From ntegeb at gmail.com  Mon Jun  6 23:31:30 2016
From: ntegeb at gmail.com (Badru Ntege)
Date: Tue, 7 Jun 2016 02:31:30 +0300
Subject: [Community-Discuss] [members-discuss] AFRINIC Board Statement,
	5th June 2016
In-Reply-To: <3b1f651ae97291d974dfaf65df04ae80@skannet.com>
References: <3b1f651ae97291d974dfaf65df04ae80@skannet.com>
Message-ID: <AA884158-CB53-4CDA-A41E-5A6EBF70F214@gmail.com>


Chair 

Lets face it. The issues are real and not about race but a group of people in the community.  No doubt this has created sentiments that might be deeper and silent.

Lets also see some more responsible representation of facts from the board. Some statements from board and also those on the list can be loosely translated in the underlying mood.

Afrinic is more than 10 years and has been a product of hard dedicated work by many more than the current board so I ask that board give respect to the history.

The organisation will overcome the current challenges and I?m sure new fresh board members will also continue to build on 12 years of leadership.

My insistence on respecting the bottom up process and written by-laws would remove what is the elephant in the room today.  

Regards

Badru Ntege
CEO 
NFT Consult Ltd 
Www.Nftconsult.com

?Vision without execution is hallucination.? 
? Thomas A. Edison






> On 6 Jun 2016, at 11:14 am, sfolayan at skannet.com wrote:
> 
> Dear Community,
> 
> Our attention has been drawn to some email message containing allegations of racism within the AFRINIC Community and subsequent press coverage.
> 
> The AFRINIC Board has zero tolerance for racism and this is clearly reflected in the Code of Conduct available at http://afrinic.net/en/community/code-of-conduct
> 
> Community members are asked to be mindful of this, in their interactions either in person or online.
> 
> Best regards ...
> 
> Sunday Folayan
> Chair, AFRINIC Board
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Members-Discuss mailing list
> Members-Discuss at afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/members-discuss



From sfolayan at skannet.com  Mon Jun  6 08:14:14 2016
From: sfolayan at skannet.com (sfolayan at skannet.com)
Date: Mon, 06 Jun 2016 10:14:14 +0200
Subject: [Community-Discuss] AFRINIC Board Statement, 5th June 2016
Message-ID: <3b1f651ae97291d974dfaf65df04ae80@skannet.com>

Dear Community,

Our attention has been drawn to some email message containing 
allegations of racism within the AFRINIC Community and subsequent press 
coverage.

The AFRINIC Board has zero tolerance for racism and this is clearly 
reflected in the Code of Conduct available at 
http://afrinic.net/en/community/code-of-conduct

Community members are asked to be mindful of this, in their interactions 
either in person or online.

Best regards ...

Sunday Folayan
Chair, AFRINIC Board



From adiel at akplogan.com  Wed Jun  8 17:04:50 2016
From: adiel at akplogan.com (Adiel Akplogan (akp.com))
Date: Wed, 8 Jun 2016 13:04:50 -0400
Subject: [Community-Discuss] [members-discuss] AFRINIC Board Statement,
	5th June 2016
In-Reply-To: <3b1f651ae97291d974dfaf65df04ae80@skannet.com>
References: <3b1f651ae97291d974dfaf65df04ae80@skannet.com>
Message-ID: <C568837C-3AB6-48B2-8E66-E12D717C705D@akplogan.com>

Dear all,

For those of you who are wondering, the e-mail mentioned in this statement was a personal e-mail from me. To close the loop here, I think it is in order for me to also share with you the apologies note (below) I have sent to the AFREN mailing list were my original e-mail was accidentally posted. I?m deeply sorry for the trouble that this may have caused.

Thank you.

Adiel Akplogan (Associate member in my personal capacity).

>> Begin forwarded message:
>> 
>> From: "Adiel Akplogan (akp.com)" <adiel at akplogan.com>
>> Subject: Apologies - [Was: Re: [afren] [rpd] Board Composition]
>> Date: June 5, 2016 at 22:50:15 GMT-4
>> To: AFREN <afren at afnog.org>
>> 
>> Dear listers and friends,
>> 
>> I?m sorry that my private e-mail below ends up accidentally on this mailing list. I would like to apologize to my many friends and colleagues globally who have supported and worked with me over the past 20+ years and who may have felt targeted by its content. I truly value your support and friendship irrelevant of your origin and I hope you will not see in this private message anything malicious. Contrary to what was reported I did not accused Mike Silber particularly in my e-mail. He is someone I know well and hold a lot of respect for.
>> 
>> Even though I do not deny my frustration, I should have exercised a bit more control and not allow it to burst publicly.
>> 
>> I hope that all of you who really know me and have worked with me know that there was no ill intention behind that mail.
>> 
>> Kind regards.
>> 
>> - a.
>>> On May 3, 2016, at 13:16, Adiel Akplogan (akp.com) <adiel at akplogan.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hi Boubakar and all, this has always been serious and the plan has started very long ago and has deeper ramifications than just what we are seeing here. It is in fact not about a particular company trying to take over but a clear racial fight for the white to take over. They have always claim that we Black cannot run an organization like AFRINIC (too complex for our small bird brain ? that was said on my face in 2005 by some of the people pulling the strings behind ? they are far beyond just this guy undercover of ?friendship"). Some of us have witnessed that fight at the early days of AFRINIC. I have leaved through that during my 10 years as CEO both in Africa and globally. But the reality is that our own people let this kind of thing perpetuate ? sadly though no one else will fight that fight for us.
>>> 
>>> This is the same guy that was accused by Board members last year of manipulating his own election (by making companies in ZA pay for people to come and vote for him), the same guy who said in writing that Gaberonne is across the South African border and he plan to bring as many South African as Possible to vote for Mike (he said that back in October 2015 ? Some in this group have seen the transcript of such conversation). The same guy who vouch to push me out of AFRINIC because I prevented him to run his IPv4 consultancy firm for Academia (by being strict on community policy interpretation) ? The same guy is writing to private lists campaigning for his friends and making judgement about the community capability today ?
>>> 
>>> But well the same guys will end up telling us that there is nothing dramatic about all of this and that it is normal course of democracy and we should move on .. and it will be a new start. We are in this since several centuries ? :-/ when will it stop? I had to step back because at some point this was about to touch on my life ? when it reaches such level and you turn back and you see no one behind you (beside the usual suspects? who?s voices are interpreted as rhetoric) it get very scary. A very sad day for me ?
>>> 
>>> - a.
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> This is a _clear_ plan of a single company trying to hijack AfriNIC. <snip>
>>>> B.
>>>> 
>>>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>>> From: Noah <noah at neo.co.tz>
>>>> Date: Tue, May 3, 2016 at 4:25 PM
>>>> Subject: Re: [rpd] Board Composition
>>>> To: Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com>
>>>> Cc: rpd List <rpd at afrinic.net>
>>>> 
>>>> +1 Delong...
>>>> 
>>>> On 3 May 2016 18:50, "Owen DeLong" <owen at delong.com> wrote:
>>>> It has come to my attention that Mike Silber is running for the independent seat that is opening on the AfriNIC board in the next election.
>>>> 
>>>> While I consider Mike to be an excellent candidate and believe he would be a true asset to the AfriNIC board, I have a concern that I must express. This concern has nothing to do with Mike himself, but rather is a concern about organizational structure.
>>>> 
>>>> There are only 8 elected members of the AfriNIC board. If Mike Silber is elected, then 25% of the elected board seats would be held by employees of Liquid Telecom. Personally, I do not feel that the board can properly represent the diversity of the AfriNIC community if we allow multiple board seats to be held by representatives from the same organization. While I do not believe that Liquid has any sort of goal of organizational capture or any nefarious intent whatsoever, the reality is that if this is allowed, then it does create the possibility for some other organization to achieve a form of organizational capture.
>>>> 
>>>> The board has tremendous authority and responsibility within the AfriNIC organization. As such, I think it is important to consider these generic structural issues seriously, no matter how much we may like and admire the candidates in question.
>>>> 
>>>> Again, this is not personal. If it were, I?d be endorsing Mike rather than calling his candidacy into question. However, from a structural perspective, I think it is important that the community at least consider the issue.
>>>> 
>>>> Owen
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> RPD mailing list
>>>> RPD at afrinic.net
>>>> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd
>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> RPD mailing list
>>>> RPD at afrinic.net
>>>> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> afren mailing list
>>> afren at afnog.org
>>> https://www.afnog.org/mailman/listinfo/afren
> 
> On Jun 6, 2016, at 04:14, sfolayan at skannet.com wrote:
> 
> Dear Community,
> 
> Our attention has been drawn to some email message containing allegations of racism within the AFRINIC Community and subsequent press coverage.
> 
> The AFRINIC Board has zero tolerance for racism and this is clearly reflected in the Code of Conduct available at http://afrinic.net/en/community/code-of-conduct
> 
> Community members are asked to be mindful of this, in their interactions either in person or online.
> 
> Best regards ...
> 
> Sunday Folayan
> Chair, AFRINIC Board
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Members-Discuss mailing list
> Members-Discuss at afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/members-discuss

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 842 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20160608/3a079478/attachment.sig>

From randy at psg.com  Wed Jun  8 20:49:58 2016
From: randy at psg.com (Randy Bush)
Date: Wed, 08 Jun 2016 13:49:58 -0700
Subject: [Community-Discuss] [members-discuss] AFRINIC Board Statement,
	5th June 2016
In-Reply-To: <C568837C-3AB6-48B2-8E66-E12D717C705D@akplogan.com>
References: <3b1f651ae97291d974dfaf65df04ae80@skannet.com>
 <C568837C-3AB6-48B2-8E66-E12D717C705D@akplogan.com>
Message-ID: <m2lh2fxv61.wl%randy@psg.com>

that message thread is appalling.

mike silber took the high road.  that should be an example to us all.

randy



From Omo.Oaiya at wacren.net  Wed Jun  8 21:40:59 2016
From: Omo.Oaiya at wacren.net (Omo Oaiya)
Date: Wed, 8 Jun 2016 23:40:59 +0200
Subject: [Community-Discuss] [members-discuss] AFRINIC Board Statement,
 5th June 2016
In-Reply-To: <m2lh2fxv61.wl%randy@psg.com>
References: <3b1f651ae97291d974dfaf65df04ae80@skannet.com>
 <C568837C-3AB6-48B2-8E66-E12D717C705D@akplogan.com>
 <m2lh2fxv61.wl%randy@psg.com>
Message-ID: <CAG1eoi11w414DTc8gMNnAiyDi26S-CXtjEh0znWpn=K-sxniNQ@mail.gmail.com>

And to you. Please keep quiet and go get a life
On 8 Jun 2016 10:51 p.m., "Randy Bush" <randy at psg.com> wrote:

> that message thread is appalling.
>
> mike silber took the high road.  that should be an example to us all.
>
> randy
>
> _______________________________________________
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20160608/1d99f6b2/attachment.html>

From randy at psg.com  Wed Jun  8 23:12:53 2016
From: randy at psg.com (Randy Bush)
Date: Wed, 08 Jun 2016 16:12:53 -0700
Subject: [Community-Discuss] [members-discuss] AFRINIC Board Statement,
	5th June 2016
In-Reply-To: <CAG1eoi11w414DTc8gMNnAiyDi26S-CXtjEh0znWpn=K-sxniNQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <3b1f651ae97291d974dfaf65df04ae80@skannet.com>
 <C568837C-3AB6-48B2-8E66-E12D717C705D@akplogan.com>
 <m2lh2fxv61.wl%randy@psg.com>
 <CAG1eoi11w414DTc8gMNnAiyDi26S-CXtjEh0znWpn=K-sxniNQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <m260tjxoju.wl%randy@psg.com>

> And to you. Please keep quiet and go get a life

nice.  i am impressed.

randy, who is sure he left a life around here somewhere



From saul at enetworks.co.za  Thu Jun  9 07:15:48 2016
From: saul at enetworks.co.za (Saul Stein)
Date: Thu, 9 Jun 2016 09:15:48 +0200 (SAST)
Subject: [Community-Discuss] [members-discuss] AFRINIC Board Statement,
	5th June 2016
In-Reply-To: <C568837C-3AB6-48B2-8E66-E12D717C705D@akplogan.com>
References: <3b1f651ae97291d974dfaf65df04ae80@skannet.com>
 <C568837C-3AB6-48B2-8E66-E12D717C705D@akplogan.com>
Message-ID: <00e101d1c21e$bf59dd00$3e0d9700$@enetworks.co.za>

Adiel,

I live in South Africa, where were are well aware of racism and racist 
issues. Sadly, there have been a few instances such as your email lately 
which have resulted the offenders being fired from their jobs (even when 
comments were in their personal capacity) and just generally hauled over the 
coals by the public in general and would not be able to participate in 
organisations moving forward.

What concerns me about your apology is that you are apologising for sending 
the email to the list and not for your racist thoughts. If you have an issue 
about demographics on the board, the minority (by far) are white, only two, 
the CEO and one community elected member (not white elected or black 
elected, community elected).  What about focusing our energies on positive 
things gender equality?

You're entitled to have your own personal concerns about the board, their 
actions, perceived issues and your stated incorrect facts for which people 
have been cleared. But to make this a race issue, public list or private 
thoughts is not acceptable!

Saul

-----Original Message-----
From: Adiel Akplogan (akp.com) [mailto:adiel at akplogan.com]
Sent: 08 June 2016 07:05 PM
To: Sunday Folayan <sfolayan at skannet.com.ng>
Cc: community-discuss at afrinic.net; AfriNIC Discuss 
<members-discuss at afrinic.net>
Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] [members-discuss] AFRINIC Board Statement, 
5th June 2016

Dear all,

For those of you who are wondering, the e-mail mentioned in this statement 
was a personal e-mail from me. To close the loop here, I think it is in 
order for me to also share with you the apologies note (below) I have sent 
to the AFREN mailing list were my original e-mail was accidentally posted. I?m 
deeply sorry for the trouble that this may have caused.

Thank you.

Adiel Akplogan (Associate member in my personal capacity).

>> Begin forwarded message:
>>
>> From: "Adiel Akplogan (akp.com)" <adiel at akplogan.com>
>> Subject: Apologies - [Was: Re: [afren] [rpd] Board Composition]
>> Date: June 5, 2016 at 22:50:15 GMT-4
>> To: AFREN <afren at afnog.org>
>>
>> Dear listers and friends,
>>
>> I?m sorry that my private e-mail below ends up accidentally on this 
>> mailing list. I would like to apologize to my many friends and colleagues 
>> globally who have supported and worked with me over the past 20+ years 
>> and who may have felt targeted by its content. I truly value your support 
>> and friendship irrelevant of your origin and I hope you will not see in 
>> this private message anything malicious. Contrary to what was reported I 
>> did not accused Mike Silber particularly in my e-mail. He is someone I 
>> know well and hold a lot of respect for.
>>
>> Even though I do not deny my frustration, I should have exercised a bit 
>> more control and not allow it to burst publicly.
>>
>> I hope that all of you who really know me and have worked with me know 
>> that there was no ill intention behind that mail.
>>
>> Kind regards.
>>
>> - a.
>>> On May 3, 2016, at 13:16, Adiel Akplogan (akp.com) <adiel at akplogan.com> 
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Boubakar and all, this has always been serious and the plan has 
>>> started very long ago and has deeper ramifications than just what we are 
>>> seeing here. It is in fact not about a particular company trying to take 
>>> over but a clear racial fight for the white to take over. They have 
>>> always claim that we Black cannot run an organization like AFRINIC (too 
>>> complex for our small bird brain ? that was said on my face in 2005 by 
>>> some of the people pulling the strings behind ? they are far beyond just 
>>> this guy undercover of ?friendship"). Some of us have witnessed that 
>>> fight at the early days of AFRINIC. I have leaved through that during my 
>>> 10 years as CEO both in Africa and globally. But the reality is that our 
>>> own people let this kind of thing perpetuate ? sadly though no one else 
>>> will fight that fight for us.
>>>
>>> This is the same guy that was accused by Board members last year of
>>> manipulating his own election (by making companies in ZA pay for
>>> people to come and vote for him), the same guy who said in writing
>>> that Gaberonne is across the South African border and he plan to
>>> bring as many South African as Possible to vote for Mike (he said
>>> that back in October 2015 ? Some in this group have seen the
>>> transcript of such conversation). The same guy who vouch to push me
>>> out of AFRINIC because I prevented him to run his IPv4 consultancy
>>> firm for Academia (by being strict on community policy
>>> interpretation) ? The same guy is writing to private lists
>>> campaigning for his friends and making judgement about the community
>>> capability today ?
>>>
>>> But well the same guys will end up telling us that there is nothing
>>> dramatic about all of this and that it is normal course of democracy
>>> and we should move on .. and it will be a new start. We are in this
>>> since several centuries ? :-/ when will it stop? I had to step back
>>> because at some point this was about to touch on my life ? when it
>>> reaches such level and you turn back and you see no one behind you
>>> (beside the usual suspects? who?s voices are interpreted as
>>> rhetoric) it get very scary. A very sad day for me ?
>>>
>>> - a.
>>>
>>>
>>>> This is a _clear_ plan of a single company trying to hijack
>>>> AfriNIC. <snip> B.
>>>>
>>>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>>> From: Noah <noah at neo.co.tz>
>>>> Date: Tue, May 3, 2016 at 4:25 PM
>>>> Subject: Re: [rpd] Board Composition
>>>> To: Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com>
>>>> Cc: rpd List <rpd at afrinic.net>
>>>>
>>>> +1 Delong...
>>>>
>>>> On 3 May 2016 18:50, "Owen DeLong" <owen at delong.com> wrote:
>>>> It has come to my attention that Mike Silber is running for the 
>>>> independent seat that is opening on the AfriNIC board in the next 
>>>> election.
>>>>
>>>> While I consider Mike to be an excellent candidate and believe he would 
>>>> be a true asset to the AfriNIC board, I have a concern that I must 
>>>> express. This concern has nothing to do with Mike himself, but rather 
>>>> is a concern about organizational structure.
>>>>
>>>> There are only 8 elected members of the AfriNIC board. If Mike Silber 
>>>> is elected, then 25% of the elected board seats would be held by 
>>>> employees of Liquid Telecom. Personally, I do not feel that the board 
>>>> can properly represent the diversity of the AfriNIC community if we 
>>>> allow multiple board seats to be held by representatives from the same 
>>>> organization. While I do not believe that Liquid has any sort of goal 
>>>> of organizational capture or any nefarious intent whatsoever, the 
>>>> reality is that if this is allowed, then it does create the possibility 
>>>> for some other organization to achieve a form of organizational 
>>>> capture.
>>>>
>>>> The board has tremendous authority and responsibility within the 
>>>> AfriNIC organization. As such, I think it is important to consider 
>>>> these generic structural issues seriously, no matter how much we may 
>>>> like and admire the candidates in question.
>>>>
>>>> Again, this is not personal. If it were, I?d be endorsing Mike rather 
>>>> than calling his candidacy into question. However, from a structural 
>>>> perspective, I think it is important that the community at least 
>>>> consider the issue.
>>>>
>>>> Owen
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> RPD mailing list
>>>> RPD at afrinic.net
>>>> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> RPD mailing list
>>>> RPD at afrinic.net
>>>> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> afren mailing list
>>> afren at afnog.org
>>> https://www.afnog.org/mailman/listinfo/afren
>
> On Jun 6, 2016, at 04:14, sfolayan at skannet.com wrote:
>
> Dear Community,
>
> Our attention has been drawn to some email message containing allegations 
> of racism within the AFRINIC Community and subsequent press coverage.
>
> The AFRINIC Board has zero tolerance for racism and this is clearly
> reflected in the Code of Conduct available at
> http://afrinic.net/en/community/code-of-conduct
>
> Community members are asked to be mindful of this, in their interactions 
> either in person or online.
>
> Best regards ...
>
> Sunday Folayan
> Chair, AFRINIC Board
>
> _______________________________________________
> Members-Discuss mailing list
> Members-Discuss at afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/members-discuss




From jnoulaye at yahoo.fr  Thu Jun  9 08:00:15 2016
From: jnoulaye at yahoo.fr (jnoulaye at yahoo.fr)
Date: Thu, 9 Jun 2016 08:00:15 +0000 (UTC)
Subject: [Community-Discuss] [members-discuss] AFRINIC Board Statement,
	5th June 2016
In-Reply-To: <00e101d1c21e$bf59dd00$3e0d9700$@enetworks.co.za>
References: <3b1f651ae97291d974dfaf65df04ae80@skannet.com>
 <C568837C-3AB6-48B2-8E66-E12D717C705D@akplogan.com>
 <00e101d1c21e$bf59dd00$3e0d9700$@enetworks.co.za>
Message-ID: <776238872.87133.1465459215382.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com>

Dear ?Members,I've read the mails of Saul Stein & Randy Bush.Their statements were still carried on ?an ambience that no longer fits the code of conduct ?quoted by the Chair (Sunday) into one of his last mail (http://afrinic.net/en/community/code-of-conduct).?I request the Board to start unsuscribe from this mailing list any user with attitude that keeps going to that way.The AIS is in progress here in Gaborone and we are into the room following the activities, and we need peace and tranquility for this purpose.
Warm regards,
Janvier Ngnoulaye,PhDLecturer in ICT & consultantUniversity of YaoundeAfrinic Member
      De?: Saul Stein <saul at enetworks.co.za>
 ??: General Discussions of AFRINIC <community-discuss at afrinic.net>; Sunday Folayan <sfolayan at skannet.com.ng> 
Cc?: AfriNIC Discuss <members-discuss at afrinic.net>
 Envoy? le : Jeudi 9 juin 2016 8h15
 Objet?: Re: [members-discuss] [Community-Discuss] AFRINIC Board Statement, 5th June 2016
   
Adiel,

I live in South Africa, where were are well aware of racism and racist 
issues. Sadly, there have been a few instances such as your email lately 
which have resulted the offenders being fired from their jobs (even when 
comments were in their personal capacity) and just generally hauled over the 
coals by the public in general and would not be able to participate in 
organisations moving forward.

