivery trial, and with NIRs conducting trainings at NIR meetings. AIT is helping APNIC with Training Administration at the moment. APNIC is looking forward to collaborate more with intERLab/AIT. MyAPNIC is the name given to a major ongoing project to develop a secure, members only area on the APNIC website. The management tools in MyAPNIC interacts with Whois database and APNIC’s allocation manager software to allow users to manage IP and AS resources, set administrative, billing and security details, and receive account-related messages. E-Voting features have been added to MyAPNIC. Continuing working on distributing APNIC POP and “F” root server mirroring around the region 5 countries was planned in 2003: HK, KR, CN, TW, SG HKIX has just fully operated in Jan 2004 as an APNIC POP and a mirror of “F” root server APNIC funding and owning the hardware: approximately USD100,000 pre site. APNIC pays ISC (the “F” root server operator) for per site fee operation. Suggestion: Kilnam Chon gave suggestion that major countries in Asia Pacific should have root server mirroring for robustness. ICANN and WSIS Firstly the development relating to ICANN is NRO – Number Resource Organization which is more or less in coalition of all RIRs and carriage of joint activities. One of the activities is the intention to form a new ASO with ICANN. ASO was formed since 1999 to be reestablished since ICANN reform. The discussions are still going on. The final point is WSIS which is newly and highly politically charged event which has come across since last year. RIRs was attending and watching developments. Trying to help out by giving information to level up the understanding of WSIS delegates about Internet model, Internet governance, etc. The final result of WSIS in December 2003 which is quite scary is to put Internet resources into hands of inter government organization Working groups under WSIS were formed to work on this The presenter pointed out that we need to really looking at WSIS seriously especially in the next two years. APNIC provides the registration system for this year APRICOT. APNIC has got over 40 secretariat staffs during Year 2003. Finally, the presenter explained that the APNIC’s financial situation is under control but a big influence is the exchange rate.
2.8	APTLD by Ian Chiang
	The presenter briefed activities in 2003: Legally incorporated in Malaysia 7 new members Established APTLD sponsorship Program Organized APTLD Technical Workshop New APTLD Website in November 2003 Published Member’s bi-monthly newsletter Extend Board’s term to 2 years, with half of Board seats open for election each year TWNIC was re-appointed as APTLD Secretariat for another 2 years term 2003 Events overviews were presented. 4 face-to-face meetings February AGM – Taipei, Taiwan May Member/ Board Meeting – KL, Malaysia August Member/ Board Meeting – Busan, Korea November Member/ Board Meeting and Technical Workshop – Wellington, New Zealand (The first technical workshop was in Wellington chaired by Dr. Kanchana.) 1 ad hoc board meeting during ICANN Carthage Meetings 2 on-line Board meetings in January and May 1 on-line Membership WG meeting in July APTLD is based on membership, and its activities are funded by membership fees. There are 21 ordinary members including au, cc, cn, cx, hk, jp, kr, my, nu, nz, ph, sg, th, tj, tv, tw, vn, tk (23 Nov 2003), jo (09 Dec 2003), nf (13 Jan 2004), and lk (04 Feb 2004). 2 associate member: Afilias (in process) and Register.com, Inc. (in process), and 1 observer: CENTR (Council of European National Top-Level Domain Registries) which application was accepted at Wellington meeting. The APTLD Board of Directors was announced. The APTLD Committees was shown. The presenter gave a summary of the first APTLD technical workshop in Willington which was very successful. APTLD has agreed to continue organizing future APTLD technical workshop. The APTLD’s Sponsorship Program was briefly presented. APTLD 2004 Event Schedule was presented in which the second technical workshop is going to held on 24 February 2004 co-hosted by APNIC and APTLD, APTLD AGM in KL on 26 February 2004 in conjunction with APRICOT 2004, APTLD Member/Board Meeting will be in KL again on 18 July 2004 in conjunction with ICANN KL Meetings, and from between 4 – 6 November 2004 will be APTLD Member/Board Meeting and 3rd Technical Workshop will be in Perth in conjunction with APTLD Perth Meeting. The presenter ended the presentation with a brief information on KL AGM agenda.
