Perfil da pessoa

Pessoa

Christopher Hawker

O papel público, as decisões ou a participação jurídica documentados de Christopher Hawker podem influenciar investimentos em redes, acesso ao mercado, políticas de infraestrutura ou limites de responsabilidade; este dossiê separa os registros citados da verificação do cargo atual.

Os dados disponíveis abrangem Cargos: author.

Mais recente 2026-09-12

Cargos: author

Evidências

Papel público: As fontes públicas citadas identificam Christopher Hawker como uma pessoa ligada a decisões, litígios, governança ou operações relevantes para a infraestrutura da internet; o cargo e a afiliação atuais ainda precisam ser verificados.

Detalhes relacionados

Christopher Hawker
Current status Implemented Author Christopher Hawker Relevant forum Policy SIG Previous versions prop-156-v001 Secretariat impact assessment Impact assessment for v001.
public people profile

Última atualização: 2026-09-11

Cargos

Role:authorAinda não avaliadoHistórico

Fatos com fonte

Participação em políticas RIR

1RIRs com participação

5Políticas com participação

3Mensagens de política

11 de ago. de 2026Primeira participação

11 de ago. de 2026Última participação

prop-156Assignment of Temporary IP ResourcesDesconhecida · 0 Mensagens de discussão
Coerência do ponto de vista: Nenhuma posição explícita declarada
prop-162prop-162: WHOIS PrivacyDesconhecida · 1 Mensagens de discussão
Coerência do ponto de vista: Evidências insuficientes para avaliar a consistência
The WHOIS Privacy proposal appears as a scope comparison with a directory-services acceptable-use submission. That comparison does not state support for or opposition to WHOIS Privacy and cannot establish a position history.
prop-162: WHOIS Privacy
Avaliação: Evidências insuficientes para avaliar a consistência · The WHOIS Privacy proposal appears as a scope comparison with a directory-services acceptable-use submission. That comparison does not state support for or opposition to WHOIS Privacy and cannot establish a position history.
Condições: Different directory-service subjects should not be treated as interchangeable policies.
11 de ago. de 2026
Prop-162 is based on WHOIS Privacy, the proposal submitted (based on the title) is regarding Acceptable Use Terms for APNIC Directory Services.
prop-162: WHOIS Privacy · prop-165: Provision of IPv4 Address Space to IPv6-only Networks for Transitional Purpose
Avaliação: Evidências insuficientes para avaliar a consistência · The email distinguishes WHOIS Privacy from acceptable-use terms while questioning the agenda treatment of prop-165. It supplies no comparable substantive position on WHOIS Privacy, so a cross-policy reversal cannot be assessed.
Condições: Agenda access, proposal maturity and substantive policy preference are different questions.
11 de ago. de 2026
Prop-162 is based on WHOIS Privacy, the proposal submitted (based on the title) is regarding Acceptable Use Terms for APNIC Directory Services.
11 de ago. de 2026
On what basis was the decision made to reinstate a proposal that was withdrawn, instead of presented as a new proposal?
prop-164prop-164: Allocations of IPv6 Resources longer than a /32 with a nibble boundary alignmentDesconhecida · 0 Mensagens de discussão
Coerência do ponto de vista: Nenhuma posição explícita declarada
prop-165prop-165: Provision of IPv4 Address Space to IPv6-only Networks for Transitional PurposeDesconhecida · 1 Mensagens de discussão
Coerência do ponto de vista: Evidências insuficientes para avaliar a consistência
He asks for withdrawal or postponement of prop-165 and gives procedural, sunset-clause and policy-development reasons. He also says additional time could improve its chance of consensus; this is a qualified recommendation about the present proposal, not evidence of a reversal.
prop-165: Provision of IPv4 Address Space to IPv6-only Networks for Transitional Purpose
Avaliação: Evidências insuficientes para avaliar a consistência · He asks for withdrawal or postponement of prop-165 and gives procedural, sunset-clause and policy-development reasons. He also says additional time could improve its chance of consensus; this is a qualified recommendation about the present proposal, not evidence of a reversal.
Condições: Only one dated email is supplied. · Respect for an author’s effort is compatible with requesting postponement.
11 de ago. de 2026
This recommendation is not to minimise the importance of the author's proposal in any way or to undervalue the time they have invested in its drafting, its more so to show that greater time is required to ensure that this proposal is shaped in a way that affords it the best chance of reaching consensus, and that as a result other proposals should be considered a "greater priority".
prop-168: Increase to maximum IPv4 delegations · prop-165: Provision of IPv4 Address Space to IPv6-only Networks for Transitional Purpose
Avaliação: Coerente · Within this email, the expectation that prop-168 could exhaust the remaining pool is used consistently as a conditional argument that prop-165 could become redundant. Supporting his own allocation proposal while questioning the usefulness and timing of another does not, by itself, establish a contradiction.
Condições: This is internal coherence of a single argument, not proof of consistency across time. · The predicted depletion and redundancy are not verified outcomes.
prop-168prop-168: Increase to maximum IPv4 delegationsDesconhecida · 1 Mensagens de discussão
Coerência do ponto de vista: Evidências insuficientes para avaliar a consistência
Hawker identifies himself as the prop-168 author and uses expected pool depletion to question the usefulness of prop-165. One conditional forecast does not establish his longer-term position or prove that depletion occurred.
prop-168: Increase to maximum IPv4 delegations
Avaliação: Evidências insuficientes para avaliar a consistência · Hawker identifies himself as the prop-168 author and uses expected pool depletion to question the usefulness of prop-165. One conditional forecast does not establish his longer-term position or prove that depletion occurred.
Condições: The forecast is expressly qualified by possible author bias and expectations about adoption and depletion. · Three observations of the same email must not be counted as three separate statements.
11 de ago. de 2026
Acknowledging the potential for author bias, there is a reasonable expectation that Prop-168 that I have submitted, will deplete the available address pool within 6 months.
prop-168: Increase to maximum IPv4 delegations · prop-165: Provision of IPv4 Address Space to IPv6-only Networks for Transitional Purpose
Avaliação: Coerente · Within this email, the expectation that prop-168 could exhaust the remaining pool is used consistently as a conditional argument that prop-165 could become redundant. Supporting his own allocation proposal while questioning the usefulness and timing of another does not, by itself, establish a contradiction.
Condições: This is internal coherence of a single argument, not proof of consistency across time. · The predicted depletion and redundancy are not verified outcomes.
11 de ago. de 2026
Acknowledging the potential for author bias, there is a reasonable expectation that Prop-168 that I have submitted, will deplete the available address pool within 6 months.