What concerns me about your apology is that you are apologising for sending 
the email to the list and not for your racist thoughts. If you have an issue 
about demographics on the board, the minority (by far) are white, only two, 
the CEO and one community elected member (not white elected or black 
elected, community elected).? What about focusing our energies on positive 
things gender equality?

You're entitled to have your own personal concerns about the board, their 
actions, perceived issues and your stated incorrect facts for which people 
have been cleared. But to make this a race issue, public list or private 
thoughts is not acceptable!

Saul

-----Original Message-----
From: Adiel Akplogan (akp.com) [mailto:adiel at akplogan.com]
Sent: 08 June 2016 07:05 PM
To: Sunday Folayan <sfolayan at skannet.com.ng>
Cc: community-discuss at afrinic.net; AfriNIC Discuss 
<members-discuss at afrinic.net>
Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] [members-discuss] AFRINIC Board Statement, 
5th June 2016

Dear all,

For those of you who are wondering, the e-mail mentioned in this statement 
was a personal e-mail from me. To close the loop here, I think it is in 
order for me to also share with you the apologies note (below) I have sent 
to the AFREN mailing list were my original e-mail was accidentally posted. I?m 
deeply sorry for the trouble that this may have caused.

Thank you.

Adiel Akplogan (Associate member in my personal capacity).

>> Begin forwarded message:
>>
>> From: "Adiel Akplogan (akp.com)" <adiel at akplogan.com>
>> Subject: Apologies - [Was: Re: [afren] [rpd] Board Composition]
>> Date: June 5, 2016 at 22:50:15 GMT-4
>> To: AFREN <afren at afnog.org>
>>
>> Dear listers and friends,
>>
>> I?m sorry that my private e-mail below ends up accidentally on this 
>> mailing list. I would like to apologize to my many friends and colleagues 
>> globally who have supported and worked with me over the past 20+ years 
>> and who may have felt targeted by its content. I truly value your support 
>> and friendship irrelevant of your origin and I hope you will not see in 
>> this private message anything malicious. Contrary to what was reported I 
>> did not accused Mike Silber particularly in my e-mail. He is someone I 
>> know well and hold a lot of respect for.
>>
>> Even though I do not deny my frustration, I should have exercised a bit 
>> more control and not allow it to burst publicly.
>>
>> I hope that all of you who really know me and have worked with me know 
>> that there was no ill intention behind that mail.
>>
>> Kind regards.
>>
>> - a.
>>> On May 3, 2016, at 13:16, Adiel Akplogan (akp.com) <adiel at akplogan.com> 
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Boubakar and all, this has always been serious and the plan has 
>>> started very long ago and has deeper ramifications than just what we are 
>>> seeing here. It is in fact not about a particular company trying to take 
>>> over but a clear racial fight for the white to take over. They have 
>>> always claim that we Black cannot run an organization like AFRINIC (too 
>>> complex for our small bird brain ? that was said on my face in 2005 by 
>>> some of the people pulling the strings behind ? they are far beyond just 
>>> this guy undercover of ?friendship"). Some of us have witnessed that 
>>> fight at the early days of AFRINIC. I have leaved through that during my 
>>> 10 years as CEO both in Africa and globally. But the reality is that our 
>>> own people let this kind of thing perpetuate ? sadly though no one else 
>>> will fight that fight for us.
>>>
>>> This is the same guy that was accused by Board members last year of
>>> manipulating his own election (by making companies in ZA pay for
>>> people to come and vote for him), the same guy who said in writing
>>> that Gaberonne is across the South African border and he plan to
>>> bring as many South African as Possible to vote for Mike (he said
>>> that back in October 2015 ? Some in this group have seen the
>>> transcript of such conversation). The same guy who vouch to push me
>>> out of AFRINIC because I prevented him to run his IPv4 consultancy
>>> firm for Academia (by being strict on community policy
>>> interpretation) ? The same guy is writing to private lists
>>> campaigning for his friends and making judgement about the community
>>> capability today ?
>>>
>>> But well the same guys will end up telling us that there is nothing
>>> dramatic about all of this and that it is normal course of democracy
>>> and we should move on .. and it will be a new start. We are in this
>>> since several centuries ? :-/ when will it stop? I had to step back
>>> because at some point this was about to touch on my life ? when it
>>> reaches such level and you turn back and you see no one behind you
>>> (beside the usual suspects? who?s voices are interpreted as
>>> rhetoric) it get very scary. A very sad day for me ?
>>>
>>> - a.
>>>
>>>
>>>> This is a _clear_ plan of a single company trying to hijack
>>>> AfriNIC. <snip> B.
>>>>
>>>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>>> From: Noah <noah at neo.co.tz>
>>>> Date: Tue, May 3, 2016 at 4:25 PM
>>>> Subject: Re: [rpd] Board Composition
>>>> To: Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com>
>>>> Cc: rpd List <rpd at afrinic.net>
>>>>
>>>> +1 Delong...
>>>>
>>>> On 3 May 2016 18:50, "Owen DeLong" <owen at delong.com> wrote:
>>>> It has come to my attention that Mike Silber is running for the 
>>>> independent seat that is opening on the AfriNIC board in the next 
>>>> election.
>>>>
>>>> While I consider Mike to be an excellent candidate and believe he would 
>>>> be a true asset to the AfriNIC board, I have a concern that I must 
>>>> express. This concern has nothing to do with Mike himself, but rather 
>>>> is a concern about organizational structure.
>>>>
>>>> There are only 8 elected members of the AfriNIC board. If Mike Silber 
>>>> is elected, then 25% of the elected board seats would be held by 
>>>> employees of Liquid Telecom. Personally, I do not feel that the board 
>>>> can properly represent the diversity of the AfriNIC community if we 
>>>> allow multiple board seats to be held by representatives from the same 
>>>> organization. While I do not believe that Liquid has any sort of goal 
>>>> of organizational capture or any nefarious intent whatsoever, the 
>>>> reality is that if this is allowed, then it does create the possibility 
>>>> for some other organization to achieve a form of organizational 
>>>> capture.
>>>>
>>>> The board has tremendous authority and responsibility within the 
>>>> AfriNIC organization. As such, I think it is important to consider 
>>>> these generic structural issues seriously, no matter how much we may 
>>>> like and admire the candidates in question.
>>>>
>>>> Again, this is not personal. If it were, I?d be endorsing Mike rather 
>>>> than calling his candidacy into question. However, from a structural 
>>>> perspective, I think it is important that the community at least 
>>>> consider the issue.
>>>>
>>>> Owen
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> RPD mailing list
>>>> RPD at afrinic.net
>>>> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> RPD mailing list
>>>> RPD at afrinic.net
>>>> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> afren mailing list
>>> afren at afnog.org
>>> https://www.afnog.org/mailman/listinfo/afren
>
> On Jun 6, 2016, at 04:14, sfolayan at skannet.com wrote:
>
> Dear Community,
>
> Our attention has been drawn to some email message containing allegations 
> of racism within the AFRINIC Community and subsequent press coverage.
>
> The AFRINIC Board has zero tolerance for racism and this is clearly
> reflected in the Code of Conduct available at
> http://afrinic.net/en/community/code-of-conduct
>
> Community members are asked to be mindful of this, in their interactions 
> either in person or online.
>
> Best regards ...
>
> Sunday Folayan
> Chair, AFRINIC Board
>
> _______________________________________________
> Members-Discuss mailing list
> Members-Discuss at afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/members-discuss


_______________________________________________
Members-Discuss mailing list
Members-Discuss at afrinic.net
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/members-discuss


  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20160609/69950534/attachment.html>

From randy at psg.com  Thu Jun  9 09:36:24 2016
From: randy at psg.com (Randy Bush)
Date: Thu, 09 Jun 2016 02:36:24 -0700
Subject: [Community-Discuss] [members-discuss] AFRINIC Board Statement,
	5th June 2016
In-Reply-To: <776238872.87133.1465459215382.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com>
References: <3b1f651ae97291d974dfaf65df04ae80@skannet.com>
 <C568837C-3AB6-48B2-8E66-E12D717C705D@akplogan.com>
 <00e101d1c21e$bf59dd00$3e0d9700$@enetworks.co.za>
 <776238872.87133.1465459215382.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <m2fusmwvon.wl%randy@psg.com>

> I've read the mails of Saul Stein & Randy Bush.  Their statements were
> still carried on ?an ambience that no longer fits the code of
> conduct?quoted by the Chair

i suggest you cite the mails you believe were in violation.  you mean
messages such as the following?

From: Randy Bush <randy at psg.com>
Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] [members-discuss] AFRINIC Board Statement, 5th June 2016
To: Omo Oaiya <Omo.Oaiya at wacren.net>
Cc: General Discussions of AFRINIC <community-discuss at afrinic.net>,
    AfriNIC Discuss <members-discuss at afrinic.net>
Date: Wed, 08 Jun 2016 16:12:53 -0700

> And to you. Please keep quiet and go get a life

nice.  i am impressed.

randy, who is sure he left a life around here somewhere



From Omo.Oaiya at wacren.net  Thu Jun  9 10:01:47 2016
From: Omo.Oaiya at wacren.net (Omo Oaiya)
Date: Thu, 9 Jun 2016 12:01:47 +0200
Subject: [Community-Discuss] [members-discuss] AFRINIC Board Statement,
	5th June 2016
In-Reply-To: <m2fusmwvon.wl%randy@psg.com>
References: <3b1f651ae97291d974dfaf65df04ae80@skannet.com>
 <C568837C-3AB6-48B2-8E66-E12D717C705D@akplogan.com>
 <00e101d1c21e$bf59dd00$3e0d9700$@enetworks.co.za>
 <776238872.87133.1465459215382.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com>
 <m2fusmwvon.wl%randy@psg.com>
Message-ID: <4468567A-9A36-437B-A294-633029401D66@wacren.net>


> On 9 Jun 2016, at 11:36, Randy Bush <randy at psg.com> wrote:
> 
>> I've read the mails of Saul Stein & Randy Bush.  Their statements were
>> still carried on  an ambience that no longer fits the code of
>> conduct quoted by the Chair
> 
> i suggest you cite the mails you believe were in violation.  you mean
> messages such as the following?


Perhaps, but Janvier does not need to cite.   My out of character outburst is a reaction to your sarcastic and often incitant comments on the list.

The Chair has assured me that you have also been reprimanded in his e-mail to me this morning so I am happy that your several transgressions have also been addressed.



> 
> From: Randy Bush <randy at psg.com>
> Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] [members-discuss] AFRINIC Board Statement, 5th June 2016
> To: Omo Oaiya <Omo.Oaiya at wacren.net>
> Cc: General Discussions of AFRINIC <community-discuss at afrinic.net>,
>    AfriNIC Discuss <members-discuss at afrinic.net>
> Date: Wed, 08 Jun 2016 16:12:53 -0700
> 
>> And to you. Please keep quiet and go get a life
> 
> nice.  i am impressed.
> 
> randy, who is sure he left a life around here somewhere
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss


?
Omo Oaiya
CTO/Directeur Technique, WACREN
Mobile: +234 806 4522778, +221 784 305 224
Skype: kodion
http://www.wacren.net



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20160609/53952660/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 801 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20160609/53952660/attachment.sig>

From wayne at domains.co.za  Thu Jun  9 10:01:23 2016
From: wayne at domains.co.za (Wayne Diamond)
Date: Thu, 9 Jun 2016 10:01:23 +0000
Subject: [Community-Discuss] [members-discuss] AFRINIC Board Statement,
	5th June 2016
References: <3b1f651ae97291d974dfaf65df04ae80@skannet.com>
 <C568837C-3AB6-48B2-8E66-E12D717C705D@akplogan.com>
 <00e101d1c21e$bf59dd00$3e0d9700$@enetworks.co.za> 
Message-ID: <1aba8859c544449399d5f7a6af85edc1@owa.diamatrix.co.za>

Hi All

Over the last year or so these email threads have started degenerating into attacks on people, attacks on companies and now things have degenerated so far as to having racist accusations. I must say, personally, I am appalled by this as it seems like the mission or intention of the Board has been totally lost.

I for one am very disappointed that Mike Silber has withdrawn his nomination, a person with greater insight, integrity and knowledge is hard to come by and ironically all these great traits seem to be missing at the moment.

I believe that the CEO and the Board of any company is supposed to lead by EXAMPLE, to show the direction of the company and to lead its employees. How can the full time employees of AfriNic actually want to work for AfriNic when there is such dissention and fighting from the Board level. Accusations, innuendos and downright stupid comments have been written.

* I personally don?t care from which countries in Africa the Board is comprised of and if there are slightly more members from certain regions than others. 
* I don?t care what race or sex these members

* I do care that members do the job that they have been appointed to do.
* I do care that the Board shows leadership and guidance.
* I do care that the Board behaves in an ethical and appropriate manner.
* I do care that the BOARD take responsibility for what they do and are held responsible for their actions, or lack thereof.

In my mind it's quite simple:
* If you don?t have anything positive to say on this thread, DON?T say anything.
* If you cannot contribute to the vision of AfriNic, then rather maintain your silence. 
* If you are not going to act ?without favour? and in the best interests of AfriNic, then please withdraw from the Board.
* If you cannot act in the best interests of AfriNic and not for personal gain of any form, then again, please withdraw your Board membership.

With all that has happened over the last 2 years with AfriNic and the Board, what we need right now are leaders that will stand out, lead by example, show direction and take responsibility for their actions and the actions and / or lack thereof of AfriNic too. 

What we need right now is the community to hold the new leadership to task, especially should they fail to fulfil their mandate and what they have been appointed to do.

To the new Board, if you feel you cannot perform or act in this manner and be judged based on your work, then step down now!

Technology and the internet is leading the world, yet we are acting and behaving like a 3rd world country and going nowehere, It is now time for everyone to move past these issues and move forward into what is best for AfriNic and its community. 

Regards,

Wayne Diamond

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Telephone: 011?640 9700 / 0861 100?698
Fax # 086-686-2445
www.domains.co.za

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


-----Original Message-----
From: Saul Stein [mailto:saul at enetworks.co.za]
Sent: Thursday, June 9, 2016 9:16 AM
To: General Discussions of AFRINIC <community-discuss at afrinic.net>; Sunday Folayan <sfolayan at skannet.com.ng>
Cc: AfriNIC Discuss <members-discuss at afrinic.net>
Subject: Re: [members-discuss] [Community-Discuss] AFRINIC Board Statement, 5th June 2016

Adiel,

I live in South Africa, where were are well aware of racism and racist issues. Sadly, there have been a few instances such as your email lately which have resulted the offenders being fired from their jobs (even when comments were in their personal capacity) and just generally hauled over the coals by the public in general and would not be able to participate in organisations moving forward.

What concerns me about your apology is that you are apologising for sending the email to the list and not for your racist thoughts. If you have an issue about demographics on the board, the minority (by far) are white, only two, the CEO and one community elected member (not white elected or black elected, community elected).  What about focusing our energies on positive things gender equality?

You're entitled to have your own personal concerns about the board, their actions, perceived issues and your stated incorrect facts for which people have been cleared. But to make this a race issue, public list or private thoughts is not acceptable!

Saul

-----Original Message-----
From: Adiel Akplogan (akp.com) [mailto:adiel at akplogan.com]
Sent: 08 June 2016 07:05 PM
To: Sunday Folayan <sfolayan at skannet.com.ng>
Cc: community-discuss at afrinic.net; AfriNic Discuss <members-discuss at afrinic.net>
Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] [members-discuss] AFRINIC Board Statement, 5th June 2016

Dear all,

For those of you who are wondering, the e-mail mentioned in this statement was a personal e-mail from me. To close the loop here, I think it is in order for me to also share with you the apologies note (below) I have sent to the AFREN mailing list were my original e-mail was accidentally posted. I?m deeply sorry for the trouble that this may have caused.

Thank you.

Adiel Akplogan (Associate member in my personal capacity).