2.9	IntERLab by Kanchana Kanchanasut
	The presenter started with what AP* organizations have agreed since AP* retreat in 2000 that is to establish an Internet Training Center with a fixed location. The donation of USD 50,000 as a seed money was received from Toru Takahashi in 2000 to run AP* Retreat Secretariat as well as to prepare for the Training Center. AIT has been discussing with APNIC on partnership. AIT started to work on coordinating the training for APNIC. We had a concept called ALIRE which was discussed many times in AP* Retreat meetings addressing the human resource center at AIT. Once that concept was adopted, the name was changed to intERLab. intERLab stands for Internet Education and Research Laboratory. intERLab was officially launched at AIT on December 15, 2003. Prof. Kilnam Chon and Prof. Jun Murai presented at the launching ceremony of intERLab. Both of them are intERLab’s chairman of the Steering Committee. The idea of having intERLab is to concentrate on engineering and technical aspects of the Internet at the same time on social/governance and policy issues as well as Internet applications. Each component of intERLab will concentrate on research, degree program and training. We will start on training and research activities. Funding: Started with AIT contribution: a building with 600 sqm, and a little bit of funding for renovation. Currently, intERLab has 6 AIT staff and 6 project staff. The presenter pointed out that intERLab through the Social and Policy component will perform the functions of secretariat of many activities such as AP* Retreat Secretariat, etc. The presenter welcomed donations such as laboratory equipment, i.e., router, etc. The presenter would like to collaborate with other AP organizations to provide intERLab with resource persons for the training There is also a need for funding for participants, staff and operation and total estimated expense is expected to be USD 350, 000 per annum.
Q:	How do you get intERLab to organize training in country X?
A:	Our primary target would be to have fixed location training so participants need to come to AIT. However we would also explore a scheme where we use to fly trainers to the location and also try to organize some remote classrooms.
2.10	SANOG by Gaurab Raj Upadhaya
	SANOG stands for South Asian Network Operators Group. This is in line with established practices like NANOG in North America, RIPE NCC Meetings in Europe and APRICOT in Asia. The meeting will provide a regional forum to discuss operational issues and technologies closer home for data operators in the South Asian Region. SANOG I was held in Kathmandu, Nepal in Jan 2003 in conjunction with CAN IT Conference 2003 and it included pre and post conference tutorials, conference and meeting. The agenda for the first meeting of SANOG was to establish the procedures for future meetings and gathering a consensus for such a group. SANOG II was held in Colombo, Sri Lanka in July together with Networking South Asia and APAN South Asia meeting and it included 4 day workshops, two-day tutorials and one-day conference and meeting. As an addition from the first meeting, NetSA/SANOG had full workshops in two tracks – Routing & Systems. It was organized by LEARN – the Lanka Academic Network. 50+ local participants and 80+ International Participants were present and it offered fellowship to 50 people to participate which was covered partial travel and accommodation provided to Fellows. The generous sponsorships came from LEARN, APNIC, LISPA-LK, CINTEC, Cisco, Lanka Com and other local companies and WorldBank infoDev Program for fellowships. More participants from academic networks, but operators from all countries were also present. SANOG III was held in January 2004 in Bangalore, India which was hosted by IPv6 Forum, India and co-hosted with IPv6 Summit. 150+ participants were present and fellowship to 15 people with help from NSRC and funds from ISOC and books were donated by Cisco Press, as well as NSRC. SANOG IV will be in July or August 2004 and 3 system workshops will be added. A better conference day is being targeted and 200+ participants are expected from all countries. SANOG V will probability in Dhaka and SANOG VI will be in Thimpu/Bhuta, and collaboration with other organizations is expected to grow. In terms of collaborations, MoU with APNIC was signed during APNIC 16 for co-operation. Co-operation with NSRC for SANOG III and collaboration is expected to increase in future. Other organizations in collaboration with SANOG were also mentioned. It was informed that the website will be updated soon with SANOG III materials. APIA is going to sign the MoU with SANOG and APCAUCE is interested in organizing bi-annual meeting with SANOG.
