Amrita Choudhury cleaned APNIC's rules; the paperwork stayed

Amrita Choudhury Cleaned APNIC's Rulebook. The Paperwork Kept Its Job.

Why it matters

Two APNIC proposals removed duplicated instructions and grouped registration rules. Both passed. APNIC said neither would change how it evaluates requests or require a registry-system change. Amrita Choudhury won a clearer manual, while the applicant still had to bring the evidence.

Sofia Ren2 November 2026Reading Time 2 minLast update: 2 November 2026

Amrita Choudhury; likeness grounded in a named ICANN photograph. The reading room and open policy document are imagined.

Summary

Amrita Choudhury and Simon Sohel Baroi wrote prop-135 to remove repeated request-documentation language and prop-136 to gather resource registration requirements. Both became policy in December 2021.
APNIC's assessments expected neither a changed request-evaluation practice nor a change to its registration system. The current manual still asks for substantial evidence and processes complete applications in order.

The rulebook got lighter; the folder did not

An applicant can face two different kinds of friction: an instruction repeated in several places and a real requirement to prove that a network needs resources. Choudhury attacked the first. Her prop-135 identified duplicated supporting-documentation language in the policy manual. Her prop-136 brought separately stated registration duties into a consolidated section. APNIC 52 reached consensus on both, and the policy was published in December 2021.

APNIC was unusually plain about the operating consequence. In both impact assessments, the Secretariat said the changes were unlikely to alter current request-evaluation practice and required no change to the registration system. That is a useful admission. A tidier paragraph can help an applicant find a rule without making the rule disappear.

Read the active policy. Section 5.3 still requires registration of assigned ASNs, APNIC delegations and downstream delegations, with separate thresholds for customer networks. Section 5.6 still permits APNIC to ask for engineering and subnet plans, topology, routing plans, equipment invoices, prior holdings and intended use. Section 5.6.2 says incomplete applications get correction requests; APNIC then handles properly documented requests in order. The cleaner manual still gives the registry a substantial evidence gate.

The two proposals mattered because policy text is the public interface to that gate. Choudhury made its route easier to read. She did not claim a faster application queue or a lower proof burden. The official assessment did not either. The source record gives no before-and-after applicant time, correction count or staff workload. Those figures would show whether a clearer rulebook also changed the experience at the counter.

Sources: prop-135; prop-136; current APNIC policy.