>> Begin forwarded message:
>>
>> From: "Adiel Akplogan (akp.com)" <adiel at akplogan.com>
>> Subject: Apologies - [Was: Re: [afren] [rpd] Board Composition]
>> Date: June 5, 2016 at 22:50:15 GMT-4
>> To: AFREN <afren at afnog.org>
>>
>> Dear listers and friends,
>>
>> I?m sorry that my private e-mail below ends up accidentally on this 
>> mailing list. I would like to apologize to my many friends and 
>> colleagues globally who have supported and worked with me over the 
>> past 20+ years and who may have felt targeted by its content. I truly 
>> value your support and friendship irrelevant of your origin and I 
>> hope you will not see in this private message anything malicious.
>> Contrary to what was reported I did not accused Mike Silber 
>> particularly in my e-mail. He is someone I know well and hold a lot of respect for.
>>
>> Even though I do not deny my frustration, I should have exercised a 
>> bit more control and not allow it to burst publicly.
>>
>> I hope that all of you who really know me and have worked with me 
>> know that there was no ill intention behind that mail.
>>
>> Kind regards.
>>
>> - a.
>>> On May 3, 2016, at 13:16, Adiel Akplogan (akp.com) 
>>> <adiel at akplogan.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Boubakar and all, this has always been serious and the plan has 
>>> started very long ago and has deeper ramifications than just what we 
>>> are seeing here. It is in fact not about a particular company trying 
>>> to take over but a clear racial fight for the white to take over.
>>> They have always claim that we Black cannot run an organization like 
>>> AFRINIC (too complex for our small bird brain ? that was said on my 
>>> face in 2005 by some of the people pulling the strings behind ? they 
>>> are far beyond just this guy undercover of ?friendship"). Some of us 
>>> have witnessed that fight at the early days of AFRINIC. I have 
>>> leaved through that during my
>>> 10 years as CEO both in Africa and globally. But the reality is that 
>>> our own people let this kind of thing perpetuate ? sadly though no 
>>> one else will fight that fight for us.
>>>
>>> This is the same guy that was accused by Board members last year of 
>>> manipulating his own election (by making companies in ZA pay for 
>>> people to come and vote for him), the same guy who said in writing 
>>> that Gaberonne is across the South African border and he plan to 
>>> bring as many South African as Possible to vote for Mike (he said 
>>> that back in October 2015 ? Some in this group have seen the 
>>> transcript of such conversation). The same guy who vouch to push me 
>>> out of AFRINIC because I prevented him to run his IPv4 consultancy 
>>> firm for Academia (by being strict on community policy
>>> interpretation) ? The same guy is writing to private lists 
>>> campaigning for his friends and making judgement about the community 
>>> capability today ?
>>>
>>> But well the same guys will end up telling us that there is nothing 
>>> dramatic about all of this and that it is normal course of democracy 
>>> and we should move on .. and it will be a new start. We are in this 
>>> since several centuries ? :-/ when will it stop? I had to step back 
>>> because at some point this was about to touch on my life ? when it 
>>> reaches such level and you turn back and you see no one behind you 
>>> (beside the usual suspects? who?s voices are interpreted as
>>> rhetoric) it get very scary. A very sad day for me ?
>>>
>>> - a.
>>>
>>>
>>>> This is a _clear_ plan of a single company trying to hijack 
>>>> AfriNIC. <snip> B.
>>>>
>>>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>>> From: Noah <noah at neo.co.tz>
>>>> Date: Tue, May 3, 2016 at 4:25 PM
>>>> Subject: Re: [rpd] Board Composition
>>>> To: Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com>
>>>> Cc: rpd List <rpd at afrinic.net>
>>>>
>>>> +1 Delong...
>>>>
>>>> On 3 May 2016 18:50, "Owen DeLong" <owen at delong.com> wrote:
>>>> It has come to my attention that Mike Silber is running for the 
>>>> independent seat that is opening on the AfriNIC board in the next 
>>>> election.
>>>>
>>>> While I consider Mike to be an excellent candidate and believe he 
>>>> would be a true asset to the AfriNIC board, I have a concern that I 
>>>> must express. This concern has nothing to do with Mike himself, but 
>>>> rather is a concern about organizational structure.
>>>>
>>>> There are only 8 elected members of the AfriNIC board. If Mike 
>>>> Silber is elected, then 25% of the elected board seats would be 
>>>> held by employees of Liquid Telecom. Personally, I do not feel that 
>>>> the board can properly represent the diversity of the AfriNIC 
>>>> community if we allow multiple board seats to be held by 
>>>> representatives from the same organization. While I do not believe 
>>>> that Liquid has any sort of goal of organizational capture or any 
>>>> nefarious intent whatsoever, the reality is that if this is 
>>>> allowed, then it does create the possibility for some other 
>>>> organization to achieve a form of organizational capture.
>>>>
>>>> The board has tremendous authority and responsibility within the 
>>>> AfriNIC organization. As such, I think it is important to consider 
>>>> these generic structural issues seriously, no matter how much we 
>>>> may like and admire the candidates in question.
>>>>
>>>> Again, this is not personal. If it were, I?d be endorsing Mike 
>>>> rather than calling his candidacy into question. However, from a 
>>>> structural perspective, I think it is important that the community 
>>>> at least consider the issue.
>>>>
>>>> Owen
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> RPD mailing list
>>>> RPD at afrinic.net
>>>> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> RPD mailing list
>>>> RPD at afrinic.net
>>>> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> afren mailing list
>>> afren at afnog.org
>>> https://www.afnog.org/mailman/listinfo/afren
>
> On Jun 6, 2016, at 04:14, sfolayan at skannet.com wrote:
>
> Dear Community,
>
> Our attention has been drawn to some email message containing 
> allegations of racism within the AFRINIC Community and subsequent press coverage.
>
> The AFRINIC Board has zero tolerance for racism and this is clearly 
> reflected in the Code of Conduct available at 
> http://afrinic.net/en/community/code-of-conduct
>
> Community members are asked to be mindful of this, in their 
> interactions either in person or online.
>
> Best regards ...
>
> Sunday Folayan
> Chair, AFRINIC Board
>
> _______________________________________________
> Members-Discuss mailing list
> Members-Discuss at afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/members-discuss


_______________________________________________
Members-Discuss mailing list
Members-Discuss at afrinic.net
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/members-discuss

From ali at hussein.me.ke  Thu Jun  9 10:24:06 2016
From: ali at hussein.me.ke (Ali Hussein)
Date: Thu, 9 Jun 2016 12:24:06 +0200
Subject: [Community-Discuss] [members-discuss] AFRINIC Board Statement,
	5th June 2016
In-Reply-To: <1aba8859c544449399d5f7a6af85edc1@owa.diamatrix.co.za>
References: <3b1f651ae97291d974dfaf65df04ae80@skannet.com>
 <C568837C-3AB6-48B2-8E66-E12D717C705D@akplogan.com>
 <00e101d1c21e$bf59dd00$3e0d9700$@enetworks.co.za>
 <1aba8859c544449399d5f7a6af85edc1@owa.diamatrix.co.za>
Message-ID: <4DD2F980-C2F2-40CB-B0E7-C08112155AA7@hussein.me.ke>

Wayne

I can't agree more with your heartfelt comments.

Can we all rise above all this unnecessary friction and actually serve the community? 

Ali Hussein
Principal
Hussein & Associates
+254 0713 601113 

Twitter: @AliHKassim
Skype: abu-jomo
LinkedIn: http://ke.linkedin.com/in/alihkassim


"Discovery consists in seeing what everyone else has seen and thinking what no one else has thought".  ~ Albert Szent-Gy?rgyi

Sent from my iPad

> On 9 Jun 2016, at 12:01 PM, Wayne Diamond <wayne at domains.co.za> wrote:
> 
> Hi All
> 
> Over the last year or so these email threads have started degenerating into attacks on people, attacks on companies and now things have degenerated so far as to having racist accusations. I must say, personally, I am appalled by this as it seems like the mission or intention of the Board has been totally lost.
> 
> I for one am very disappointed that Mike Silber has withdrawn his nomination, a person with greater insight, integrity and knowledge is hard to come by and ironically all these great traits seem to be missing at the moment.
> 
> I believe that the CEO and the Board of any company is supposed to lead by EXAMPLE, to show the direction of the company and to lead its employees. How can the full time employees of AfriNic actually want to work for AfriNic when there is such dissention and fighting from the Board level. Accusations, innuendos and downright stupid comments have been written.
> 
> * I personally don?t care from which countries in Africa the Board is comprised of and if there are slightly more members from certain regions than others. 
> * I don?t care what race or sex these members
> 
> * I do care that members do the job that they have been appointed to do.
> * I do care that the Board shows leadership and guidance.
> * I do care that the Board behaves in an ethical and appropriate manner.
> * I do care that the BOARD take responsibility for what they do and are held responsible for their actions, or lack thereof.
> 
> In my mind it's quite simple:
> * If you don?t have anything positive to say on this thread, DON?T say anything.
> * If you cannot contribute to the vision of AfriNic, then rather maintain your silence. 
> * If you are not going to act ?without favour? and in the best interests of AfriNic, then please withdraw from the Board.
> * If you cannot act in the best interests of AfriNic and not for personal gain of any form, then again, please withdraw your Board membership.
> 
> With all that has happened over the last 2 years with AfriNic and the Board, what we need right now are leaders that will stand out, lead by example, show direction and take responsibility for their actions and the actions and / or lack thereof of AfriNic too. 
> 
> What we need right now is the community to hold the new leadership to task, especially should they fail to fulfil their mandate and what they have been appointed to do.
> 
> To the new Board, if you feel you cannot perform or act in this manner and be judged based on your work, then step down now!
> 
> Technology and the internet is leading the world, yet we are acting and behaving like a 3rd world country and going nowehere, It is now time for everyone to move past these issues and move forward into what is best for AfriNic and its community. 
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Wayne Diamond
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Telephone: 011 640 9700 / 0861 100 698
> Fax # 086-686-2445
> www.domains.co.za
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Saul Stein [mailto:saul at enetworks.co.za]
> Sent: Thursday, June 9, 2016 9:16 AM
> To: General Discussions of AFRINIC <community-discuss at afrinic.net>; Sunday Folayan <sfolayan at skannet.com.ng>
> Cc: AfriNIC Discuss <members-discuss at afrinic.net>
> Subject: Re: [members-discuss] [Community-Discuss] AFRINIC Board Statement, 5th June 2016
> 
> Adiel,
> 
> I live in South Africa, where were are well aware of racism and racist issues. Sadly, there have been a few instances such as your email lately which have resulted the offenders being fired from their jobs (even when comments were in their personal capacity) and just generally hauled over the coals by the public in general and would not be able to participate in organisations moving forward.
> 
> What concerns me about your apology is that you are apologising for sending the email to the list and not for your racist thoughts. If you have an issue about demographics on the board, the minority (by far) are white, only two, the CEO and one community elected member (not white elected or black elected, community elected).  What about focusing our energies on positive things gender equality?
> 
> You're entitled to have your own personal concerns about the board, their actions, perceived issues and your stated incorrect facts for which people have been cleared. But to make this a race issue, public list or private thoughts is not acceptable!
> 
> Saul
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Adiel Akplogan (akp.com) [mailto:adiel at akplogan.com]
> Sent: 08 June 2016 07:05 PM
> To: Sunday Folayan <sfolayan at skannet.com.ng>
> Cc: community-discuss at afrinic.net; AfriNic Discuss <members-discuss at afrinic.net>
> Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] [members-discuss] AFRINIC Board Statement, 5th June 2016
> 
> Dear all,
> 
> For those of you who are wondering, the e-mail mentioned in this statement was a personal e-mail from me. To close the loop here, I think it is in order for me to also share with you the apologies note (below) I have sent to the AFREN mailing list were my original e-mail was accidentally posted. I?m deeply sorry for the trouble that this may have caused.
> 
> Thank you.
> 
> Adiel Akplogan (Associate member in my personal capacity).
> 
>>> Begin forwarded message:
>>> 
>>> From: "Adiel Akplogan (akp.com)" <adiel at akplogan.com>
>>> Subject: Apologies - [Was: Re: [afren] [rpd] Board Composition]
>>> Date: June 5, 2016 at 22:50:15 GMT-4
>>> To: AFREN <afren at afnog.org>
>>> 
>>> Dear listers and friends,
>>> 
>>> I?m sorry that my private e-mail below ends up accidentally on this 
>>> mailing list. I would like to apologize to my many friends and 
>>> colleagues globally who have supported and worked with me over the 
>>> past 20+ years and who may have felt targeted by its content. I truly 
>>> value your support and friendship irrelevant of your origin and I 
>>> hope you will not see in this private message anything malicious.
>>> Contrary to what was reported I did not accused Mike Silber 
>>> particularly in my e-mail. He is someone I know well and hold a lot of respect for.
>>> 
>>> Even though I do not deny my frustration, I should have exercised a 
>>> bit more control and not allow it to burst publicly.
>>> 
>>> I hope that all of you who really know me and have worked with me 
>>> know that there was no ill intention behind that mail.
>>> 
>>> Kind regards.
>>> 
>>> - a.
>>>> On May 3, 2016, at 13:16, Adiel Akplogan (akp.com) 
>>>> <adiel at akplogan.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> Hi Boubakar and all, this has always been serious and the plan has 
>>>> started very long ago and has deeper ramifications than just what we 
>>>> are seeing here. It is in fact not about a particular company trying 
>>>> to take over but a clear racial fight for the white to take over.
>>>> They have always claim that we Black cannot run an organization like 
>>>> AFRINIC (too complex for our small bird brain ? that was said on my 
>>>> face in 2005 by some of the people pulling the strings behind ? they 
>>>> are far beyond just this guy undercover of ?friendship"). Some of us 
>>>> have witnessed that fight at the early days of AFRINIC. I have 
>>>> leaved through that during my
>>>> 10 years as CEO both in Africa and globally. But the reality is that 
>>>> our own people let this kind of thing perpetuate ? sadly though no 
>>>> one else will fight that fight for us.
>>>> 
>>>> This is the same guy that was accused by Board members last year of 
>>>> manipulating his own election (by making companies in ZA pay for 
>>>> people to come and vote for him), the same guy who said in writing 
>>>> that Gaberonne is across the South African border and he plan to 
>>>> bring as many South African as Possible to vote for Mike (he said 
>>>> that back in October 2015 ? Some in this group have seen the 
>>>> transcript of such conversation). The same guy who vouch to push me 
>>>> out of AFRINIC because I prevented him to run his IPv4 consultancy 
>>>> firm for Academia (by being strict on community policy
>>>> interpretation) ? The same guy is writing to private lists 
>>>> campaigning for his friends and making judgement about the community 
>>>> capability today ?
>>>> 
>>>> But well the same guys will end up telling us that there is nothing 
>>>> dramatic about all of this and that it is normal course of democracy 
>>>> and we should move on .. and it will be a new start. We are in this 
>>>> since several centuries ? :-/ when will it stop? I had to step back 
>>>> because at some point this was about to touch on my life ? when it 
>>>> reaches such level and you turn back and you see no one behind you 
>>>> (beside the usual suspects? who?s voices are interpreted as
>>>> rhetoric) it get very scary. A very sad day for me ?
>>>> 
>>>> - a.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> This is a _clear_ plan of a single company trying to hijack 
>>>>> AfriNIC. <snip> B.
>>>>> 
>>>>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>>>> From: Noah <noah at neo.co.tz>
>>>>> Date: Tue, May 3, 2016 at 4:25 PM
>>>>> Subject: Re: [rpd] Board Composition
>>>>> To: Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com>
>>>>> Cc: rpd List <rpd at afrinic.net>
>>>>> 
>>>>> +1 Delong...
>>>>> 
>>>>> On 3 May 2016 18:50, "Owen DeLong" <owen at delong.com> wrote:
>>>>> It has come to my attention that Mike Silber is running for the 
>>>>> independent seat that is opening on the AfriNIC board in the next 
>>>>> election.
>>>>> 
>>>>> While I consider Mike to be an excellent candidate and believe he 
>>>>> would be a true asset to the AfriNIC board, I have a concern that I 
>>>>> must express. This concern has nothing to do with Mike himself, but 
>>>>> rather is a concern about organizational structure.
>>>>> 
>>>>> There are only 8 elected members of the AfriNIC board. If Mike 
>>>>> Silber is elected, then 25% of the elected board seats would be 
>>>>> held by employees of Liquid Telecom. Personally, I do not feel that 
>>>>> the board can properly represent the diversity of the AfriNIC 
>>>>> community if we allow multiple board seats to be held by 
>>>>> representatives from the same organization. While I do not believe 
>>>>> that Liquid has any sort of goal of organizational capture or any 
>>>>> nefarious intent whatsoever, the reality is that if this is 
>>>>> allowed, then it does create the possibility for some other 
>>>>> organization to achieve a form of organizational capture.
>>>>> 
>>>>> The board has tremendous authority and responsibility within the 
>>>>> AfriNIC organization. As such, I think it is important to consider 
>>>>> these generic structural issues seriously, no matter how much we 
>>>>> may like and admire the candidates in question.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Again, this is not personal. If it were, I?d be endorsing Mike 
>>>>> rather than calling his candidacy into question. However, from a 
>>>>> structural perspective, I think it is important that the community 
>>>>> at least consider the issue.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Owen
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> RPD mailing list
>>>>> RPD at afrinic.net
>>>>> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd
>>>>> 
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> RPD mailing list
>>>>> RPD at afrinic.net
>>>>> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd
>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> afren mailing list
>>>> afren at afnog.org
>>>> https://www.afnog.org/mailman/listinfo/afren
>> 
>> On Jun 6, 2016, at 04:14, sfolayan at skannet.com wrote:
>> 
>> Dear Community,
>> 
>> Our attention has been drawn to some email message containing 
>> allegations of racism within the AFRINIC Community and subsequent press coverage.
>> 
>> The AFRINIC Board has zero tolerance for racism and this is clearly 
>> reflected in the Code of Conduct available at 
>> http://afrinic.net/en/community/code-of-conduct
>> 
>> Community members are asked to be mindful of this, in their 
>> interactions either in person or online.
>> 
>> Best regards ...
>> 
>> Sunday Folayan
>> Chair, AFRINIC Board
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Members-Discuss mailing list
>> Members-Discuss at afrinic.net
>> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/members-discuss
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Members-Discuss mailing list
> Members-Discuss at afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/members-discuss
> _______________________________________________
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20160609/d7598c77/attachment.html>

From Kris.Senanu at accesskenya.com  Thu Jun  9 12:15:01 2016
From: Kris.Senanu at accesskenya.com (Kris Senanu)
Date: Thu, 9 Jun 2016 12:15:01 +0000
Subject: [Community-Discuss] [members-discuss] AFRINIC Board Statement,
	5th June 2016
In-Reply-To: <1aba8859c544449399d5f7a6af85edc1@owa.diamatrix.co.za>
References: <3b1f651ae97291d974dfaf65df04ae80@skannet.com>
 <C568837C-3AB6-48B2-8E66-E12D717C705D@akplogan.com>
 <00e101d1c21e$bf59dd00$3e0d9700$@enetworks.co.za>
 <1aba8859c544449399d5f7a6af85edc1@owa.diamatrix.co.za>
Message-ID: <FE7D76B003C9694780362714FE0F84663154BEA5@zabrysvisexmbx4.af.didata.local>

Well put Wayne,

We need to move forward positively and rise up above petty politics !!

Kris Senanu 
Chairman
KENIC

-----Original Message-----
From: Wayne Diamond [mailto:wayne at domains.co.za] 
Sent: Thursday, June 09, 2016 1:01 PM
To: General Discussions of AFRINIC
Cc: AfriNIC Discuss
Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] [members-discuss] AFRINIC Board Statement, 5th June 2016

Hi All

Over the last year or so these email threads have started degenerating into attacks on people, attacks on companies and now things have degenerated so far as to having racist accusations. I must say, personally, I am appalled by this as it seems like the mission or intention of the Board has been totally lost.

I for one am very disappointed that Mike Silber has withdrawn his nomination, a person with greater insight, integrity and knowledge is hard to come by and ironically all these great traits seem to be missing at the moment.

I believe that the CEO and the Board of any company is supposed to lead by EXAMPLE, to show the direction of the company and to lead its employees. How can the full time employees of AfriNic actually want to work for AfriNic when there is such dissention and fighting from the Board level. Accusations, innuendos and downright stupid comments have been written.