3.	Internet History – NSF’s international programs by Kazunori Konishi
	The presenter gave an overview about Internet History in Asia which was a session during last APAN meeting in Busan. Four presentations were made which mostly focus on activities of Internet development especially deployment. APNG established the History Committee after the meeting. APNG may take over the role of getting Internet history of each country in Asia. The presenter gave a brief history of the Internet since 1969 to 1986. Larry Landweber made a good contribution for NSF to adopt TCP/IP protocol in 1986. The International Activities of NSF during 1990 – 1997 were summarized. Steve Goldstein was in charge of the project which started from 128kbps connection to INRIA (France) and upgraded to 50Mbps (shared with UUnet). After that most of research networks in Asia were connected to SprintLink. The new International Internet Services (HPIIS) had been drafted for multiple awards and had been presented during Inet’95 by Steve. HPIIS during 1998 – 2004 was summarized. In 1998, three awards were presented; TransPAC, EuroLink and NaukaNet. The presenter then provided details of TransPAC. Transit services are widely provided to APAN members. A very reliable operation; dual circuit topology & excellent NOC team enables ~100% availability. Highly performance experiments are conducted jointly by the scientists and NOC. GbE link between APAN-JP AND SURFnet has been installed via TransLight: GLIF. Observatory project with enhanced services is being developed & deployed. NSF is preparing next HPIIS program which has not been named exactly. The presenter named it as HPII2 for temporarily. The HPII2’s priorities were presented which are supporting community, new technology to cope with NSF program and enhance connectivity to additional regions (e.g., Latin America, Africa). The summary of HPIIS was then presented as follows: HPIIS has developed intra-Asia connectivity, and has expanded the regional collaborations as well as the global joint projects. Without NSF HPIIS program it may be difficult for us to work for AP region to connect to USA. Science community is well supported, and is expanding the collaborations with USA. NSF recently granted Gloriad project, making up for the thin pipe between CN and JP. It is critical to establish a fat pipe between CN and JP, and the new plan was presented by a CRL executive at Joint Techs Workshop in Hawaii in January. Continuously, the presenter explained about fat cables in Asia inclusive of their respective capacities and Links. Then, the presenter gave his personal observation on possible hubs in Asia. Deregulation of telecom business is critical for lost-cost international circuits. The 3 cities which are expected to be the main hubs in Asia: Tokyo: most trans-pacific cables are terminated. Hong Kong: gateway to China Singapore: many cables are landed. In terms of collaborations between Gloriad and APAN/TransPAC, NSF CISE will try to get the approval about the new solicitation of international Internet Services in March 2004. NSF official informally asks to integrate two NSF projects, TransPAC and Gloriad into a single one. The network diagram of TransPAC – Gloriad with CJK Gigabit Links which was written in September 2003 in Hong Kong was presented. The new 2.5Gbps link between China and Japan will be used for Gloriad project, too. NSF will grant only one proposal from Asia. CSTNET will use JP-CN 2.5 Gbps link for APAN activities. Gloriad projects will be possible over APAN/TransPAC links. The principal investigator of the new proposal will be discussed among IU, NCSA, Internet2, etc. APAN-JP will discuss on the single proposal with CSTNET/APAN-CN, in parallel with the discussion with & in USA.
4.	ENUM Updates by Hiro Hotta
	The presenter gave brief information about what ENUM is. ENUM is a mechanism for mapping telephone (E.164) numbers to Internet resource addresses/ Domain Names/ URIs. It is one to many mapping. Mapping is registered using NAPTR records in DNS and referred to by DNS lookup. End users through applications can select URIs according to their preference. It was explained what ENUM is used for with the help of a figure. Standardization is being done in IETF for protocol and in ITU for procedure of national operation. Standardization in IETF is almost done. RIPE NCC manages e164.arpa for formal ENUM DNS space in cooperation with ITU-T. Several countries/economies are doing ENUM trials. Then the conversion of E.164 number to domain name was explained. The example of ENUM services was presented. The services and protocols are SIP, H.323, InternetFAX, Telephone, FAX, Email and Web. The issues still needs to be addressed are future vision/ business model, DNS operation and Application software development, Security, Privacy and Regulation. Then, the presenter explained the delegation of a telephone number space for ENUM trail and procedure of delegation. In summary, there are 24 delegations: Europe (15), Asia (2: Singapore and China), Middle East (1), Latin America (1), Islands/Archipelago (3) and Beyond-CC experiment (2). The presenter showed 5 categories of trial organizations as Led by organization created for the trial Led by ccTLD Led by regulator (government) Led by a company entrusted by regulator Led by entrusted ccTLD registry of another country Two trails in Europe were summarized together with activities in Asia Pacific. As a conclusion, trials are underway in many countries/economies, especially in Europe (2 trials had very often exposed; Austria and UK) and in East Asia (KR, CN, TW, JP, SG and AU). Commercial operation is about to start in a few countries.