Participação em políticas RIR

1RIRs com participação

5Políticas com participação

3Mensagens de política

11 de ago. de 2026Primeira participação

11 de ago. de 2026Última participação

prop-156Assignment of Temporary IP ResourcesDesconhecida · 0 Mensagens de discussão

Coerência do ponto de vista: Nenhuma posição explícita declarada

prop-162prop-162: WHOIS PrivacyDesconhecida · 1 Mensagens de discussão

Coerência do ponto de vista: Evidências insuficientes para avaliar a consistência

The WHOIS Privacy proposal appears as a scope comparison with a directory-services acceptable-use submission. That comparison does not state support for or opposition to WHOIS Privacy and cannot establish a position history.

prop-162: WHOIS Privacy

Avaliação: Evidências insuficientes para avaliar a consistência · The WHOIS Privacy proposal appears as a scope comparison with a directory-services acceptable-use submission. That comparison does not state support for or opposition to WHOIS Privacy and cannot establish a position history.

Condições: Different directory-service subjects should not be treated as interchangeable policies.

11 de ago. de 2026
Prop-162 is based on WHOIS Privacy, the proposal submitted (based on the title) is regarding Acceptable Use Terms for APNIC Directory Services.

prop-162: WHOIS Privacy · prop-165: Provision of IPv4 Address Space to IPv6-only Networks for Transitional Purpose

Avaliação: Evidências insuficientes para avaliar a consistência · The email distinguishes WHOIS Privacy from acceptable-use terms while questioning the agenda treatment of prop-165. It supplies no comparable substantive position on WHOIS Privacy, so a cross-policy reversal cannot be assessed.