* I personally don?t care from which countries in Africa the Board is comprised of and if there are slightly more members from certain regions than others. 
* I don?t care what race or sex these members

* I do care that members do the job that they have been appointed to do.
* I do care that the Board shows leadership and guidance.
* I do care that the Board behaves in an ethical and appropriate manner.
* I do care that the BOARD take responsibility for what they do and are held responsible for their actions, or lack thereof.

In my mind it's quite simple:
* If you don?t have anything positive to say on this thread, DON?T say anything.
* If you cannot contribute to the vision of AfriNic, then rather maintain your silence. 
* If you are not going to act ?without favour? and in the best interests of AfriNic, then please withdraw from the Board.
* If you cannot act in the best interests of AfriNic and not for personal gain of any form, then again, please withdraw your Board membership.

With all that has happened over the last 2 years with AfriNic and the Board, what we need right now are leaders that will stand out, lead by example, show direction and take responsibility for their actions and the actions and / or lack thereof of AfriNic too. 

What we need right now is the community to hold the new leadership to task, especially should they fail to fulfil their mandate and what they have been appointed to do.

To the new Board, if you feel you cannot perform or act in this manner and be judged based on your work, then step down now!

Technology and the internet is leading the world, yet we are acting and behaving like a 3rd world country and going nowehere, It is now time for everyone to move past these issues and move forward into what is best for AfriNic and its community. 

Regards,

Wayne Diamond

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Telephone: 011?640 9700 / 0861 100?698
Fax # 086-686-2445
www.domains.co.za

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


-----Original Message-----
From: Saul Stein [mailto:saul at enetworks.co.za]
Sent: Thursday, June 9, 2016 9:16 AM
To: General Discussions of AFRINIC <community-discuss at afrinic.net>; Sunday Folayan <sfolayan at skannet.com.ng>
Cc: AfriNIC Discuss <members-discuss at afrinic.net>
Subject: Re: [members-discuss] [Community-Discuss] AFRINIC Board Statement, 5th June 2016

Adiel,

I live in South Africa, where were are well aware of racism and racist issues. Sadly, there have been a few instances such as your email lately which have resulted the offenders being fired from their jobs (even when comments were in their personal capacity) and just generally hauled over the coals by the public in general and would not be able to participate in organisations moving forward.

What concerns me about your apology is that you are apologising for sending the email to the list and not for your racist thoughts. If you have an issue about demographics on the board, the minority (by far) are white, only two, the CEO and one community elected member (not white elected or black elected, community elected).  What about focusing our energies on positive things gender equality?

You're entitled to have your own personal concerns about the board, their actions, perceived issues and your stated incorrect facts for which people have been cleared. But to make this a race issue, public list or private thoughts is not acceptable!

Saul

-----Original Message-----
From: Adiel Akplogan (akp.com) [mailto:adiel at akplogan.com]
Sent: 08 June 2016 07:05 PM
To: Sunday Folayan <sfolayan at skannet.com.ng>
Cc: community-discuss at afrinic.net; AfriNic Discuss <members-discuss at afrinic.net>
Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] [members-discuss] AFRINIC Board Statement, 5th June 2016

Dear all,

For those of you who are wondering, the e-mail mentioned in this statement was a personal e-mail from me. To close the loop here, I think it is in order for me to also share with you the apologies note (below) I have sent to the AFREN mailing list were my original e-mail was accidentally posted. I?m deeply sorry for the trouble that this may have caused.

Thank you.

Adiel Akplogan (Associate member in my personal capacity).

>> Begin forwarded message:
>>
>> From: "Adiel Akplogan (akp.com)" <adiel at akplogan.com>
>> Subject: Apologies - [Was: Re: [afren] [rpd] Board Composition]
>> Date: June 5, 2016 at 22:50:15 GMT-4
>> To: AFREN <afren at afnog.org>
>>
>> Dear listers and friends,
>>
>> I?m sorry that my private e-mail below ends up accidentally on this 
>> mailing list. I would like to apologize to my many friends and 
>> colleagues globally who have supported and worked with me over the 
>> past 20+ years and who may have felt targeted by its content. I truly 
>> value your support and friendship irrelevant of your origin and I 
>> hope you will not see in this private message anything malicious.
>> Contrary to what was reported I did not accused Mike Silber 
>> particularly in my e-mail. He is someone I know well and hold a lot of respect for.
>>
>> Even though I do not deny my frustration, I should have exercised a 
>> bit more control and not allow it to burst publicly.
>>
>> I hope that all of you who really know me and have worked with me 
>> know that there was no ill intention behind that mail.
>>
>> Kind regards.
>>
>> - a.
>>> On May 3, 2016, at 13:16, Adiel Akplogan (akp.com) 
>>> <adiel at akplogan.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Boubakar and all, this has always been serious and the plan has 
>>> started very long ago and has deeper ramifications than just what we 
>>> are seeing here. It is in fact not about a particular company trying 
>>> to take over but a clear racial fight for the white to take over.
>>> They have always claim that we Black cannot run an organization like 
>>> AFRINIC (too complex for our small bird brain ? that was said on my 
>>> face in 2005 by some of the people pulling the strings behind ? they 
>>> are far beyond just this guy undercover of ?friendship"). Some of us 
>>> have witnessed that fight at the early days of AFRINIC. I have 
>>> leaved through that during my
>>> 10 years as CEO both in Africa and globally. But the reality is that 
>>> our own people let this kind of thing perpetuate ? sadly though no 
>>> one else will fight that fight for us.
>>>
>>> This is the same guy that was accused by Board members last year of 
>>> manipulating his own election (by making companies in ZA pay for 
>>> people to come and vote for him), the same guy who said in writing 
>>> that Gaberonne is across the South African border and he plan to 
>>> bring as many South African as Possible to vote for Mike (he said 
>>> that back in October 2015 ? Some in this group have seen the 
>>> transcript of such conversation). The same guy who vouch to push me 
>>> out of AFRINIC because I prevented him to run his IPv4 consultancy 
>>> firm for Academia (by being strict on community policy
>>> interpretation) ? The same guy is writing to private lists 
>>> campaigning for his friends and making judgement about the community 
>>> capability today ?
>>>
>>> But well the same guys will end up telling us that there is nothing 
>>> dramatic about all of this and that it is normal course of democracy 
>>> and we should move on .. and it will be a new start. We are in this 
>>> since several centuries ? :-/ when will it stop? I had to step back 
>>> because at some point this was about to touch on my life ? when it 
>>> reaches such level and you turn back and you see no one behind you 
>>> (beside the usual suspects? who?s voices are interpreted as
>>> rhetoric) it get very scary. A very sad day for me ?
>>>
>>> - a.
>>>
>>>
>>>> This is a _clear_ plan of a single company trying to hijack 
>>>> AfriNIC. <snip> B.
>>>>
>>>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>>> From: Noah <noah at neo.co.tz>
>>>> Date: Tue, May 3, 2016 at 4:25 PM
>>>> Subject: Re: [rpd] Board Composition
>>>> To: Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com>
>>>> Cc: rpd List <rpd at afrinic.net>
>>>>
>>>> +1 Delong...
>>>>
>>>> On 3 May 2016 18:50, "Owen DeLong" <owen at delong.com> wrote:
>>>> It has come to my attention that Mike Silber is running for the 
>>>> independent seat that is opening on the AfriNIC board in the next 
>>>> election.
>>>>
>>>> While I consider Mike to be an excellent candidate and believe he 
>>>> would be a true asset to the AfriNIC board, I have a concern that I 
>>>> must express. This concern has nothing to do with Mike himself, but 
>>>> rather is a concern about organizational structure.
>>>>
>>>> There are only 8 elected members of the AfriNIC board. If Mike 
>>>> Silber is elected, then 25% of the elected board seats would be 
>>>> held by employees of Liquid Telecom. Personally, I do not feel that 
>>>> the board can properly represent the diversity of the AfriNIC 
>>>> community if we allow multiple board seats to be held by 
>>>> representatives from the same organization. While I do not believe 
>>>> that Liquid has any sort of goal of organizational capture or any 
>>>> nefarious intent whatsoever, the reality is that if this is 
>>>> allowed, then it does create the possibility for some other 
>>>> organization to achieve a form of organizational capture.
>>>>
>>>> The board has tremendous authority and responsibility within the 
>>>> AfriNIC organization. As such, I think it is important to consider 
>>>> these generic structural issues seriously, no matter how much we 
>>>> may like and admire the candidates in question.
>>>>
>>>> Again, this is not personal. If it were, I?d be endorsing Mike 
>>>> rather than calling his candidacy into question. However, from a 
>>>> structural perspective, I think it is important that the community 
>>>> at least consider the issue.
>>>>
>>>> Owen
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> RPD mailing list
>>>> RPD at afrinic.net
>>>> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> RPD mailing list
>>>> RPD at afrinic.net
>>>> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> afren mailing list
>>> afren at afnog.org
>>> https://www.afnog.org/mailman/listinfo/afren
>
> On Jun 6, 2016, at 04:14, sfolayan at skannet.com wrote:
>
> Dear Community,
>
> Our attention has been drawn to some email message containing 
> allegations of racism within the AFRINIC Community and subsequent press coverage.
>
> The AFRINIC Board has zero tolerance for racism and this is clearly 
> reflected in the Code of Conduct available at 
> http://afrinic.net/en/community/code-of-conduct
>
> Community members are asked to be mindful of this, in their 
> interactions either in person or online.
>
> Best regards ...
>
> Sunday Folayan
> Chair, AFRINIC Board
>
> _______________________________________________
> Members-Discuss mailing list
> Members-Discuss at afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/members-discuss


_______________________________________________
Members-Discuss mailing list
Members-Discuss at afrinic.net
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/members-discuss
_______________________________________________
Community-Discuss mailing list
Community-Discuss at afrinic.net
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss

From jnoulaye at yahoo.fr  Thu Jun  9 16:01:56 2016
From: jnoulaye at yahoo.fr (jnoulaye at yahoo.fr)
Date: Thu, 9 Jun 2016 16:01:56 +0000 (UTC)
Subject: [Community-Discuss] =?utf-8?q?Fact_Sheet_on_NTIA=E2=80=99s_Assess?=
 =?utf-8?q?ment_of_the_IANA_Stewardship_Transition_Proposal_=7C_NTIA?=
In-Reply-To: <CAJm7f67AFb8Oj8=QgVcJ8dmyLvBdP2c8DR+1yzLvpBQaap=7tg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAJm7f67AFb8Oj8=QgVcJ8dmyLvBdP2c8DR+1yzLvpBQaap=7tg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <2061620380.710326.1465488116169.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com>

Dear members,Fresh news, following what the panel said this morning (AIS 2016 - Gaborone).IANA Stewardship Transition in progress, get more details here: ?https://www.ntia.doc.gov/other-publication/2016/fact-sheet-ntias-assessment-iana-stewardship-transition-proposal


Regards,Janvier Ngnoulaye
CRISP Team member  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20160609/47abf665/attachment.html>

From alan.barrett at afrinic.net  Fri Jun 10 10:20:37 2016
From: alan.barrett at afrinic.net (Alan Barrett)
Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2016 12:20:37 +0200
Subject: [Community-Discuss] Accountability assessment
Message-ID: <66EA5281-23B7-4E2F-A866-64B2EC401FF8@afrinic.net>

Arising from a review of AFRINIC?s Bylaws and other documents, several potential areas for improvement were identified.

The attached document was presented to the AFRINIC Membership and the community during the AGMM in Gaborone, Botswana, on 9 June 2016.

I invite the community and the membership to comment on these suggestions, or any other areas where the Bylaws could be improved.  Comments should be sent to the community-discuss at afrinic.net mailing list.  In due course, Bylaws changes will be drafted to implement the suggestions (and additional points that might be identified).

Alan Barrett
CEO, AFRINIC

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: AFRINICRIRAccountabilityAssessment-Suggestions-20160609.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 58450 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20160610/86196c1f/attachment.pdf>
-------------- next part --------------



From adiel at akplogan.com  Fri Jun 10 14:20:09 2016
From: adiel at akplogan.com (Adiel A. Akplogan)
Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2016 10:20:09 -0400
Subject: [Community-Discuss] [members-discuss] AFRINIC Board Statement,
	5th June 2016
In-Reply-To: <00e101d1c21e$bf59dd00$3e0d9700$@enetworks.co.za>
References: <3b1f651ae97291d974dfaf65df04ae80@skannet.com>
 <C568837C-3AB6-48B2-8E66-E12D717C705D@akplogan.com>
 <00e101d1c21e$bf59dd00$3e0d9700$@enetworks.co.za>
Message-ID: <D1DCBD05-ECF2-483F-8F4F-3729F91BF081@akplogan.com>

Hello Saul,

I truly respect and appreciate your opinion on this but it won?t be wise for us to continue to engage on this on the public list. If you would like to have further discussion on this to understand, I will be happy to do so off list as I have done with others who like you probably felt the same way (who by the way I?m thanking here for their confidence) but who took the time to engage me on this privately and to whom I also offered my apologies privately and lay out what I really had in mind while writing which is far from the interpretation. It can happen in private conversation (or even in public) that our words go beyond our thoughts (because we are just human) but when it happen in private you may have someone in that private circle to drag your attention to it and you adjust learn from it but ***it stays private***. However, when it goes public and before you know it becomes exposed to all sort of interpretations. What one can do is to mitigate the impact and apologize.

Happy to chat with you privately on this.

Regards.

- a. (in my personal capacity).

On Jun 9, 2016, at 03:15, Saul Stein <saul at enetworks.co.za> wrote:

> Adiel,
> 
> I live in South Africa, where were are well aware of racism and racist
> issues. Sadly, there have been a few instances such as your email lately
> which have resulted the offenders being fired from their jobs (even when
> comments were in their personal capacity) and just generally hauled over the
> coals by the public in general and would not be able to participate in
> organisations moving forward.
> 
> What concerns me about your apology is that you are apologising for sending
> the email to the list and not for your racist thoughts. If you have an issue
> about demographics on the board, the minority (by far) are white, only two,
> the CEO and one community elected member (not white elected or black
> elected, community elected).  What about focusing our energies on positive
> things gender equality?
> 
> You're entitled to have your own personal concerns about the board, their
> actions, perceived issues and your stated incorrect facts for which people
> have been cleared. But to make this a race issue, public list or private
> thoughts is not acceptable!
> 
> Saul
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Adiel Akplogan (akp.com) [mailto:adiel at akplogan.com]
> Sent: 08 June 2016 07:05 PM
> To: Sunday Folayan <sfolayan at skannet.com.ng>
> Cc: community-discuss at afrinic.net; AfriNIC Discuss
> <members-discuss at afrinic.net>
> Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] [members-discuss] AFRINIC Board Statement,
> 5th June 2016
> 
> Dear all,
> 
> For those of you who are wondering, the e-mail mentioned in this statement
> was a personal e-mail from me. To close the loop here, I think it is in
> order for me to also share with you the apologies note (below) I have sent
> to the AFREN mailing list were my original e-mail was accidentally posted. I?m
> deeply sorry for the trouble that this may have caused.
> 
> Thank you.
> 
> Adiel Akplogan (Associate member in my personal capacity).
> 
>>> Begin forwarded message:
>>> 
>>> From: "Adiel Akplogan (akp.com)" <adiel at akplogan.com>
>>> Subject: Apologies - [Was: Re: [afren] [rpd] Board Composition]
>>> Date: June 5, 2016 at 22:50:15 GMT-4
>>> To: AFREN <afren at afnog.org>
>>> 
>>> Dear listers and friends,
>>> 
>>> I?m sorry that my private e-mail below ends up accidentally on this
>>> mailing list. I would like to apologize to my many friends and colleagues
>>> globally who have supported and worked with me over the past 20+ years
>>> and who may have felt targeted by its content. I truly value your support
>>> and friendship irrelevant of your origin and I hope you will not see in
>>> this private message anything malicious. Contrary to what was reported I
>>> did not accused Mike Silber particularly in my e-mail. He is someone I
>>> know well and hold a lot of respect for.
>>> 
>>> Even though I do not deny my frustration, I should have exercised a bit
>>> more control and not allow it to burst publicly.
>>> 
>>> I hope that all of you who really know me and have worked with me know
>>> that there was no ill intention behind that mail.
>>> 
>>> Kind regards.
>>> 
>>> - a.
>>>> On May 3, 2016, at 13:16, Adiel Akplogan (akp.com) <adiel at akplogan.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> Hi Boubakar and all, this has always been serious and the plan has
>>>> started very long ago and has deeper ramifications than just what we are
>>>> seeing here. It is in fact not about a particular company trying to take
>>>> over but a clear racial fight for the white to take over. They have
>>>> always claim that we Black cannot run an organization like AFRINIC (too
>>>> complex for our small bird brain ? that was said on my face in 2005 by
>>>> some of the people pulling the strings behind ? they are far beyond just
>>>> this guy undercover of ?friendship"). Some of us have witnessed that
>>>> fight at the early days of AFRINIC. I have leaved through that during my
>>>> 10 years as CEO both in Africa and globally. But the reality is that our
>>>> own people let this kind of thing perpetuate ? sadly though no one else
>>>> will fight that fight for us.
>>>> 
>>>> This is the same guy that was accused by Board members last year of
>>>> manipulating his own election (by making companies in ZA pay for
>>>> people to come and vote for him), the same guy who said in writing
>>>> that Gaberonne is across the South African border and he plan to
>>>> bring as many South African as Possible to vote for Mike (he said
>>>> that back in October 2015 ? Some in this group have seen the
>>>> transcript of such conversation). The same guy who vouch to push me
>>>> out of AFRINIC because I prevented him to run his IPv4 consultancy
>>>> firm for Academia (by being strict on community policy
>>>> interpretation) ? The same guy is writing to private lists
>>>> campaigning for his friends and making judgement about the community
>>>> capability today ?
>>>> 
>>>> But well the same guys will end up telling us that there is nothing
>>>> dramatic about all of this and that it is normal course of democracy
>>>> and we should move on .. and it will be a new start. We are in this
>>>> since several centuries ? :-/ when will it stop? I had to step back
>>>> because at some point this was about to touch on my life ? when it
>>>> reaches such level and you turn back and you see no one behind you
>>>> (beside the usual suspects? who?s voices are interpreted as
>>>> rhetoric) it get very scary. A very sad day for me ?
>>>> 
>>>> - a.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> This is a _clear_ plan of a single company trying to hijack
>>>>> AfriNIC. <snip> B.
>>>>> 
>>>>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>>>> From: Noah <noah at neo.co.tz>
>>>>> Date: Tue, May 3, 2016 at 4:25 PM
>>>>> Subject: Re: [rpd] Board Composition
>>>>> To: Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com>
>>>>> Cc: rpd List <rpd at afrinic.net>
>>>>> 
>>>>> +1 Delong...
>>>>> 
>>>>> On 3 May 2016 18:50, "Owen DeLong" <owen at delong.com> wrote:
>>>>> It has come to my attention that Mike Silber is running for the
>>>>> independent seat that is opening on the AfriNIC board in the next
>>>>> election.
>>>>> 
>>>>> While I consider Mike to be an excellent candidate and believe he would
>>>>> be a true asset to the AfriNIC board, I have a concern that I must
>>>>> express. This concern has nothing to do with Mike himself, but rather
>>>>> is a concern about organizational structure.
>>>>> 
>>>>> There are only 8 elected members of the AfriNIC board. If Mike Silber
>>>>> is elected, then 25% of the elected board seats would be held by
>>>>> employees of Liquid Telecom. Personally, I do not feel that the board
>>>>> can properly represent the diversity of the AfriNIC community if we
>>>>> allow multiple board seats to be held by representatives from the same
>>>>> organization. While I do not believe that Liquid has any sort of goal
>>>>> of organizational capture or any nefarious intent whatsoever, the
>>>>> reality is that if this is allowed, then it does create the possibility
>>>>> for some other organization to achieve a form of organizational
>>>>> capture.
>>>>> 
>>>>> The board has tremendous authority and responsibility within the
>>>>> AfriNIC organization. As such, I think it is important to consider
>>>>> these generic structural issues seriously, no matter how much we may
>>>>> like and admire the candidates in question.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Again, this is not personal. If it were, I?d be endorsing Mike rather
>>>>> than calling his candidacy into question. However, from a structural
>>>>> perspective, I think it is important that the community at least
>>>>> consider the issue.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Owen
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> RPD mailing list
>>>>> RPD at afrinic.net
>>>>> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd
>>>>> 
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> RPD mailing list
>>>>> RPD at afrinic.net
>>>>> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> afren mailing list
>>>> afren at afnog.org
>>>> https://www.afnog.org/mailman/listinfo/afren
>> 
>> On Jun 6, 2016, at 04:14, sfolayan at skannet.com wrote:
>> 
>> Dear Community,
>> 
>> Our attention has been drawn to some email message containing allegations
>> of racism within the AFRINIC Community and subsequent press coverage.
>> 
>> The AFRINIC Board has zero tolerance for racism and this is clearly
>> reflected in the Code of Conduct available at
>> http://afrinic.net/en/community/code-of-conduct
>> 
>> Community members are asked to be mindful of this, in their interactions
>> either in person or online.
>> 
>> Best regards ...
>> 
>> Sunday Folayan
>> Chair, AFRINIC Board
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Members-Discuss mailing list
>> Members-Discuss at afrinic.net
>> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/members-discuss
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 487 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20160610/46b0ddac/attachment.sig>

From sfolayan at skannet.com  Sun Jun 12 06:19:06 2016
From: sfolayan at skannet.com (Sunday Folayan)
Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2016 07:19:06 +0100
Subject: [Community-Discuss] AIS Botswana Appreciation/Lets work together
Message-ID: <575CFEDA.3070000@skannet.com>

Dear AFRINIC Community,

I am now home, and I believe many of us are back to our respective 
homes. I wish all those who still are on their way, Journey mercies.