Q:	What is the interaction between ENUM and VOIP?
A:	After ENUM is referred to, VOIP will be the application. VOIP can be used not by the URI but by the phone number.
5.	Promotion of Native names in the Internet by Kilnam Chon
	The presenter started with the important of native names in the Internet for very old and very young people. The presenter briefed the background of Internet Internationalization (i18n) and Localization (l10n). It would be very delightful if non-native English speakers could make a search on the web in their own languages. The native names in the Internet can be serviced in several ways such as Internationalized Domain Names (IDN), keyword lookup service, keyword search service, directory and some more. Applications of native names can be found in web access, email in less degree and many more (probably more will be coming). The social impact of native names like user friendliness, no translation nor Romanization and outreach to senior citizen, less literate (never learned English) and young children should be addressed very carefully. The presenter then presented the native names’ cases in country basic: Korea Presidential election in 2002; website with one candidate name in Korean. Keyword Lookup Service: 20 million hits/day (one vendor) Keyword Search Service: (~ 5 vendors) IDN service to start in 2004 China Keyword Search Service (~ 5 vendors) Keyword Lookup Service (1 vendor) IDN service since 2002 Japan No Keyword Lookup Service Keyword Search Service IDN service since 2002 Thailand Keyword Lookup Service Keyword Search Service Arabic Language Right to Left Scribing Keyword Search Service Keyword Lookup Service IDN Service: com/net The interesting issues of native names were visited. Outreach: International outreach; native names have a big impact to developing or emerging countries especially non-roman characters countries. Domestic outreach to the senior citizen, less literate and children. A study on social impact like usage comparison of native names and Romanized names and impact of outreach to less favored communities should be conducted. Mobile phone may be one of the leading applications. A promotion plan: kick off in APRICOT KL (native name workshop on Feb 23rd, 2004) and have continuing activities for 2-3 years. There was a comment from participant that native names can be used to preserve in-danger languages and minority languages which are not in use or don’t have country. The presenter emphasized that the social impact study should be done.
Lunch: 12:30 – 14:00
6.	Internet Outlook in the Asia Pacific – APNIC perspective by Paul Wilson
	APNIC activities are quite interesting in terms of indicators of what the industry is doing in the region. Because APNIC is able to provide factual information about resources & ISPs in a very unique way. The basic data that the presenter is able to provide is to do with membership and IP resources. The presenter used the APNIC membership figures to analyze where ISPs are merging in different parts of the regions. Each member is independent ISP with requirement for portable addresses. The membership category reflects the size of ISP. It is also an objective and scientific criterion. Total membership increases as ISP industry grows and it reveals regional and national trends. The limitations in how to analyze those figures were mentioned: The capacity for paying for APNIC membership fee may not equal. Some ISPs may not be able to pay for membership fee. They will get the addresses from other ISPs. A lot of ISPs do not represented because there are downstream ISPs. NIRs skew distribution. The presenter showed the growth of APNIC membership in charts as well as the breakdown of APNIC new members per year. The presenter explained that the membership of APNIC decreased during mid 1997 – mid 1998 due to the economy crisis in the region. After that during the dot come boomed and peaked in around mid 2000, the APNIC membership boomed in term of the new ISPs. During the dot com crashes, there was not a sudden decrease of the membership in term of the new ISPs per month. The net change in term of APNIC membership hit the zero point at around beginning of 2002. The numbers of cancellations and new members were the same. After that the number of membership climbed up and quite steady. The large number of cancellations is still going on. The reason is because the companies are going out of the business. The number of net membership change has slowly increased. It is quite difficult to predict under the circumstance where there are a lot of new members coming in and a large number of cancellations. New and closed members per country code were presented through a chart. The presenter then moved to IP addresses. The IP addresses have been allocated only in accordance with demonstrated need for addresses. The need demonstrated by the deployment plan. The request process is quite technical, objective and quite scientific. The history shows that allocated addresses are deployed (routed) quickly within about three months. Some limitations are policies may change to make addresses more or less available and addresses may come from other sources. The presenter then gave figures of total allocations annually through a series of charts. For IPv4 address space, network deployment rates remained strong in 2002, despite the difficult financial conditions reflected in the slow membership growth rate. Although the rate of growth in demand for IPv4 address space in AP region slowed, the total amount of new allocations was the highest ever. According to the current statistic of IP addresses deployment, the address space is still available for about 20 more years. The three big players in term of IP addresses allocation are Japan, China and Korea. The presenter showed the IP addresses allocations chart where the comparison between pre and post APNIC policy was presented. The total allocations globally were presented through two charts. APNIC is allocating IPv4 address space at a faster rate than the other RIRs. APNIC’s total IPv4 allocations are now more than the other region in a last couple of years. The number of IPv6 block allocations in Asia-Pacific was growing nicely until last year when the total number dropped. The total number of allocations is still very small. This represents experimental and trial of IPv6.
