Policy outcomes from the Open Policy Meeting at APNIC 60

Policy SIG leaders at APNIC 60.

The APNIC 60 Open Policy Meeting (OPM) was held across two sessions on 11 September at the APNIC 60 conference in Da Nang, Viet Nam. Of the five proposals presented, three have reached consensus.

Consensus achieved

The three policies that achieved consensus are in the Endorsement from the EC stage of the Development Process.

Prop-162: Whois Privacy - The aim of this policy proposal, according to its authors, is to prevent potential abuse of information in bulk whois data. It was first presented at APNIC 59, but did not reach consensus.

Prop-166: Revocation of Persistently Non-functional RPKI Certification Authorities - The aim of this proposed policy, according to its authors, is to reduce the relying party workload caused by persistently non-functional RPKI Certificate Authorities (CAs).

Prop-167: Published Statistics on Directory Service Usage - The aim of this policy proposal, according to its authors, is to provide APNIC Members and stakeholders with visibility into the use of whois and RDAP services.

Consensus not forthcoming

The two proposals that did not reach consensus have been referred to the authors for further community discussion and/or submission of new and updated proposals.

prop-164: Allocations of IPv6 Resources longer than a /32 with a nibble boundary alignment - The aim of this policy proposal, according to its authors, is to provide more accurate data about sub-assignment of IPv6 resources by reducing the minimum allocation size of IPv6 prefixes from a /32 to a /36.

The reasoning for this proposal not reaching consensus is unclear, as you will see in my commentary below. Comments from the floor did not indicate any issues with the policy, and one person in the room commented that it was baffling that there were no questions clarifying why there would be objection to the proposal.

prop-165: Provision of IPv4 Address Space to IPv6-only Networks for Transitional Purpose - The aim of this proposed policy, according to its authors, is to support the deployment of IPv6-only networks that still require minimal IPv4 resources for transitional purposes.

Community feedback online, and at the OPM , indicated that this could be covered under current policy and that the policy proposal could result in less robust needs assessment for IPv4 delegations.

No feedback, no consensus?

After the prop-164 consensus call, the author noted that they had received no feedback on the mailing list, yet this policy did not reach consensus. While this is not uncommon, without community feedback it is difficult for authors to modify their policy proposals to match community expectations.

So this is my call to action: Help the policy proposal authors help you!

Give feedback, whether it be to support the proposal, or give guidance on where YOU think it is missing the mark. Policy development is a collaborative process, and needs input from diverse stakeholders.

Get involved

The next Open Policy Meeting will happen on Wednesday, 11 February 2026 at APRICOT 2026 / APNIC 61 in Jakarta, Indonesia. The deadline for policy submissions to be considered at APRICOT 2026 is Monday, 12 January 2026.

By submitting a proposal to change APNIC policy, you are suggesting a different way of managing IP addresses in the region. If the community likes your idea, it could result in policy change.

APNIC's community policy process relies on people like you to keep the policies relevant to the changing environment. Everyone can participate. It doesn't matter how much experience you have - it's a great way to build your reputation and contribute to the Internet.

The views expressed by the authors of this blog are their own and do not necessarily reflect the views of APNIC. Please note a Code of Conduct applies to this blog.