Please Join me to thank the people of Botswana and BOCRA, our wonderful 
hosts for their exceptional hospitality. I equally thank the Staff of 
AFRINIC, other AF* organizations, together with the many other 
volunteers who workd hard to give us a great summit. The exceptional 
conduct of our businesses at AIS-16, especially the Annual General 
Meeting of Members (AGMM) was only possible because of your cooperation 
and desire for a stronger AFRINIC.

As Africans, we pride ourselves at instructions (for the young), respect 
(for elders) and compassion (for all). We must now promote those 
virtues, and bring them to bear in our relationships within the AFRINIC 
community.

We all expressed our wishes for a greater and stronger organization in 
diverse ways, but we must come to terms with the fact that Members have 
spoken clearly about what they want in the organization. For those 
elected, It is not the time to gloat but we must respect even the loud 
and pedantic voices and we must not ignore the still and quiet ones, if 
we must succeed. For those not elected, remain committed. The community 
never forgets good members!

As I take my seat among other Directors when another three-year term 
commences on the 1st of July 2016, I shall be guided by the very many 
lessons of Gaborone. I invite you all to find that niche where we each 
can add value, as we focus on the future. Whether it is on-line or 
off-line, let us continue to contribute our quota to enable AFRINIC 
fulfill its mission. We owe it to the coming generation.

Kind Regards ...

Sunday Folayan.
Chair, AFRINIC Board



From mje at posix.co.za  Sun Jun 12 13:40:15 2016
From: mje at posix.co.za (Mark Elkins)
Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2016 15:40:15 +0200
Subject: [Community-Discuss] Constitution - Suggestion for Improvements
Message-ID: <575D663F.6040506@posix.co.za>

To get the ball rolling, I have looked over the "Suggestions for
Improvements" and have provided my thoughts.

Some Background: I was involved before AFRINIC was created. To date
myself, I believe I first met Nii Quaynor at an I-Net conference in San
Jose, 22-25 June 1999, where the issue of an African RIR was discussed.
I have since then supported first the idea of an African RIR and since
its creation, AFRINIC itself. My name can be found in AFRINIC's founding
documents of support. I attended both pre-AFRINIC and some of the early
AFRINIC meetings.
I have physically attended every AFRINIC meeting since Maputo and had
the privilege of being an AFRINIC Board Member for six of those years. I
am or have been on a number of other Boards as well and am a member of
the Institute of Directors in Southern Africa (IoDSA).



1. Lack of clarity on whether or not Associate Members may vote: The
Bylaws section 7.2(i) gives Members (presumably including Associate
Members) the power to elect Directors; 7.4 states that Associate Members
are observers at meetings (which may be interpreted to remove other
rights); 7.5 lists a few rights of Associate Members (which may be
interpreted to remove other rights); 7.6 gives certain rights to
Registered Members and Resource Members (clearly excluding Associate
Members) and these rights include the right to vote on certain special
and ordinary resolutions; 13.7(i) states that Directors are elected
by Resource Members and Registered Members. It is clear that the rights
in 7.6 are not granted to Associate Members, but there is a ?conflict
between 7.2(i) and 13.7(i) on whether or not Associate Members may vote?
in elections for Directors. This conflict must be resolved one way or
another.
We need to decide whether or not Associate Members should vote, and
modify the Bylaws to give effect to that decision.


I was involved in some of the rewriting of the Bylaws although not
listed as one of the "Bylaw review committee". We knew that the process
would be imperfect and that further changes would be necessary to fix
inconsistencies. We also introduced (in an imperfect way) the concept of
an Associate Members. This was both to include "Individual Membership"
(I believe that Alan Barrett, Randy Bush and I were all Individual
Members - and held at that time the right to Vote) and to provide a
place for interested organisations such as Regulators who had no need of
numbering resources. This is why there is a multiple fee structure for
Associated Members. However, there was a fear that this could be used
for "Board Capture" in that it would be possible to quickly create a
number of Associate members in order to Vote in a particular way.
Talking to Adiel, he felt that one way to overcome this problem was to
delay an Associate Members right to exercise their Vote for the first year.
There are (were) currently only three Associate members and I am one.
Out of the large numbers of Resource members - there would be no harm in
allowing Associative members to vote. There may otherwise be no value in
even having this membership category.

I thus propose that the ByLaws be updated/corrected to reflect that
Associate Members can Vote in General Elections, but only after one
calendar year of Membership.

                                -oOo-

2. Interchangeable use of the terms ?Bylaw? or ?Bylaws? and
?Constitution?: The Mauritian Companies Act refers to a ?Constitution?
of a company, but AFRINIC sometimes refers to the document as the Bylaws
and sometimes as the Constitution. Suggest adding a clause 1.3 to ?
clarify that this document may be referred to by the term ?Bylaws? or
?Constitution?, and is intended to serve the function of the
Constitution in terms of the Companies Act of Mauritius?.

I agree with Alan's suggestion that both terms are currently (possibly
incorrectly)  used interchangeably and a clause could be added to
reflect this.

My thoughts:
    Constitution ==> "Big" vague stuff
    Bylaws ==> "Detailed" day-to-day stuff

Of course, the opening words in the Bylaw booklet includes:

AfriNIC Bylaws

1 INTERPRETATION

1.1  In this Constitution,

-and further below-

Constitution: This constitution, as amended from time to time in
accordance with the Act.


I'm still a bit confused between the two - which seem to be one at AFRINIC.

                                -oOo-

3. Clarification that all Registered Members in terms of Bylaws 6.3, and
only such Registered Members, must be registered in terms of the
Companies Act as members of the company.

I Agree.

                                -oOo-

4. Term limits: Consider adding a term limit for elected Board members.
We need to decide whether or not to add a limit, and what the limit
should be.

We used to have a Term Limit (of two years). It was removed in the last
re-write. This allows the Board to potentially have and keep
institutional memory (help not make the same mistakes again). This seems
to work just fine in at least the RIPE region - which we in our systems
probably resemble the most.
Membership can I believe adequately decide when a person should no
longer stand by not voting for them any more.

                                -oOo-

5. Independence of Directors: Consider adding a limit to the number of
Directors who may work for the same organisation. We need to decide
whether or not to add a limit, and what the limit should be.

I believe we should add such a limit and I would propose that the limit
should be Two (2). Two directors out of nine can not surly be considered
as capture.

                                -oOo-

6. Regional representation: Consider modifying 13.5 to state that
Directors must act in the interests of AFRINIC as a whole?, regardless
of their regional affiliation.

Neither should they represent their Company or any other institution or
organisation.
I agree.

                                -oOo-

7. Conflict of interest: Consider adding a requirement for Directors to
disclose any conflict of interest, and to ?recluse themselves from
voting on any matter where they have a conflict of interest.

This is Standard Practise in many Boards, we should follow the same route.
I agree.

                                -oOo-

8. Separation of powers: Consider adding a requirement that ?
no more than one key position? (Board Chair, Vice Chair, Chief Executive
Officer, Chief Financial Officer) may be occupied by the same person.

I'm having difficulty seeing where this would occur in the above example
but the concept makes for good governance practise.
I agree.

                                -oOo-

9. Replacement of Directors: The bylaws sections 13.1, 13.8, 13.10, and
13.14 give different methods of replacing Directors for different
reasons. ?Consider harmonising this?.

I agree.

                                -oOo-

10. Board approval of nominations: The Board can approve or disapprove
nominations for Board elections in terms of the Bylaws section 12.14(i).
Consider requiring a super-majority? of two thirds of the Board to
disapprove any nomination.

I agree.

                                -oOo-

11. Modification to the Bylaws or Constitution: The Bylaws say how the
AFRINIC Members may change the Bylaws, but the Companies Act say that
the Registered Members can change it. Consider requiring that the
Bylaws/Constitution may be changed only after a Special Resolution by
all AFRINIC Members in terms of Bylaws 7.6(vi)? , so that the Registered
Members (the same nine people as the Directors) cannot act without
broader approval.

I agree

                                -oOo-

12. Policies introduced by the Board: In terms of the Bylaws section
11.4, the Board may adopt policy changes that did not go through the
normal PDP. ?Consider giving the community the right to reject such
policy changes introduced by the Board.

I agree

-- 
Mark James ELKINS  -  Posix Systems - (South) Africa
mje at posix.co.za       Tel: +27.128070590  Cell: +27.826010496
For fast, reliable, low cost Internet in ZA: https://ftth.posix.co.za

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 4230 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20160612/67cfb04a/attachment.p7s>

From ali at hussein.me.ke  Mon Jun 13 01:38:35 2016
From: ali at hussein.me.ke (Ali Hussein)
Date: Mon, 13 Jun 2016 04:38:35 +0300
Subject: [Community-Discuss] Constitution - Suggestion for Improvements
In-Reply-To: <575D663F.6040506@posix.co.za>
References: <575D663F.6040506@posix.co.za>
Message-ID: <5E2A41E6-B338-4C35-9EFC-939BB61464CC@hussein.me.ke>

Mark

Thank you for this and the backgrounder.

I concur with your thoughts and general direction of your post to improve governance and remove certain ambiguities.

The one thing I'd add is to specifically and without any ambiguity refer certain matters to  the AGM or Special AGM.

Ali Hussein
Principal
Hussein & Associates
+254 0713 601113 

Twitter: @AliHKassim
Skype: abu-jomo
LinkedIn: http://ke.linkedin.com/in/alihkassim


"Discovery consists in seeing what everyone else has seen and thinking what no one else has thought".  ~ Albert Szent-Gy?rgyi

Sent from my iPad

> On 12 Jun 2016, at 4:40 PM, Mark Elkins <mje at posix.co.za> wrote:
> 
> To get the ball rolling, I have looked over the "Suggestions for
> Improvements" and have provided my thoughts.
> 
> Some Background: I was involved before AFRINIC was created. To date
> myself, I believe I first met Nii Quaynor at an I-Net conference in San
> Jose, 22-25 June 1999, where the issue of an African RIR was discussed.
> I have since then supported first the idea of an African RIR and since
> its creation, AFRINIC itself. My name can be found in AFRINIC's founding
> documents of support. I attended both pre-AFRINIC and some of the early
> AFRINIC meetings.
> I have physically attended every AFRINIC meeting since Maputo and had
> the privilege of being an AFRINIC Board Member for six of those years. I
> am or have been on a number of other Boards as well and am a member of
> the Institute of Directors in Southern Africa (IoDSA).
> 
> 
> 
> 1. Lack of clarity on whether or not Associate Members may vote: The
> Bylaws section 7.2(i) gives Members (presumably including Associate
> Members) the power to elect Directors; 7.4 states that Associate Members
> are observers at meetings (which may be interpreted to remove other
> rights); 7.5 lists a few rights of Associate Members (which may be
> interpreted to remove other rights); 7.6 gives certain rights to
> Registered Members and Resource Members (clearly excluding Associate
> Members) and these rights include the right to vote on certain special
> and ordinary resolutions; 13.7(i) states that Directors are elected
> by Resource Members and Registered Members. It is clear that the rights
> in 7.6 are not granted to Associate Members, but there is a ?conflict
> between 7.2(i) and 13.7(i) on whether or not Associate Members may vote?
> in elections for Directors. This conflict must be resolved one way or
> another.
> We need to decide whether or not Associate Members should vote, and
> modify the Bylaws to give effect to that decision.
> 
> 
> I was involved in some of the rewriting of the Bylaws although not
> listed as one of the "Bylaw review committee". We knew that the process
> would be imperfect and that further changes would be necessary to fix
> inconsistencies. We also introduced (in an imperfect way) the concept of
> an Associate Members. This was both to include "Individual Membership"
> (I believe that Alan Barrett, Randy Bush and I were all Individual
> Members - and held at that time the right to Vote) and to provide a
> place for interested organisations such as Regulators who had no need of
> numbering resources. This is why there is a multiple fee structure for
> Associated Members. However, there was a fear that this could be used
> for "Board Capture" in that it would be possible to quickly create a
> number of Associate members in order to Vote in a particular way.
> Talking to Adiel, he felt that one way to overcome this problem was to
> delay an Associate Members right to exercise their Vote for the first year.
> There are (were) currently only three Associate members and I am one.
> Out of the large numbers of Resource members - there would be no harm in
> allowing Associative members to vote. There may otherwise be no value in
> even having this membership category.
> 
> I thus propose that the ByLaws be updated/corrected to reflect that
> Associate Members can Vote in General Elections, but only after one
> calendar year of Membership.
> 
>                                -oOo-
> 
> 2. Interchangeable use of the terms ?Bylaw? or ?Bylaws? and
> ?Constitution?: The Mauritian Companies Act refers to a ?Constitution?
> of a company, but AFRINIC sometimes refers to the document as the Bylaws
> and sometimes as the Constitution. Suggest adding a clause 1.3 to ?
> clarify that this document may be referred to by the term ?Bylaws? or
> ?Constitution?, and is intended to serve the function of the
> Constitution in terms of the Companies Act of Mauritius?.
> 
> I agree with Alan's suggestion that both terms are currently (possibly
> incorrectly)  used interchangeably and a clause could be added to
> reflect this.
> 
> My thoughts:
>    Constitution ==> "Big" vague stuff
>    Bylaws ==> "Detailed" day-to-day stuff
> 
> Of course, the opening words in the Bylaw booklet includes:
> 
> AfriNIC Bylaws
> 
> 1 INTERPRETATION
> 
> 1.1  In this Constitution,
> 
> -and further below-
> 
> Constitution: This constitution, as amended from time to time in
> accordance with the Act.
> 
> 
> I'm still a bit confused between the two - which seem to be one at AFRINIC.
> 
>                                -oOo-
> 
> 3. Clarification that all Registered Members in terms of Bylaws 6.3, and
> only such Registered Members, must be registered in terms of the
> Companies Act as members of the company.
> 
> I Agree.
> 
>                                -oOo-
> 
> 4. Term limits: Consider adding a term limit for elected Board members.
> We need to decide whether or not to add a limit, and what the limit
> should be.
> 
> We used to have a Term Limit (of two years). It was removed in the last
> re-write. This allows the Board to potentially have and keep
> institutional memory (help not make the same mistakes again). This seems
> to work just fine in at least the RIPE region - which we in our systems
> probably resemble the most.
> Membership can I believe adequately decide when a person should no
> longer stand by not voting for them any more.
> 
>                                -oOo-
> 
> 5. Independence of Directors: Consider adding a limit to the number of
> Directors who may work for the same organisation. We need to decide
> whether or not to add a limit, and what the limit should be.
> 
> I believe we should add such a limit and I would propose that the limit
> should be Two (2). Two directors out of nine can not surly be considered
> as capture.
> 
>                                -oOo-
> 
> 6. Regional representation: Consider modifying 13.5 to state that
> Directors must act in the interests of AFRINIC as a whole?, regardless
> of their regional affiliation.
> 
> Neither should they represent their Company or any other institution or
> organisation.
> I agree.
> 
>                                -oOo-
> 
> 7. Conflict of interest: Consider adding a requirement for Directors to
> disclose any conflict of interest, and to ?recluse themselves from
> voting on any matter where they have a conflict of interest.
> 
> This is Standard Practise in many Boards, we should follow the same route.
> I agree.
> 
>                                -oOo-
> 
> 8. Separation of powers: Consider adding a requirement that ?
> no more than one key position? (Board Chair, Vice Chair, Chief Executive
> Officer, Chief Financial Officer) may be occupied by the same person.
> 
> I'm having difficulty seeing where this would occur in the above example
> but the concept makes for good governance practise.
> I agree.
> 
>                                -oOo-
> 
> 9. Replacement of Directors: The bylaws sections 13.1, 13.8, 13.10, and
> 13.14 give different methods of replacing Directors for different
> reasons. ?Consider harmonising this?.
> 
> I agree.
> 
>                                -oOo-
> 
> 10. Board approval of nominations: The Board can approve or disapprove
> nominations for Board elections in terms of the Bylaws section 12.14(i).
> Consider requiring a super-majority? of two thirds of the Board to
> disapprove any nomination.
> 
> I agree.
> 
>                                -oOo-
> 
> 11. Modification to the Bylaws or Constitution: The Bylaws say how the
> AFRINIC Members may change the Bylaws, but the Companies Act say that
> the Registered Members can change it. Consider requiring that the
> Bylaws/Constitution may be changed only after a Special Resolution by
> all AFRINIC Members in terms of Bylaws 7.6(vi)? , so that the Registered
> Members (the same nine people as the Directors) cannot act without
> broader approval.
> 
> I agree
> 
>                                -oOo-
> 
> 12. Policies introduced by the Board: In terms of the Bylaws section
> 11.4, the Board may adopt policy changes that did not go through the
> normal PDP. ?Consider giving the community the right to reject such
> policy changes introduced by the Board.
> 
> I agree
> 
> -- 
> Mark James ELKINS  -  Posix Systems - (South) Africa
> mje at posix.co.za       Tel: +27.128070590  Cell: +27.826010496
> For fast, reliable, low cost Internet in ZA: https://ftth.posix.co.za
> 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20160613/a01d3fcf/attachment.html>

From badru.ntege at nftconsult.com  Mon Jun 13 02:31:59 2016
From: badru.ntege at nftconsult.com (Badru Ntege)
Date: Mon, 13 Jun 2016 02:31:59 +0000
Subject: [Community-Discuss] Constitution - Suggestion for Improvements
In-Reply-To: <5E2A41E6-B338-4C35-9EFC-939BB61464CC@hussein.me.ke>
References: <575D663F.6040506@posix.co.za>,
 <5E2A41E6-B338-4C35-9EFC-939BB61464CC@hussein.me.ke>
Message-ID: <4126EDDF-DAE9-4DC6-9FD2-47CA1B91339A@nftconsult.com>


Thanks Mark

I like all your points and I think it's a good list of issues to start with.  Without wanting to straight jacket the board I also think we need to look into the extent of executional rights of the board and also reporting timelines.