Q:	Why the growth of IP address allocations in Japan has been rapidly high in the past few years?
A:	Due to broadband connections. Before that 60% of IP addresses were assigned to permanent connections. With these broadband connection networks being established, much more addresses have been assigned to these networks.
Comments from Kilnam Chon: There should be additional factors than broadband, for example VOIP, because Taiwan and Hong Kong have many broadband connections but IP address allocations are not high.
A:	Each ISP might adopt different policy to its customers, i.e., set criteria for giving the public IP address to premier customers not to all customers.
7.	.ASIA by Che Hoo Cheng and Edmon Chun
	The presenter thanked to Isumi Aizu for providing a time slot for Dot Asia TLD initiative presentation. The presenter then started with .Asia concept. The key concept is that .Asia will be coordinated by Dot Asia Org. The Dot Asia Org will be not-for-profit Registry Operator Driven by ccTLDs and will be cooperated in Hong Kong. AP Internet and IT Groups for relevance, and broad representation from the Asia Pacific community will be added into the structure of Dot Asia Org. .Asia as the TLD to satisfy sponsored gTLD criteria (>2 chars) and most simple and recognizable. Unlike “.EU” which is a ccTLD and administrative by European Commission, “.Asia” will be driven by community based organizations and ccTLDs, and it is a kind of combination of semi-public sector organizations and community organizations. .Asia Vision is to leverage the successful and cooperative platform of Asia Pacific Region Internet community to further this collaborative approach to other areas of the growing economies. .Asia Mission are to operate a viable not-for-profit initiative to be a technically advanced, world-class TLD registry for the AP community; to establish an Internet namespace with global recognition and regional significance for the betterment of the Asian Internet experience; and to reinvest surpluses in socio-technological advancement initiatives relevant to the Asian Internet community. The presenter gave an explanation on conceptual organization structure through a chart. The presenter then explained special features and differentiators of .Asia: Augmenting UDRP and WIPO Reserved Domains List with Local DRP Reserved Lists which will improve regional intellectual Properties Rights Protection and especially for IDNs. Asia Pacific Regional Presence Requirement Proof-of-Concept Multilingual TLD Participation from ccTLDs Nominations to and votes for the governing Board of Councilors Local Domain Dispute Resolution Policy to augment the UDRP List of Reserved Names to be blocked from the registry Language expertise on multilingual domain names Experience of operation of a TLD from your ccTLD Participation from AP Groups Nomination of a representative to sit at the Advisory Council From the representative at the Advisory Council nomination and vote for the seats at the Board of Councilors Experience and Knowledge on policies for Registry .Asia Bids to the Proceeds Steering Committee for grant allocations Suggestions and advice to Proceeds Steering Committee on areas of interest for re-investments The presenter has talked to quite number of ccTLDs and responses are quite positive and would like to get more supports from AP groups.
Q:	What is the role of Afilias?
A:	Affiliate will be technology provider of this initiative and will provide initial financial investment.
Q:	What is the motivation from the user point of view to have .Asia? Why do we need .Asia?
A:	One of the key is to leverage the successful and cooperative platform of Asia Pacific Region Internet community to further this collaborative approach to other areas of the growing economies, rather than individual country.
Q:	Who is the customer of .Asia?
Comment from participant: like regional magazines, whoever is running business or some operations in Asia might register for .Asia rather than .com, .org, etc. Let’s discuss how to manage .Asia during this APRICOT so that at least the technology or know how can be transferred to ccTLD. Some ccTLDs are messed up. .Asia will give the alternative to customers, i.e., .kr.asia, .jp.asia, etc.
The session was closed by a remark from the chair of the session Izumi: this is challenging in term of political. For .EU, European commission is in place as a political and economic entity. They are well established with good history, framework and parliament. That is not here in Asia. “Who is in charge of Asia?” is a very legitimate political question. The Afilias or other Internet community in Asia can answer to this question now. This may open up very interesting questions.