Condições: Agenda access, proposal maturity and substantive policy preference are different questions.

11 de ago. de 2026
Prop-162 is based on WHOIS Privacy, the proposal submitted (based on the title) is regarding Acceptable Use Terms for APNIC Directory Services.

11 de ago. de 2026
On what basis was the decision made to reinstate a proposal that was withdrawn, instead of presented as a new proposal?

prop-164prop-164: Allocations of IPv6 Resources longer than a /32 with a nibble boundary alignmentDesconhecida · 0 Mensagens de discussão

Coerência do ponto de vista: Nenhuma posição explícita declarada

prop-165prop-165: Provision of IPv4 Address Space to IPv6-only Networks for Transitional PurposeDesconhecida · 1 Mensagens de discussão

Coerência do ponto de vista: Evidências insuficientes para avaliar a consistência

He asks for withdrawal or postponement of prop-165 and gives procedural, sunset-clause and policy-development reasons. He also says additional time could improve its chance of consensus; this is a qualified recommendation about the present proposal, not evidence of a reversal.

prop-165: Provision of IPv4 Address Space to IPv6-only Networks for Transitional Purpose

Avaliação: Evidências insuficientes para avaliar a consistência · He asks for withdrawal or postponement of prop-165 and gives procedural, sunset-clause and policy-development reasons. He also says additional time could improve its chance of consensus; this is a qualified recommendation about the present proposal, not evidence of a reversal.

Condições: Only one dated email is supplied. · Respect for an author’s effort is compatible with requesting postponement.

11 de ago. de 2026
This recommendation is not to minimise the importance of the author's proposal in any way or to undervalue the time they have invested in its drafting, its more so to show that greater time is required to ensure that this proposal is shaped in a way that affords it the best chance of reaching consensus, and that as a result other proposals should be considered a "greater priority".

prop-168: Increase to maximum IPv4 delegations · prop-165: Provision of IPv4 Address Space to IPv6-only Networks for Transitional Purpose

Avaliação: Coerente · Within this email, the expectation that prop-168 could exhaust the remaining pool is used consistently as a conditional argument that prop-165 could become redundant. Supporting his own allocation proposal while questioning the usefulness and timing of another does not, by itself, establish a contradiction.

Condições: This is internal coherence of a single argument, not proof of consistency across time. · The predicted depletion and redundancy are not verified outcomes.

prop-168prop-168: Increase to maximum IPv4 delegationsDesconhecida · 1 Mensagens de discussão

Coerência do ponto de vista: Evidências insuficientes para avaliar a consistência

Hawker identifies himself as the prop-168 author and uses expected pool depletion to question the usefulness of prop-165. One conditional forecast does not establish his longer-term position or prove that depletion occurred.

prop-168: Increase to maximum IPv4 delegations

Avaliação: Evidências insuficientes para avaliar a consistência · Hawker identifies himself as the prop-168 author and uses expected pool depletion to question the usefulness of prop-165. One conditional forecast does not establish his longer-term position or prove that depletion occurred.

Condições: The forecast is expressly qualified by possible author bias and expectations about adoption and depletion. · Three observations of the same email must not be counted as three separate statements.

11 de ago. de 2026
Acknowledging the potential for author bias, there is a reasonable expectation that Prop-168 that I have submitted, will deplete the available address pool within 6 months.

prop-168: Increase to maximum IPv4 delegations · prop-165: Provision of IPv4 Address Space to IPv6-only Networks for Transitional Purpose

Condições: This is internal coherence of a single argument, not proof of consistency across time. · The predicted depletion and redundancy are not verified outcomes.

11 de ago. de 2026
Acknowledging the potential for author bias, there is a reasonable expectation that Prop-168 that I have submitted, will deplete the available address pool within 6 months.