Your institutional memory is also very accurate on the issues of associate members which we need to make a final decision around as it has been pending for a long time

Regards

Badru Ntege
CEO
NFT Consult Ltd
Www.Nftconsult.com<http://Www.Nftconsult.com>

?Vision without execution is hallucination.?
? Thomas A. Edison






On 13 Jun 2016, at 4:43 am, Ali Hussein <ali at hussein.me.ke<mailto:ali at hussein.me.ke>> wrote:

Mark

Thank you for this and the backgrounder.

I concur with your thoughts and general direction of your post to improve governance and remove certain ambiguities.

The one thing I'd add is to specifically and without any ambiguity refer certain matters to  the AGM or Special AGM.

Ali Hussein
Principal
Hussein & Associates
+254 0713 601113


Twitter: @AliHKassim

Skype: abu-jomo

LinkedIn: http://ke.linkedin.com/in/alihkassim


"Discovery consists in seeing what everyone else has seen and thinking what no one else has thought".  ~ Albert Szent-Gy?rgyi

Sent from my iPad

On 12 Jun 2016, at 4:40 PM, Mark Elkins <mje at posix.co.za<mailto:mje at posix.co.za>> wrote:

To get the ball rolling, I have looked over the "Suggestions for
Improvements" and have provided my thoughts.

Some Background: I was involved before AFRINIC was created. To date
myself, I believe I first met Nii Quaynor at an I-Net conference in San
Jose, 22-25 June 1999, where the issue of an African RIR was discussed.
I have since then supported first the idea of an African RIR and since
its creation, AFRINIC itself. My name can be found in AFRINIC's founding
documents of support. I attended both pre-AFRINIC and some of the early
AFRINIC meetings.
I have physically attended every AFRINIC meeting since Maputo and had
the privilege of being an AFRINIC Board Member for six of those years. I
am or have been on a number of other Boards as well and am a member of
the Institute of Directors in Southern Africa (IoDSA).



1. Lack of clarity on whether or not Associate Members may vote: The
Bylaws section 7.2(i) gives Members (presumably including Associate
Members) the power to elect Directors; 7.4 states that Associate Members
are observers at meetings (which may be interpreted to remove other
rights); 7.5 lists a few rights of Associate Members (which may be
interpreted to remove other rights); 7.6 gives certain rights to
Registered Members and Resource Members (clearly excluding Associate
Members) and these rights include the right to vote on certain special
and ordinary resolutions; 13.7(i) states that Directors are elected
by Resource Members and Registered Members. It is clear that the rights
in 7.6 are not granted to Associate Members, but there is a ?conflict
between 7.2(i) and 13.7(i) on whether or not Associate Members may vote?
in elections for Directors. This conflict must be resolved one way or
another.
We need to decide whether or not Associate Members should vote, and
modify the Bylaws to give effect to that decision.


I was involved in some of the rewriting of the Bylaws although not
listed as one of the "Bylaw review committee". We knew that the process
would be imperfect and that further changes would be necessary to fix
inconsistencies. We also introduced (in an imperfect way) the concept of
an Associate Members. This was both to include "Individual Membership"
(I believe that Alan Barrett, Randy Bush and I were all Individual
Members - and held at that time the right to Vote) and to provide a
place for interested organisations such as Regulators who had no need of
numbering resources. This is why there is a multiple fee structure for
Associated Members. However, there was a fear that this could be used
for "Board Capture" in that it would be possible to quickly create a
number of Associate members in order to Vote in a particular way.
Talking to Adiel, he felt that one way to overcome this problem was to
delay an Associate Members right to exercise their Vote for the first year.
There are (were) currently only three Associate members and I am one.
Out of the large numbers of Resource members - there would be no harm in
allowing Associative members to vote. There may otherwise be no value in
even having this membership category.

I thus propose that the ByLaws be updated/corrected to reflect that
Associate Members can Vote in General Elections, but only after one
calendar year of Membership.

                               -oOo-

2. Interchangeable use of the terms ?Bylaw? or ?Bylaws? and
?Constitution?: The Mauritian Companies Act refers to a ?Constitution?
of a company, but AFRINIC sometimes refers to the document as the Bylaws
and sometimes as the Constitution. Suggest adding a clause 1.3 to ?
clarify that this document may be referred to by the term ?Bylaws? or
?Constitution?, and is intended to serve the function of the
Constitution in terms of the Companies Act of Mauritius?.

I agree with Alan's suggestion that both terms are currently (possibly
incorrectly)  used interchangeably and a clause could be added to
reflect this.

My thoughts:
   Constitution ==> "Big" vague stuff
   Bylaws ==> "Detailed" day-to-day stuff

Of course, the opening words in the Bylaw booklet includes:

AfriNIC Bylaws

1 INTERPRETATION

1.1  In this Constitution,

-and further below-

Constitution: This constitution, as amended from time to time in
accordance with the Act.


I'm still a bit confused between the two - which seem to be one at AFRINIC.

                               -oOo-

3. Clarification that all Registered Members in terms of Bylaws 6.3, and
only such Registered Members, must be registered in terms of the
Companies Act as members of the company.

I Agree.

                               -oOo-

4. Term limits: Consider adding a term limit for elected Board members.
We need to decide whether or not to add a limit, and what the limit
should be.

We used to have a Term Limit (of two years). It was removed in the last
re-write. This allows the Board to potentially have and keep
institutional memory (help not make the same mistakes again). This seems
to work just fine in at least the RIPE region - which we in our systems
probably resemble the most.
Membership can I believe adequately decide when a person should no
longer stand by not voting for them any more.

                               -oOo-

5. Independence of Directors: Consider adding a limit to the number of
Directors who may work for the same organisation. We need to decide
whether or not to add a limit, and what the limit should be.

I believe we should add such a limit and I would propose that the limit
should be Two (2). Two directors out of nine can not surly be considered
as capture.

                               -oOo-

6. Regional representation: Consider modifying 13.5 to state that
Directors must act in the interests of AFRINIC as a whole?, regardless
of their regional affiliation.

Neither should they represent their Company or any other institution or
organisation.
I agree.

                               -oOo-

7. Conflict of interest: Consider adding a requirement for Directors to
disclose any conflict of interest, and to ?recluse themselves from
voting on any matter where they have a conflict of interest.

This is Standard Practise in many Boards, we should follow the same route.
I agree.

                               -oOo-

8. Separation of powers: Consider adding a requirement that ?
no more than one key position? (Board Chair, Vice Chair, Chief Executive
Officer, Chief Financial Officer) may be occupied by the same person.

I'm having difficulty seeing where this would occur in the above example
but the concept makes for good governance practise.
I agree.

                               -oOo-

9. Replacement of Directors: The bylaws sections 13.1, 13.8, 13.10, and
13.14 give different methods of replacing Directors for different
reasons. ?Consider harmonising this?.

I agree.

                               -oOo-

10. Board approval of nominations: The Board can approve or disapprove
nominations for Board elections in terms of the Bylaws section 12.14(i).
Consider requiring a super-majority? of two thirds of the Board to
disapprove any nomination.

I agree.

                               -oOo-

11. Modification to the Bylaws or Constitution: The Bylaws say how the
AFRINIC Members may change the Bylaws, but the Companies Act say that
the Registered Members can change it. Consider requiring that the
Bylaws/Constitution may be changed only after a Special Resolution by
all AFRINIC Members in terms of Bylaws 7.6(vi)? , so that the Registered
Members (the same nine people as the Directors) cannot act without
broader approval.

I agree

                               -oOo-

12. Policies introduced by the Board: In terms of the Bylaws section
11.4, the Board may adopt policy changes that did not go through the
normal PDP. ?Consider giving the community the right to reject such
policy changes introduced by the Board.

I agree

--
Mark James ELKINS  -  Posix Systems - (South) Africa
mje at posix.co.za<mailto:mje at posix.co.za>       Tel: +27.128070590  Cell: +27.826010496
For fast, reliable, low cost Internet in ZA: https://ftth.posix.co.za

_______________________________________________
Community-Discuss mailing list
Community-Discuss at afrinic.net<mailto:Community-Discuss at afrinic.net>
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20160613/c16b596d/attachment.html>

From kodion at gmail.com  Wed Jun  8 21:30:57 2016
From: kodion at gmail.com (Omo Oaiya)
Date: Wed, 8 Jun 2016 23:30:57 +0200
Subject: [Community-Discuss] [members-discuss] AFRINIC Board Statement,
 5th June 2016
In-Reply-To: <m2lh2fxv61.wl%randy@psg.com>
References: <3b1f651ae97291d974dfaf65df04ae80@skannet.com>
 <C568837C-3AB6-48B2-8E66-E12D717C705D@akplogan.com>
 <m2lh2fxv61.wl%randy@psg.com>
Message-ID: <CAG1eoi3+2OGqxbrqqYLjj0xGMTVZaVFCt99QDfzukKDJ5sqkrQ@mail.gmail.com>

And to you. Please keep quiet and go get a life
On 8 Jun 2016 10:51 p.m., "Randy Bush" <randy at psg.com> wrote:

> that message thread is appalling.
>
> mike silber took the high road.  that should be an example to us all.
>
> randy
>
> _______________________________________________
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20160608/4a6d7972/attachment.html>

From wayne at domains.co.za  Thu Jun  9 09:36:00 2016
From: wayne at domains.co.za (Wayne Diamond)
Date: Thu, 9 Jun 2016 09:36:00 +0000
Subject: [Community-Discuss] [members-discuss] AFRINIC Board Statement,
	5th June 2016
In-Reply-To: <00e101d1c21e$bf59dd00$3e0d9700$@enetworks.co.za>
References: <3b1f651ae97291d974dfaf65df04ae80@skannet.com>
 <C568837C-3AB6-48B2-8E66-E12D717C705D@akplogan.com>
 <00e101d1c21e$bf59dd00$3e0d9700$@enetworks.co.za>
Message-ID: <6ebd4ac1db954812ac4b832cc2e47360@owa.diamatrix.co.za>

Hi All

Over the last year or so these email threads have started degenerating into attacks on people, attacks on companies and now things have degenerated so far as to having racist accusations. I must say, personally, I am appalled by this as it seems like the mission or intention of the Board has been totally lost.

I for one am very disappointed that Mike Silber has withdrawn his nomination, a person with greater insight, integrity and knowledge is hard to come by and ironically all these great traits seem to be missing at the moment.

I believe that the CEO and the Board of any company is supposed to lead by EXAMPLE, to show the direction of the company and to lead its employees. How can the full time employees of AfriNic actually want to work for AfriNic when there is such dissention and fighting from the Board level. Accusations, innuendos and downright stupid comments have been written.

* I personally don?t care from which countries in Africa the Board is comprised of and if there are slightly more members from certain regions than others. 
* I don?t care what race or sex these members

* I do care that members do the job that they have been appointed to do.
* I do care that the Board shows leadership and guidance.
* I do care that the Board behaves in an ethical and appropriate manner.
* I do care that the BOARD take responsibility for what they do and are held responsible for their actions, or lack thereof.

In my mind it's quite simple:
* If you don?t have anything positive to say on this thread, DON?T say anything.
* If you cannot contribute to the vision of AfriNic, then rather maintain your silence. 
* If you are not going to act ?without favour? and in the best interests of AfriNic, then please withdraw from the Board.
* If you cannot act in the best interests of AfriNic and not for personal gain of any form, then again, please withdraw your Board membership.

With all that has happened over the last 2 years with AfriNic and the Board, what we need right now are leaders that will stand out, lead by example, show direction and take responsibility for their actions and the actions and / or lack thereof of AfriNic too. 

What we need right now is the community to hold the new leadership to task, especially should they fail to fulfil their mandate and what they have been appointed to do.

To the new Board, if you feel you cannot perform or act in this manner and be judged based on your work, then step down now!

Technology and the internet is leading the world, yet we are acting and behaving like a 3rd world country and going nowehere, It is now time for everyone to move past these issues and move forward into what is best for AfriNic and its community. 

Regards,

Wayne Diamond

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Telephone: 011?640 9700 / 0861 100?698
Fax # 086-686-2445
www.domains.co.za

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


-----Original Message-----
From: Saul Stein [mailto:saul at enetworks.co.za] 
Sent: Thursday, June 9, 2016 9:16 AM
To: General Discussions of AFRINIC <community-discuss at afrinic.net>; Sunday Folayan <sfolayan at skannet.com.ng>
Cc: AfriNIC Discuss <members-discuss at afrinic.net>
Subject: Re: [members-discuss] [Community-Discuss] AFRINIC Board Statement, 5th June 2016

Adiel,

I live in South Africa, where were are well aware of racism and racist issues. Sadly, there have been a few instances such as your email lately which have resulted the offenders being fired from their jobs (even when comments were in their personal capacity) and just generally hauled over the coals by the public in general and would not be able to participate in organisations moving forward.

What concerns me about your apology is that you are apologising for sending the email to the list and not for your racist thoughts. If you have an issue about demographics on the board, the minority (by far) are white, only two, the CEO and one community elected member (not white elected or black elected, community elected).  What about focusing our energies on positive things gender equality?

You're entitled to have your own personal concerns about the board, their actions, perceived issues and your stated incorrect facts for which people have been cleared. But to make this a race issue, public list or private thoughts is not acceptable!

Saul

-----Original Message-----
From: Adiel Akplogan (akp.com) [mailto:adiel at akplogan.com]
Sent: 08 June 2016 07:05 PM
To: Sunday Folayan <sfolayan at skannet.com.ng>
Cc: community-discuss at afrinic.net; AfriNic Discuss <members-discuss at afrinic.net>
Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] [members-discuss] AFRINIC Board Statement, 5th June 2016

Dear all,

For those of you who are wondering, the e-mail mentioned in this statement was a personal e-mail from me. To close the loop here, I think it is in order for me to also share with you the apologies note (below) I have sent to the AFREN mailing list were my original e-mail was accidentally posted. I?m deeply sorry for the trouble that this may have caused.

Thank you.

Adiel Akplogan (Associate member in my personal capacity).

>> Begin forwarded message:
>>
>> From: "Adiel Akplogan (akp.com)" <adiel at akplogan.com>
>> Subject: Apologies - [Was: Re: [afren] [rpd] Board Composition]
>> Date: June 5, 2016 at 22:50:15 GMT-4
>> To: AFREN <afren at afnog.org>
>>
>> Dear listers and friends,
>>
>> I?m sorry that my private e-mail below ends up accidentally on this 
>> mailing list. I would like to apologize to my many friends and 
>> colleagues globally who have supported and worked with me over the 
>> past 20+ years and who may have felt targeted by its content. I truly 
>> value your support and friendship irrelevant of your origin and I 
>> hope you will not see in this private message anything malicious. 
>> Contrary to what was reported I did not accused Mike Silber 
>> particularly in my e-mail. He is someone I know well and hold a lot of respect for.
>>
>> Even though I do not deny my frustration, I should have exercised a 
>> bit more control and not allow it to burst publicly.
>>
>> I hope that all of you who really know me and have worked with me 
>> know that there was no ill intention behind that mail.
>>
>> Kind regards.
>>
>> - a.
>>> On May 3, 2016, at 13:16, Adiel Akplogan (akp.com) 
>>> <adiel at akplogan.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Boubakar and all, this has always been serious and the plan has 
>>> started very long ago and has deeper ramifications than just what we 
>>> are seeing here. It is in fact not about a particular company trying 
>>> to take over but a clear racial fight for the white to take over. 
>>> They have always claim that we Black cannot run an organization like 
>>> AFRINIC (too complex for our small bird brain ? that was said on my 
>>> face in 2005 by some of the people pulling the strings behind ? they 
>>> are far beyond just this guy undercover of ?friendship"). Some of us 
>>> have witnessed that fight at the early days of AFRINIC. I have 
>>> leaved through that during my
>>> 10 years as CEO both in Africa and globally. But the reality is that 
>>> our own people let this kind of thing perpetuate ? sadly though no 
>>> one else will fight that fight for us.
>>>
>>> This is the same guy that was accused by Board members last year of 
>>> manipulating his own election (by making companies in ZA pay for 
>>> people to come and vote for him), the same guy who said in writing 
>>> that Gaberonne is across the South African border and he plan to 
>>> bring as many South African as Possible to vote for Mike (he said 
>>> that back in October 2015 ? Some in this group have seen the 
>>> transcript of such conversation). The same guy who vouch to push me 
>>> out of AFRINIC because I prevented him to run his IPv4 consultancy 
>>> firm for Academia (by being strict on community policy
>>> interpretation) ? The same guy is writing to private lists 
>>> campaigning for his friends and making judgement about the community 
>>> capability today ?
>>>
>>> But well the same guys will end up telling us that there is nothing 
>>> dramatic about all of this and that it is normal course of democracy 
>>> and we should move on .. and it will be a new start. We are in this 
>>> since several centuries ? :-/ when will it stop? I had to step back 
>>> because at some point this was about to touch on my life ? when it 
>>> reaches such level and you turn back and you see no one behind you 
>>> (beside the usual suspects? who?s voices are interpreted as
>>> rhetoric) it get very scary. A very sad day for me ?
>>>
>>> - a.
>>>
>>>
>>>> This is a _clear_ plan of a single company trying to hijack 
>>>> AfriNIC. <snip> B.
>>>>
>>>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>>> From: Noah <noah at neo.co.tz>
>>>> Date: Tue, May 3, 2016 at 4:25 PM
>>>> Subject: Re: [rpd] Board Composition
>>>> To: Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com>
>>>> Cc: rpd List <rpd at afrinic.net>
>>>>
>>>> +1 Delong...
>>>>
>>>> On 3 May 2016 18:50, "Owen DeLong" <owen at delong.com> wrote:
>>>> It has come to my attention that Mike Silber is running for the 
>>>> independent seat that is opening on the AfriNIC board in the next 
>>>> election.
>>>>
>>>> While I consider Mike to be an excellent candidate and believe he 
>>>> would be a true asset to the AfriNIC board, I have a concern that I 
>>>> must express. This concern has nothing to do with Mike himself, but 
>>>> rather is a concern about organizational structure.
>>>>
>>>> There are only 8 elected members of the AfriNIC board. If Mike 
>>>> Silber is elected, then 25% of the elected board seats would be 
>>>> held by employees of Liquid Telecom. Personally, I do not feel that 
>>>> the board can properly represent the diversity of the AfriNIC 
>>>> community if we allow multiple board seats to be held by 
>>>> representatives from the same organization. While I do not believe 
>>>> that Liquid has any sort of goal of organizational capture or any 
>>>> nefarious intent whatsoever, the reality is that if this is 
>>>> allowed, then it does create the possibility for some other 
>>>> organization to achieve a form of organizational capture.
>>>>
>>>> The board has tremendous authority and responsibility within the 
>>>> AfriNIC organization. As such, I think it is important to consider 
>>>> these generic structural issues seriously, no matter how much we 
>>>> may like and admire the candidates in question.
>>>>
>>>> Again, this is not personal. If it were, I?d be endorsing Mike 
>>>> rather than calling his candidacy into question. However, from a 
>>>> structural perspective, I think it is important that the community 
>>>> at least consider the issue.
>>>>
>>>> Owen
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> RPD mailing list
>>>> RPD at afrinic.net
>>>> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> RPD mailing list
>>>> RPD at afrinic.net
>>>> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> afren mailing list
>>> afren at afnog.org
>>> https://www.afnog.org/mailman/listinfo/afren
>
> On Jun 6, 2016, at 04:14, sfolayan at skannet.com wrote:
>
> Dear Community,
>
> Our attention has been drawn to some email message containing 
> allegations of racism within the AFRINIC Community and subsequent press coverage.
>
> The AFRINIC Board has zero tolerance for racism and this is clearly 
> reflected in the Code of Conduct available at 
> http://afrinic.net/en/community/code-of-conduct
>
> Community members are asked to be mindful of this, in their 
> interactions either in person or online.
>
> Best regards ...
>
> Sunday Folayan
> Chair, AFRINIC Board
>
> _______________________________________________
> Members-Discuss mailing list
> Members-Discuss at afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/members-discuss


_______________________________________________
Members-Discuss mailing list
Members-Discuss at afrinic.net
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/members-discuss

From karl at mtds.com  Thu Jun  9 11:16:11 2016
From: karl at mtds.com (Karl U Stanzick)
Date: Thu, 9 Jun 2016 11:16:11 +0000 (WET)
Subject: [Community-Discuss] [members-discuss] AFRINIC Board Statement,
 5th June 2016
In-Reply-To: <4468567A-9A36-437B-A294-633029401D66@wacren.net>
References: <3b1f651ae97291d974dfaf65df04ae80@skannet.com>
 <C568837C-3AB6-48B2-8E66-E12D717C705D@akplogan.com>
 <00e101d1c21e$bf59dd00$3e0d9700$@enetworks.co.za>
 <776238872.87133.1465459215382.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com>
 <m2fusmwvon.wl%randy@psg.com>
 <4468567A-9A36-437B-A294-633029401D66@wacren.net>
Message-ID: <alpine.OSX.1.10.1606091110000.33796@karls-macbook-pro-2.local>

Hellooooooooo from Morocco!