8.	ICANN AtLarge Activities by Izumi Aizu and Tommy Matsumoto
	Izumi Aizu gave an abstract of his participation to ICANN so far. Then, he gave numbers of At-Large Structure (ALS) application in each region. Details of certified organizations as ALS and under due diligence organizations in each region were presented. There is one certified ALS in Asia Pacific which is Arab Knowledge Management Society and 4 under due diligence which are National Information Infrastructure Enterprise Promotion Association, Taiwan, At Large @ China, ISOC Taiwan Chapter and Internet Society Vasudhay Kutumbhkum (ISVK) - India. The detail of At-Large status in China, Taiwan and Japan were explained. The presenter then gave information about Regional At-Large Organization (RALO) in Asia. There should be at least 3 ALSs from 2 countries to organize Regional At-Large Organization (RALO). First preparatory meeting will be in July 2004 at ICANN KL meeting. The following challenges for RALOs were then pointed: RALOs come to produce reasonable working mechanism. It took years for DNSO to become productive. How individuals participate after RALO established? Funding: government or industry support Setup office? Secretariat: coordinating body, lightweight organization Interesting issues were raised as regional diversity, user organization to act as local focal point and how to go beyond the technical community (consumer advocates, general users, small enterprise, etc.)? Difficult to base on individuals in Asia is the major challenge for Asia-Pacific. The questions are should with the criteria? Next presenter was Tommy Mutsumoto. He started with information about APNG AtLarge committee. The APNG AtLarge committee was established to share information from AP region and to get more people involved (to do outreach). There were eight initial members. The 2nd meeting will be help on Feb 23rd at 1.30pm. Countries in Asia-Pacific region were shown. The presenter stated the core Internet groups in Asia Pacific which are APNG, APNIC, APRICOT, APTLD, APAN, APCAUCE, AI3, APCERT, AP*. Then, the presenter gave the contacts information of ALAC. Website: http://alac.icann.org Asia-Pacific contacts: Hong Xue, Hong Kong Toshifumi Matsumoto, Japan Izumi Aizu, Japan? Email: committee@alac.icann.org The ALS applications and certification process were explained by Izumi Aizu: any existing or newly formed, for this purpose, group that supports individuals’ ability to share their views on ICANN issues, and that meets the few simple criteria listed on the At-Large Advisory Committee (ALAC) website, an apply to be an At-Large Structure. The structure for individual user (At-Large) involvement was described as follows ICANN created Interim At-Large Advisory Committee (ALAC) few months ago and called for ramework of local, regional, global groups to promote structured involvement and informed participation of world’s “At-Large” community. The structure was presented as At-Large Structure -> Regional At-Large Organization -> At-Large Advisory Committee Steps for At-Large Structure Certification were then presented: Step 1: A group submits an ALS application. Step 2: ALAC conducts due diligence: ALAC Regional members in charge. Step 3: ALAC reviews the application and related documentation. Step 4: ALAC votes on certifying the applicant as an “At-Large Structure”.            ALAC has “hands-off’ approach – accept unless there are serious objections. Step 5: ALAC notifies the applicant about the result.
9.	Preparation for WSIS Tunisia Summit by Izumi Aizu and Paul Wilson
	Izumi Aizu started with summary information about World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS). WSIS was originally proposed by ITU but hosted as UN Summit. It is limited to only on one hand (members of UN are 180 countries). International organization has no say in the voting process of the summit. The first phase of the summit was held in Geneva in December 2003. The second phase is coming up in Tunisia in November 2005. The final declaration and plan of actions have been adopted through governmental negotiation with private sector, Civil Society/NGO participate as “observers”. Head of States endorsed the declaration and plan of actions. Even it has no legally binding power but politically yes. Many side events took place in Geneva. The presenter summarized WSIS preparatory process during 2002 – 2003. The biggest issue of the WSIS discussion was Internet Governance/ICANN. ICANN became symbolic entity for Internet Governance. Two different camps among governments are direct government regulation with public policy issue and self-regulation by private sector (include industry, civil society and others). China, South Africa, Brazil, Egypt, Mali, and other countries (mostly from developing countries) support the first position. Some of their strongly concerns are changing US government control of the overall framework including the Root servers into “inter-governmental” body, ccTLDs must be under their sovereign rights and GAC as advisory is not sufficient. Final Compromise was a working group setting up under UN Secretary General with all stakeholders to define working definition of “Internet Governance”, analyze the issues and make proposal, as appropriate, in 2005. Then, the presenter gave information about the final declaration which has been adopted. International Internet governance issues should be addressed in a coordinated manner. We ask the Secretary-General of the United Nations to set up a working group on Internet governance, in an open and inclusive process that ensures a mechanism for the full and active participation of governments, the private sector and civil society from both developing and developed countries, involving relevant intergovernmental and international organizations and forums, to investigate and make proposals for action, as appropriate, on the governance of Internet by 2005. Plan of actions were also presented. Forthcoming events within this year have been listed Feb 26-27: ITU Internet Governance Workshop Mar 5: ICANN Rome, WSIS Workshop Mar 25-26: UN ICT TF Global Forum, NY June: UN WG setup (limited to 15 seats) July: WSIS II PrepCom1 (Tunis) July 19-23: ICANN KL Meeting Dec 1-5: ICANN Cape Town Meeting The floor was then given to Paul Wilson. The process of WSIS has been difficult to the RIRs. RIRs have given a chance to ICANN to change the ICANN structure that would suite the address community better.
The discussion was then started. James: There are only a few voices from Asia Pacific to WSIS. How can we formally get more involvement in WSIS? Izumi: He shared information he got from the chair of ITU-T (China): They are willing to engage a rational productive dialogue in which we compare different models. They are willing to participate in the ICANN WSIS workshop in KL. Some governments have limited knowledge about technical issues. At least is not extreme only political debate. The chance is high that we will get a reasonable conclusion. Ole: The governments and some international organizations want to get into this game because they think that it is about Internet governance. ISOC stated clearly that it is coordination. Our responsibility is trying to educate the government people what it is that they are trying to take over. Paul: There is serious need for education across all participants of WSIS. The RIRs, ISOC and ICANN participants spent a lot of their time to input information and making ourselves known to them that we are existing and available to put in our words in their meeting if needed. Izumi: The process will not be able to finish in 2005. Asia Pacific has some roles to play in WSIS. Bill: ITU is worst than it used to be. How can they manage any new task? Izumi: In the other hand, as the current financial situation of ITU is bad so they want new source of funding. There are some grey areas here. If we say ITU cannot handle technical issues then ITU will say that ICANN has no legitimate policy. ICANN may improve itself otherwise it will not be able to stay. Then, he shared information about Japan where the JRPS tried to feed information to their government and community. He suggested that other countries should do the same. James: He purposed that Izumi organizes a BOF to get input from Asia-Pacific here and bring the input to the other WSIS future meetings. Izumi: The BOF has already been planned. It is going to be held after this meeting. Kilnam: A strongly recommend to take action is to setup a workshop where governments from Asia Pacific countries who have strongly pushed the Internet governance, i.e., China, India, etc., will come and share common with us (AP*). The time might be around ICANN KL meeting (not part of ICANN meeting itself).
10.	Operation of the Root Name Servers by Bill Manning
	The presenter started with the explanation about the DNS system. The Domain Name System (DNS) is a hierarchical lookup system. It is used before any actual Internet transaction (like web page transfer). The root servers are only used as the entry point to the system. “Caching” makes clients remember answers, and avoid contacting the root servers whenever possible. Hence the number of lookups is comparatively small. The root server operators do copying a very small database, the content of which is currently decided by IANA and US Department of Commerce, put that database in their servers, and make the data available to all Internet users. They cooperate among themselves and with others to maintain the level of service which is demanded by the modern Internet. The operators do not generate the database. They do not interfere with the content of the database. They run the printing presses but don’t write the book. Also they do not make policy decisions of who runs TLDs, or which domains