>From here you all are looking pretty silly down there.  I don't really 
understand the whole story, just that some people must not be happy with 
the results of the last election and are resorting to the old race card to 
justify their positions.  Not very original or helpful.

In any case, please remember that you are representing Africa and we have 
enough issues to deal with and no need to create more.

Get back to work on the African Internet.

Ramadan Moubarak!
-- 
|-Karl U. Stanzick
|-Managing Director, MTDS
|-in morocco 080200MTDS
|-direct +212(0)537278811
|-mobile +212(0)661152688
|-14, rue 16 novembre
|-Rabat 10080 Kingdom of Morocco



On Thu, 9 Jun 2016, Omo Oaiya wrote:

>
>> On 9 Jun 2016, at 11:36, Randy Bush <randy at psg.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I've read the mails of Saul Stein & Randy Bush.  Their statements were
>>> still carried on  an ambience that no longer fits the code of
>>> conduct quoted by the Chair
>>
>> i suggest you cite the mails you believe were in violation.  you mean
>> messages such as the following?
>
>
> Perhaps, but Janvier does not need to cite.   My out of character outburst is a reaction to your sarcastic and often incitant comments on the list.
>
> The Chair has assured me that you have also been reprimanded in his e-mail to me this morning so I am happy that your several transgressions have also been addressed.
>
>
>
>>
>> From: Randy Bush <randy at psg.com>
>> Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] [members-discuss] AFRINIC Board Statement, 5th June 2016
>> To: Omo Oaiya <Omo.Oaiya at wacren.net>
>> Cc: General Discussions of AFRINIC <community-discuss at afrinic.net>,
>>    AfriNIC Discuss <members-discuss at afrinic.net>
>> Date: Wed, 08 Jun 2016 16:12:53 -0700
>>
>>> And to you. Please keep quiet and go get a life
>>
>> nice.  i am impressed.
>>
>> randy, who is sure he left a life around here somewhere
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Community-Discuss mailing list
>> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net
>> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>
>
> ?
> Omo Oaiya
> CTO/Directeur Technique, WACREN
> Mobile: +234 806 4522778, +221 784 305 224
> Skype: kodion
> http://www.wacren.net
>
>
>
>

From afabbie at hotmail.com  Mon Jun 13 15:14:20 2016
From: afabbie at hotmail.com (Fabian Jr)
Date: Mon, 13 Jun 2016 18:14:20 +0300
Subject: [Community-Discuss] Accountability Assessment
In-Reply-To: <DUB121-W37EBAB8DBA5F4EB752B24FA5530@phx.gbl>
References: <C4308D67-D1F5-48DA-BA19-EC619A0A8356@afrinic.net>,
 <DUB121-W37EBAB8DBA5F4EB752B24FA5530@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <DUB121-W37880ECC3FAAA12B6AED36A5530@phx.gbl>







Dear Alan,

thanks for bringing  up this matter (points).

my opinions:

on Item 1: 

i ask a question If the associate member is paying any annual fee then i would recommend to be allowed to vote 

If one does not pay any fee i would recommend not to be allowed to vote

On Item 2:  i say YES to the proposed phrase

On item 4:  i support the term limit and i would propose to be maximum two Terms

On item 5: i support the LIMIT and i would say maximum ONLY ONE 

On Item 6: i say YES 

On item 7: i say Sure! 

On item 8: for Sure!

On item 9: i would say, Any Board Vacancy shall be filled through a normal procedure (nomination and then voting at MGM). Where the Vacancy happens more than 3 months ahead of the coming MGM then SMGM shall be called and i would recommend this meeting to be carried out through internet technology interfaces such as Teleconferences, webEx, Video Conference, Zoom and other such technology as it may be seen appropriate. Voting at the same time to be conducted electronically.

On Item 10:  i would ask a Question here.... why should the Board want to disapprove the nomination(s) ?  i think the Board shall not have mandate to approve any nomination(s) that does not fulfill the set aside requirement(s). i think the BOARD shall only approve the nomination(s) which have fulfilled the requirements and automatically disapprove those which have not met the requirements.

On Item 11: I say YES 

on Item 12:  I would say: Board is not allowed to aprove any Policy or Policy changes that have not gone through PDP.

regards,





 

 

Arbogast Fabian,

cell:+255-78-447-8387


From: alan.barrett at afrinic.net
Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2016 12:18:00 +0200
To: announce at afrinic.net
Subject: [AFRINIC-Announce] Accountability Assessment

Arising from a review of AFRINIC?s Bylaws and other documents, several potential areas for improvement were identified.
 
The attached document was presented to the AFRINIC Membership and the community during the AGMM in Gaborone, Botswana, on 9 June 2016.
 
I invite the community and the membership to comment on these suggestions, or any other areas where the Bylaws could be improved.  Comments should be sent to the community-discuss at afrinic.net mailing list.  In due course, Bylaws changes will be drafted to implement the suggestions (and additional points that might be identified).
 
Alan Barrett
CEO, AFRINIC
 


_______________________________________________
Announce mailing list
Announce at afrinic.net
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/announce 		 	   		   		 	   		  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20160613/b6dd1321/attachment.html>

From afabbie at hotmail.com  Mon Jun 13 15:16:40 2016
From: afabbie at hotmail.com (Fabian Jr)
Date: Mon, 13 Jun 2016 18:16:40 +0300
Subject: [Community-Discuss] AIS Botswana Appreciation/Lets work together
In-Reply-To: <575CFEDA.3070000@skannet.com>
References: <575CFEDA.3070000@skannet.com>
Message-ID: <DUB121-W524D4F3276F01889B081E1A5530@phx.gbl>

in deed Sunday and Team....

Dumela ra/ma ! 

congratulations and many thanks to BW teams and AFRINIC teams,

keep it up!

 

 

Arbogast Fabian,

cell:+255-78-447-8387


> To: community-discuss at afrinic.net
> From: sfolayan at skannet.com
> Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2016 07:19:06 +0100
> CC: members-discuss at afrinic.net; ace at afrinic.net
> Subject: [Community-Discuss] AIS Botswana Appreciation/Lets work together
> 
> Dear AFRINIC Community,
> 
> I am now home, and I believe many of us are back to our respective 
> homes. I wish all those who still are on their way, Journey mercies.
> 
> Please Join me to thank the people of Botswana and BOCRA, our wonderful 
> hosts for their exceptional hospitality. I equally thank the Staff of 
> AFRINIC, other AF* organizations, together with the many other 
> volunteers who workd hard to give us a great summit. The exceptional 
> conduct of our businesses at AIS-16, especially the Annual General 
> Meeting of Members (AGMM) was only possible because of your cooperation 
> and desire for a stronger AFRINIC.
> 
> As Africans, we pride ourselves at instructions (for the young), respect 
> (for elders) and compassion (for all). We must now promote those 
> virtues, and bring them to bear in our relationships within the AFRINIC 
> community.
> 
> We all expressed our wishes for a greater and stronger organization in 
> diverse ways, but we must come to terms with the fact that Members have 
> spoken clearly about what they want in the organization. For those 
> elected, It is not the time to gloat but we must respect even the loud 
> and pedantic voices and we must not ignore the still and quiet ones, if 
> we must succeed. For those not elected, remain committed. The community 
> never forgets good members!
> 
> As I take my seat among other Directors when another three-year term 
> commences on the 1st of July 2016, I shall be guided by the very many 
> lessons of Gaborone. I invite you all to find that niche where we each 
> can add value, as we focus on the future. Whether it is on-line or 
> off-line, let us continue to contribute our quota to enable AFRINIC 
> fulfill its mission. We owe it to the coming generation.
> 
> Kind Regards ...
> 
> Sunday Folayan.
> Chair, AFRINIC Board
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
 		 	   		  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20160613/ec8fa69d/attachment.html>

From mje at posix.co.za  Mon Jun 13 18:23:22 2016
From: mje at posix.co.za (Mark Elkins)
Date: Mon, 13 Jun 2016 20:23:22 +0200
Subject: [Community-Discuss] Accountability Assessment
In-Reply-To: <DUB121-W37880ECC3FAAA12B6AED36A5530@phx.gbl>
References: <C4308D67-D1F5-48DA-BA19-EC619A0A8356@afrinic.net>
 <DUB121-W37EBAB8DBA5F4EB752B24FA5530@phx.gbl>
 <DUB121-W37880ECC3FAAA12B6AED36A5530@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <575EFA1A.5090103@posix.co.za>

I have no wish to pick upon anyone but in answering some of the
questions, please consider the background to the question. This is not a
closed book exam but I believe needs thinking and research. For example
- if you do not know whether an Associate Member currently pays anything
- perhaps check first?

On the other hand, some Questions can be answered as one liners.

As an example,
So why would someone say to Question 5 (How many Directors from one
Member Organisation) - simply say "Only one".  The question is also
about "Capture of the Board". Would two out of nine people really
capture the Board?

As a part of NomCom for this year, I was somewhat disappointed by the
lack of volunteers for Board positions. Only two volunteers in both West
and North Africa?
In past years - there was an occasion when only two people volunteered
for just two seats. Whilst one candidate was very good, the second was
eventually dismissed from the Board due to non attendance.

Having a "Only One per Member Organisation" could possibly stifle some
good, competent people from applying. Is that really good for the Board
and the AFRINIC community. Look at other Boards and compare what they do
and how they operate.

In our case, I do agree though that three people from the same Member
Organisation could be too much.

ps - Fabian - thanks for answering though! Sorry to pick on you, many of
your answers do have explanations. This little rant is really for others
who are still silent.

pps, Question 12 is about Emergency Policies that have a time critical
element (need a particular policy *now*, not in 6 months time) - not
normal policies.

On 13/06/2016 17:14, Fabian Jr wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> Dear Alan,
> 
> thanks for bringing  up this matter (points).
> 
> my opinions:
> 
> *on Item 1*:
> 
> i ask a question If the associate member is paying any annual fee then i
> would recommend to be allowed to vote
> 
> If one does not pay any fee i would recommend not to be allowed to vote
> 
> *On Item 2*:  i say YES to the proposed phrase
> 
> *On item 4*:  i support the term limit and i would propose to be maximum
> two Terms
> 
> *On item 5*: i support the LIMIT and i would say maximum ONLY ONE
> 
> *On Item 6*: i say YES
> 
> *On item 7*: i say Sure!
> 
> *On item 8*: for Sure!
> 
> *On item 9*: i would say, Any Board Vacancy shall be filled through a
> normal procedure (nomination and then voting at MGM). Where the Vacancy
> happens more than 3 months ahead of the coming MGM then SMGM shall be
> called and i would recommend this meeting to be carried out through
> internet technology interfaces such as Teleconferences, webEx, Video
> Conference, Zoom and other such technology as it may be seen
> appropriate. Voting at the same time to be conducted electronically.
> 
> *On Item 10*:  i would ask a Question here.... why should the Board want
> to disapprove the nomination(s) ?  i think the Board shall not have
> mandate to approve any nomination(s) that does not fulfill the set aside
> requirement(s). i think the BOARD shall only approve the nomination(s)
> which have fulfilled the requirements and automatically disapprove those
> which have not met the requirements.
> 
> *On Item 11*: I say YES
> 
> *on Item 12*:  I would say: Board is not allowed to aprove any Policy or
> Policy changes that have not gone through PDP.
> 
> regards,
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>  
>  
> /Arbogast Fabian,/
> /cell:+255-78-447-8387/
> 
> 
> From: alan.barrett at afrinic.net
> Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2016 12:18:00 +0200
> To: announce at afrinic.net
> Subject: [AFRINIC-Announce] Accountability Assessment
> 
> Arising from a review of AFRINIC?s Bylaws and other documents, several potential areas for improvement were identified.
>  
> The attached document was presented to the AFRINIC Membership and the community during the AGMM in Gaborone, Botswana, on 9 June 2016.
>  
> I invite the community and the membership to comment on these suggestions, or any other areas where the Bylaws could be improved.  Comments should be sent to the community-discuss at afrinic.net mailing list.  In due course, Bylaws changes will be drafted to implement the suggestions (and additional points that might be identified).
>  
> Alan Barrett
> CEO, AFRINIC
>  
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________ Announce mailing list
> Announce at afrinic.net https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/announce
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
> 

-- 
Mark James ELKINS  -  Posix Systems - (South) Africa
mje at posix.co.za       Tel: +27.128070590  Cell: +27.826010496
For fast, reliable, low cost Internet in ZA: https://ftth.posix.co.za

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 4230 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20160613/5483ef4a/attachment.p7s>

From Omo.Oaiya at wacren.net  Thu Jun 16 14:51:12 2016
From: Omo.Oaiya at wacren.net (Omo Oaiya)
Date: Thu, 16 Jun 2016 16:51:12 +0200
Subject: [Community-Discuss] Accountability assessment
In-Reply-To: <66EA5281-23B7-4E2F-A866-64B2EC401FF8@afrinic.net>
References: <66EA5281-23B7-4E2F-A866-64B2EC401FF8@afrinic.net>
Message-ID: <CAG1eoi1hHKueR1tCCv==dHkF5Lm4mhcUm2zNyAx6_mUzVo2cdA@mail.gmail.com>

On 10 June 2016 at 12:20, Alan Barrett <alan.barrett at afrinic.net> wrote:

>
> I invite the community and the membership to comment on these suggestions,
> or any other areas where the Bylaws could be improved.  Comments should be
> sent to the community-discuss at afrinic.net mailing list.  In due course,
> Bylaws changes will be drafted to implement the suggestions (and additional
> points that might be identified).
>


Thanks Alan.  How long are comments open for?  When will they be
considered?  When can we expect to finalize this ?

-Omo
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20160616/18d91201/attachment.html>

From rbiramah at ipi9.com  Thu Jun 16 15:19:19 2016
From: rbiramah at ipi9.com (Raz BIRAMAH)
Date: Thu, 16 Jun 2016 16:19:19 +0100
Subject: [Community-Discuss] Accountability assessment
In-Reply-To: <CAG1eoi1hHKueR1tCCv==dHkF5Lm4mhcUm2zNyAx6_mUzVo2cdA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <66EA5281-23B7-4E2F-A866-64B2EC401FF8@afrinic.net>
 <CAG1eoi1hHKueR1tCCv==dHkF5Lm4mhcUm2zNyAx6_mUzVo2cdA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AA94AE8C-4377-498E-B9B6-8B550CE1F2EA@ipi9.com>

Thanks Alan,

Also, is it possible to share with us the points you?ve mentioned in your communication during the scheduled ? AFRINIC AGMM - AOB - Accountability Review / Update of Bylaws/Open Mic ? of Thursday June 9th. It can be the start points of the discussions, especially the Update of Bylaws.

Cordialement / Best Regards,
Raz BIRAMAH
PGPKey: 5C82B86D
 <http://twitter.com/ipi9net> <http://twitter.com/ipi9net>
> Le 16 juin 2016 ? 15:51, Omo Oaiya <Omo.Oaiya at wacren.net> a ?crit :
> 
> 
> On 10 June 2016 at 12:20, Alan Barrett <alan.barrett at afrinic.net <mailto:alan.barrett at afrinic.net>> wrote:
> 
> I invite the community and the membership to comment on these suggestions, or any other areas where the Bylaws could be improved.  Comments should be sent to the community-discuss at afrinic.net <mailto:community-discuss at afrinic.net> mailing list.  In due course, Bylaws changes will be drafted to implement the suggestions (and additional points that might be identified).
> 
> 
> Thanks Alan.  How long are comments open for?  When will they be considered?  When can we expect to finalize this ?
> 
> -Omo
>  <http:/>_______________________________________________
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20160616/78543a44/attachment.html>

From noah at neo.co.tz  Thu Jun 16 17:59:18 2016
From: noah at neo.co.tz (Noah)
Date: Thu, 16 Jun 2016 20:59:18 +0300
Subject: [Community-Discuss] Accountability assessment
In-Reply-To: <66EA5281-23B7-4E2F-A866-64B2EC401FF8@afrinic.net>
References: <66EA5281-23B7-4E2F-A866-64B2EC401FF8@afrinic.net>
Message-ID: <CAEqgTWZ3J_Fj4awOcWAd=s8cHbY2VFJfAb4Pexefz85vs0Ln7Q@mail.gmail.com>

On 10 Jun 2016 13:22, "Alan Barrett" <alan.barrett at afrinic.net> wrote:
>
> Arising from a review of AFRINIC?s Bylaws and other documents, several
potential areas for improvement were identified.
>
> The attached document was presented to the AFRINIC Membership and the
community during the AGMM in Gaborone, Botswana, on 9 June 2016.
>
> I invite the community and the membership to comment on these
suggestions, or any other areas where the Bylaws could be improved.
Comments should be sent to the community-discuss at afrinic.net mailing list.
In due course, Bylaws changes will be drafted to implement the suggestions
(and additional points that might be identified).
>

Hi Alan,

I have gone through the document but before I can add my comments, do we
know or have an overall process to follow for the bylaws changes?

Basically, what is the overall process for the bylaws changes?