are in them, and what systems TLDs use, or how they are connected to the Internet. They are actually a highly focused group of professional server operators with very long experience in DNS and network operations. They are running the root name servers as volunteers. The strength of the root servers system is that we are diverse. The diversities are in types of organizations, professional experiences, hardware and software. They work stems from a common agreement about the technical basis; the DNS information is not maintained by root-servers group, everyone on the Internet should have equal access to the data and the entire root system should be as stable and responsive as possible. They are just a close-knit technical group with high level trust among operators. Root operators show up at many technical meetings, including, IETF, NANOG, RIPE, APNIC, APRICOT, ARIN, AFNOG, and often at the ICANN meetings. They are formed with 12 distinct operators. They have close operational and technical cooperation. No formal organization but recently agreed to explore possibilities of forming a common body. They participate in ICANN Root Servers System Advisory Committee (RASSAC) as an advisory body to ICANN (participates as an individual root server operator not a group). Issues that the presenter discussed are: Internationalized Domain Names (IDN): not specifically a root problem. They publish what they get. Problem is in the application not in the DNS. DNS supports IDN. DNSSEC: technical issues with the current version of the specification. Contribute to the IETF work to develop the standard. Has come a long way. Work with the RSSAC to develop operational procedures. IPv6: work with the IETF to resolve the technical issues. Recommendations to ICANN have been made. ENUM: has no relation what so ever to root servers. In the area of security, the presenter said that the machines are physically protected. They have tested operational procedures. They have experienced professional and trusted staff. The major operational threat is DDOS. The defense mechanism that most of them are taking is through the use of anycast. Most of them have over provisioning excessively. They have very high bandwidth connection to the root servers. They work with law enforcement and government agencies and expect them coordinate and cooperate with each other. The presenter then explained more about anycast: setting up identical copies of existing servers with same IP address and exactly the same data. It works like transmitter antennas for radio: talk and listen to the nearest one. Standard Internet routing will bring the queries to the nearest server. It provides better service to more users and mitigates impact of denial of service attacks to localize barriers. The presenter shared the information of the performance improvement in China after the deployment of anycast was 15-20% faster response. In the communication procedures, there are three regular meetings per year at IETF, email (internal secure lists) and normal telephone for normal operations. For special situations, there are encrypted e-mail, private telephone numbers and private conference bridges. Finally, the presenter gave some good explanations for avoiding common misconceptions: Not all internet traffic goes through a root server. Not every DNS query is handled by a root server. Root servers are not managed by volunteers as a hobby but professionally managed and well funded. No single organization (neither commercial nor governmental) controls the entire system which is principle strength. The “A” server is not special. The group does not administrate the zone content and just publish the IANA-approved data. It is not 13 machines, but 13 installations providing service (number increasing with anycast). There are more of them outside than inside the US.
Q:	What do you do if the DOC tells you to change the content of database inside your root server?
A:	DOC has no control over root server operators. Root server operators publish the data which has been given by IANA. DOC instructs IANA what data is to put into the root zone. DOC will never come to the root server operators. They have other better way to control IANA.
Q:	What is the arrangement if DOC changes ICANN/IANA? Are you free to choose?
A:	Yes, we are free to choose. If there is no IANA for us to take the data from (if ICANN dissolves IANA functions), we will have an extraordinary meeting. If a hole is opened up, we will need to figure out how to close the hole.
Izumi: Some of the questions from governments (WSIS delegates) are about legal framework, i.e. ICANN is under the California law which is not quite acceptable and the same tone for root servers. Bill: There is no globally accepted legal framework. If we must settle on it, then I will hand the root zone administrative to WTO. Izumi: That’s exactly why they are calling for the international organization or UN organization to deal with this so that they have more stable legal framework. This is political framework issue. The point is we need to explain to them rather than ignore them. Bill then shared status of the IPv6. Approximately 1/3 of the root name servers are currently running with IPv6 stack enable. In term of the IPv6 transport for DNS are to be a reality by the end of this year, end-to-end.
11.	Others and Future Meetings
	AP* Retreat Secretariat by Pensri A. The presenter started with expenses of AP* Retreat Secretariat. The expenses were grouped to meeting and operating expenses. The expenditures are as follow: a) for 2 meetings in a year are 2500 USD b) yearly expenditures for the operating are 4800 USD c) The collection of contributions at the gate is to cover the meeting expenses. Two funding models was proposed for the operating expenses Contribution – currently <2004>; Contribution from major AP organizations which are APNIC, APNG, APAN, APIA, APTLD (Potential). Organization Support ; mainly add the AP* Retreat operating expenses to one organization’s administrative budget. Proposal needs to be worked out. Future meetings: AP* retreat in conjunction with APAN 18th 2nd July 2004 in Cairns, Australia co-chairs: Paul Wilson and Philip Smith AP* retreat in conjunction with APRICOT 2005 which will be held in Japan during Feb 2005.

The meeting adjourned at 5.40 pm.