> Alan Barrett
> CEO, AFRINIC
>

Noah
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20160616/fc40272b/attachment.html>

From Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com  Thu Jun 16 18:17:05 2016
From: Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com (Andrew Alston)
Date: Thu, 16 Jun 2016 18:17:05 +0000
Subject: [Community-Discuss] Accountability assessment
In-Reply-To: <CAEqgTWZ3J_Fj4awOcWAd=s8cHbY2VFJfAb4Pexefz85vs0Ln7Q@mail.gmail.com>
References: <66EA5281-23B7-4E2F-A866-64B2EC401FF8@afrinic.net>
 <CAEqgTWZ3J_Fj4awOcWAd=s8cHbY2VFJfAb4Pexefz85vs0Ln7Q@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <D56D0603-9DA4-4A79-81E1-DD51FE0B0664@liquidtelecom.com>

Writing as myself,

Without answering for Alan, and purely writing this because to my knowledge the only attempt at a bylaw change under the current bylaws was made by myself in Tunis,

My understanding (and using the process that I used last time to propose and attempt bylaw changes, and following the bylaws as they stand)


a.)     Someone proposes a bylaw change (They must be a member, section 12.14.ii)

b.)     It goes out with the notice of meeting at either an SGMM or an AGMM (Section 12.14.iii -> Section 12.14.iv)

c.)     The motion that goes out with the notice of SGMM/AGMM may NOT be changed on the floor ? it may be discussed but it is fixed other than for potential typo corrections etc (This is derived from section 12.14 as well, since you are voting on what has been sent to the members)

d.)     A ballot is called on the floor in the same way an election ballot is called ? members can vote, via the same means as an election ballot (electronically, by proxy, or directly) (Section 12.11 applies, since it is a special resolution as per section 7.6 vi)

e.)     Vote requires a 75% majority to pass or the motion fails (Definition section, 1.1, under the definition of special resolution)

Alan can correct me if I?m wrong on any of these points

Thanks

Andrew



From: Noah <noah at neo.co.tz>
Reply-To: General Discussions of AFRINIC <community-discuss at afrinic.net>
Date: Thursday, 16 June 2016 at 8:59 PM
To: General Discussions of AFRINIC <community-discuss at afrinic.net>
Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] Accountability assessment


On 10 Jun 2016 13:22, "Alan Barrett" <alan.barrett at afrinic.net<mailto:alan.barrett at afrinic.net>> wrote:
>
> Arising from a review of AFRINIC?s Bylaws and other documents, several potential areas for improvement were identified.
>
> The attached document was presented to the AFRINIC Membership and the community during the AGMM in Gaborone, Botswana, on 9 June 2016.
>
> I invite the community and the membership to comment on these suggestions, or any other areas where the Bylaws could be improved.  Comments should be sent to the community-discuss at afrinic.net<mailto:community-discuss at afrinic.net> mailing list.  In due course, Bylaws changes will be drafted to implement the suggestions (and additional points that might be identified).
>

Hi Alan,

I have gone through the document but before I can add my comments, do we know or have an overall process to follow for the bylaws changes?

Basically, what is the overall process for the bylaws changes?

> Alan Barrett
> CEO, AFRINIC
>

Noah
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20160616/1cec3d89/attachment.html>

From noah at neo.co.tz  Thu Jun 16 18:41:13 2016
From: noah at neo.co.tz (Noah)
Date: Thu, 16 Jun 2016 21:41:13 +0300
Subject: [Community-Discuss] Accountability assessment
In-Reply-To: <D56D0603-9DA4-4A79-81E1-DD51FE0B0664@liquidtelecom.com>
References: <66EA5281-23B7-4E2F-A866-64B2EC401FF8@afrinic.net>
 <CAEqgTWZ3J_Fj4awOcWAd=s8cHbY2VFJfAb4Pexefz85vs0Ln7Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <D56D0603-9DA4-4A79-81E1-DD51FE0B0664@liquidtelecom.com>
Message-ID: <CAEqgTWZCWTedLdYmUw8x6k+FwUMyTK9P25EWiu0w9hzQfX+pmA@mail.gmail.com>

On 16 Jun 2016 21:19, "Andrew Alston" <Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com>
wrote:
>
> Writing as myself,
>
>
>
> Without answering for Alan, and purely writing this because to my
knowledge the only attempt at a bylaw change under the current bylaws was
made by myself in Tunis,
>
>
>
> My understanding (and using the process that I used last time to propose
and attempt bylaw changes, and following the bylaws as they stand)
>
>
>
> a.)     Someone proposes a bylaw change (They must be a member, section
12.14.ii)
>
> b.)     It goes out with the notice of meeting at either an SGMM or an
AGMM (Section 12.14.iii -> Section 12.14.iv)
>
> c.)     The motion that goes out with the notice of SGMM/AGMM may NOT be
changed on the floor ? it may be discussed but it is fixed other than for
potential typo corrections etc (This is derived from section 12.14 as well,
since you are voting on what has been sent to the members)
>
> d.)     A ballot is called on the floor in the same way an election
ballot is called ? members can vote, via the same means as an election
ballot (electronically, by proxy, or directly) (Section 12.11 applies,
since it is a special resolution as per section 7.6 vi)
>
> e.)     Vote requires a 75% majority to pass or the motion fails
(Definition section, 1.1, under the definition of special resolution)
>
>

Unfortunately all the above are limited to the current bylaws.

Thereby requiring a different community oriented process.

Hence my question is specifically about current ongoing process which is
seeking over all community consultation and not members only.

>
> Thanks
>
> Andrew
>

Cheers

Noah
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20160616/569fcda2/attachment.html>

From Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com  Thu Jun 16 18:47:03 2016
From: Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com (Andrew Alston)
Date: Thu, 16 Jun 2016 18:47:03 +0000
Subject: [Community-Discuss] Accountability assessment
In-Reply-To: <CAEqgTWZCWTedLdYmUw8x6k+FwUMyTK9P25EWiu0w9hzQfX+pmA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <66EA5281-23B7-4E2F-A866-64B2EC401FF8@afrinic.net>
 <CAEqgTWZ3J_Fj4awOcWAd=s8cHbY2VFJfAb4Pexefz85vs0Ln7Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <D56D0603-9DA4-4A79-81E1-DD51FE0B0664@liquidtelecom.com>
 <CAEqgTWZCWTedLdYmUw8x6k+FwUMyTK9P25EWiu0w9hzQfX+pmA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <D12E0D3A-673A-47BF-831F-6DE5A11534DE@liquidtelecom.com>

Hi Noah,

Irrespective of the community consultation however, any changes still have to follow the process as defined by the bylaws.  There is no legal way to change the bylaws without following the bylaws.

Basically, consult the community, get agreement, then members vote.  If the members agree with the wider community, it passes, if they don?t, it won?t pass.  If you wanted to change the process, you?d have to change the bylaws first, using the bylaw process.  It?s a restriction however unfortunate, but it is the reality.

Andrew


From: Noah <noah at neo.co.tz>
Reply-To: General Discussions of AFRINIC <community-discuss at afrinic.net>
Date: Thursday, 16 June 2016 at 9:41 PM
To: General Discussions of AFRINIC <community-discuss at afrinic.net>
Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] Accountability assessment


On 16 Jun 2016 21:19, "Andrew Alston" <Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com<mailto:Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com>> wrote:
>
> Writing as myself,
>
>
>
> Without answering for Alan, and purely writing this because to my knowledge the only attempt at a bylaw change under the current bylaws was made by myself in Tunis,
>
>
>
> My understanding (and using the process that I used last time to propose and attempt bylaw changes, and following the bylaws as they stand)
>
>
>
> a.)     Someone proposes a bylaw change (They must be a member, section 12.14.ii)
>
> b.)     It goes out with the notice of meeting at either an SGMM or an AGMM (Section 12.14.iii -> Section 12.14.iv)
>
> c.)     The motion that goes out with the notice of SGMM/AGMM may NOT be changed on the floor ? it may be discussed but it is fixed other than for potential typo corrections etc (This is derived from section 12.14 as well, since you are voting on what has been sent to the members)
>
> d.)     A ballot is called on the floor in the same way an election ballot is called ? members can vote, via the same means as an election ballot (electronically, by proxy, or directly) (Section 12.11 applies, since it is a special resolution as per section 7.6 vi)
>
> e.)     Vote requires a 75% majority to pass or the motion fails (Definition section, 1.1, under the definition of special resolution)
>
>

Unfortunately all the above are limited to the current bylaws.

Thereby requiring a different community oriented process.

Hence my question is specifically about current ongoing process which is seeking over all community consultation and not members only.

>
> Thanks
>
> Andrew
>

Cheers

Noah
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20160616/1d93421a/attachment.html>

From sergekbk at gmail.com  Thu Jun 16 19:33:39 2016
From: sergekbk at gmail.com (serge ilunga)
Date: Thu, 16 Jun 2016 20:33:39 +0100
Subject: [Community-Discuss] Accountability assessment
In-Reply-To: <D12E0D3A-673A-47BF-831F-6DE5A11534DE@liquidtelecom.com>
References: <66EA5281-23B7-4E2F-A866-64B2EC401FF8@afrinic.net>
 <CAEqgTWZ3J_Fj4awOcWAd=s8cHbY2VFJfAb4Pexefz85vs0Ln7Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <D56D0603-9DA4-4A79-81E1-DD51FE0B0664@liquidtelecom.com>
 <CAEqgTWZCWTedLdYmUw8x6k+FwUMyTK9P25EWiu0w9hzQfX+pmA@mail.gmail.com>
 <D12E0D3A-673A-47BF-831F-6DE5A11534DE@liquidtelecom.com>
Message-ID: <CAHm7s1S-u+Esj9arKVV_tmVJtqTS1frH5YgirtFGA_wp7op7Yg@mail.gmail.com>

Hello Andrew,

The question about community comsultation and getting agreement.
It is obvious that this Bylaws change is  special as it follows the
accountability review  to meet the new context.

Regards.

On Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 7:47 PM, Andrew Alston <
Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com> wrote:

> Hi Noah,
>
>
>
> Irrespective of the community consultation however, any changes still have
> to follow the process as defined by the bylaws.  There is no legal way to
> change the bylaws without following the bylaws.
>
>
>
> Basically, consult the community, get agreement, then members vote.  If
> the members agree with the wider community, it passes, if they don?t, it
> won?t pass.  If you wanted to change the process, you?d have to change the
> bylaws first, using the bylaw process.  It?s a restriction however
> unfortunate, but it is the reality.
>
>
>
> Andrew
>
>
>
>
>
> *From: *Noah <noah at neo.co.tz>
> *Reply-To: *General Discussions of AFRINIC <community-discuss at afrinic.net>
> *Date: *Thursday, 16 June 2016 at 9:41 PM
> *To: *General Discussions of AFRINIC <community-discuss at afrinic.net>
> *Subject: *Re: [Community-Discuss] Accountability assessment
>
>
>
>
> On 16 Jun 2016 21:19, "Andrew Alston" <Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > Writing as myself,
> >
> >
> >
> > Without answering for Alan, and purely writing this because to my
> knowledge the only attempt at a bylaw change under the current bylaws was
> made by myself in Tunis,
> >
> >
> >
> > My understanding (and using the process that I used last time to propose
> and attempt bylaw changes, and following the bylaws as they stand)
> >
> >
> >
> > a.)     Someone proposes a bylaw change (They must be a member, section
> 12.14.ii)
> >
> > b.)     It goes out with the notice of meeting at either an SGMM or an
> AGMM (Section 12.14.iii -> Section 12.14.iv)
> >
> > c.)     The motion that goes out with the notice of SGMM/AGMM may NOT be
> changed on the floor ? it may be discussed but it is fixed other than for
> potential typo corrections etc (This is derived from section 12.14 as well,
> since you are voting on what has been sent to the members)
> >
> > d.)     A ballot is called on the floor in the same way an election
> ballot is called ? members can vote, via the same means as an election
> ballot (electronically, by proxy, or directly) (Section 12.11 applies,
> since it is a special resolution as per section 7.6 vi)
> >
> > e.)     Vote requires a 75% majority to pass or the motion fails
> (Definition section, 1.1, under the definition of special resolution)
> >
> >
>
> Unfortunately all the above are limited to the current bylaws.
>
> Thereby requiring a different community oriented process.
>
> Hence my question is specifically about current ongoing process which is
> seeking over all community consultation and not members only.
>
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > Andrew
> >
>
> Cheers
>
> Noah
>
> _______________________________________________
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>
>


-- 
*Serge ILUNGA KABWIKA*
*Skype: sergekbk*
*Cell: +243814443160*
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20160616/be18f125/attachment.html>

From madomey at hotmail.com  Thu Jun 16 21:35:54 2016
From: madomey at hotmail.com (Marcus K. G. Adomey)
Date: Thu, 16 Jun 2016 21:35:54 +0000
Subject: [Community-Discuss] Community Discuss
Message-ID: <DUB119-W301747758368F9F934BE26B9560@phx.gbl>

Hi,

I would like to joint the Community Discuss mailing list

Thanks


Marcus
	   		 	   		  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20160616/a98091c9/attachment.html>

From seun.ojedeji at gmail.com  Fri Jun 17 04:57:24 2016
From: seun.ojedeji at gmail.com (Seun Ojedeji)
Date: Fri, 17 Jun 2016 05:57:24 +0100
Subject: [Community-Discuss] Community Discuss
In-Reply-To: <DUB119-W301747758368F9F934BE26B9560@phx.gbl>
References: <DUB119-W301747758368F9F934BE26B9560@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <CAD_dc6i+tTVd7hXScjWS5ty5uV5w70JcJScHZPe1EtUzvJe_MA@mail.gmail.com>

You are here Marcus.

Cheers!

Sent from my LG G4
Kindly excuse brevity and typos
On 16 Jun 2016 10:37 p.m., "Marcus K. G. Adomey" <madomey at hotmail.com>
wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I would like to joint the Community Discuss mailing list
>
> Thanks
>
>
> Marcus
>
> _______________________________________________
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20160617/4a19bba1/attachment.html>

From alan.barrett at afrinic.net  Fri Jun 17 06:35:24 2016
From: alan.barrett at afrinic.net (Alan Barrett)
Date: Fri, 17 Jun 2016 10:35:24 +0400
Subject: [Community-Discuss] Accountability assessment
In-Reply-To: <CAEqgTWZ3J_Fj4awOcWAd=s8cHbY2VFJfAb4Pexefz85vs0Ln7Q@mail.gmail.com>
References: <66EA5281-23B7-4E2F-A866-64B2EC401FF8@afrinic.net>
 <CAEqgTWZ3J_Fj4awOcWAd=s8cHbY2VFJfAb4Pexefz85vs0Ln7Q@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <7BE13F94-8FC9-4BB0-AE10-A5F7DF7802EB@afrinic.net>

> I have gone through the document but before I can add my comments, do we know or have an overall process to follow for the bylaws changes?
> 
> Basically, what is the overall process for the bylaws changes?

We have not defined a timeline.  Please comment as soon as you are ready to comment.

I hope that discussion will lead to rough consensus within the next one or two months, and then bylaws can be drafted to implement the result.  Eventually, any bylaws changes will need to be approved by 75% majority at a members meeting.  Perhaps we?ll call a special meeting in November 2016 for that purpose, and perhaps we?ll wait until May/June 2017.

Alan Barrett




From alan.barrett at afrinic.net  Fri Jun 17 07:14:46 2016
From: alan.barrett at afrinic.net (Alan Barrett)
Date: Fri, 17 Jun 2016 11:14:46 +0400
Subject: [Community-Discuss] Accountability assessment
In-Reply-To: <CAEqgTWZCWTedLdYmUw8x6k+FwUMyTK9P25EWiu0w9hzQfX+pmA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <66EA5281-23B7-4E2F-A866-64B2EC401FF8@afrinic.net>
 <CAEqgTWZ3J_Fj4awOcWAd=s8cHbY2VFJfAb4Pexefz85vs0Ln7Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <D56D0603-9DA4-4A79-81E1-DD51FE0B0664@liquidtelecom.com>
 <CAEqgTWZCWTedLdYmUw8x6k+FwUMyTK9P25EWiu0w9hzQfX+pmA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <A5AD7FC9-8B99-4306-8B13-C44852FB3A36@afrinic.net>


> On 16 Jun 2016, at 22:41, Noah <noah at neo.co.tz> wrote:
> 
> Hence my question is specifically about current ongoing process which is seeking over all community consultation and not members only.

Comments are welcome from the community, but approval of bylaws changes is by the members.

Alan Barrett





From noah at neo.co.tz  Fri Jun 17 07:33:45 2016
From: noah at neo.co.tz (Noah)
Date: Fri, 17 Jun 2016 10:33:45 +0300
Subject: [Community-Discuss] Accountability assessment
In-Reply-To: <7BE13F94-8FC9-4BB0-AE10-A5F7DF7802EB@afrinic.net>
References: <66EA5281-23B7-4E2F-A866-64B2EC401FF8@afrinic.net>
 <CAEqgTWZ3J_Fj4awOcWAd=s8cHbY2VFJfAb4Pexefz85vs0Ln7Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <7BE13F94-8FC9-4BB0-AE10-A5F7DF7802EB@afrinic.net>
Message-ID: <CAEqgTWaWwqNZ=x-dH_Tnu2ZxNWJNK-f5jbmHt5otZ8GRDFkYsA@mail.gmail.com>

On 17 Jun 2016 09:36, "Alan Barrett" <alan.barrett at afrinic.net> wrote:
>
> > I have gone through the document but before I can add my comments, do
we know or have an overall process to follow for the bylaws changes?
> >
> > Basically, what is the overall process for the bylaws changes?
>
> We have not defined a timeline.  Please comment as soon as you are ready
to comment.
>
> I hope that discussion will lead to rough consensus within the next one
or two months, and then bylaws can be drafted to implement the result.
Eventually, any bylaws changes will need to be approved by 75% majority at
a members meeting.  Perhaps we?ll call a special meeting in November 2016
for that purpose, and perhaps we?ll wait until May/June 2017.
>

Hi Alan

Thank you for the clarification.

> Alan Barrett

Noah
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20160617/494b9ba2/attachment.html>

From honest1989 at gmail.com  Fri Jun 17 09:21:15 2016
From: honest1989 at gmail.com (Honest Ornella GANKPA)
Date: Fri, 17 Jun 2016 10:21:15 +0100
Subject: [Community-Discuss] Accountability assessment
In-Reply-To: <7BE13F94-8FC9-4BB0-AE10-A5F7DF7802EB@afrinic.net>
References: <66EA5281-23B7-4E2F-A866-64B2EC401FF8@afrinic.net>
 <CAEqgTWZ3J_Fj4awOcWAd=s8cHbY2VFJfAb4Pexefz85vs0Ln7Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <7BE13F94-8FC9-4BB0-AE10-A5F7DF7802EB@afrinic.net>
Message-ID: <CAKZY-5aUYj=MQrayYE_rmuYA0rG6sHUeM_LFkYa7V96yRNpsAA@mail.gmail.com>

Hello Mr Alan,

I have a question: I heard the term bottom up a lot during the last AIS. So
it occured to me that Afrinic is driven by the community wich decides , via
consensus, on policies and such. This is such a refresher from real life
and politicians who enforce their rules on us...

Then I'm wondering : is this the same for bylaws then? Community draft
policies and ask members for approval? Going by the same tangent (bottom up
model) is it wise for the board to participate? As this could lead to
unfortunate situations (like what I mentioned with real life politicians)

Sorry that is two questions :-)



2016-06-17 7:35 GMT+01:00 Alan Barrett <alan.barrett at afrinic.net>:

> > I have gone through the document but before I can add my comments, do we
> know or have an overall process to follow for the bylaws changes?
> >
> > Basically, what is the overall process for the bylaws changes?
>
> We have not defined a timeline.  Please comment as soon as you are ready
> to comment.
>
> I hope that discussion will lead to rough consensus within the next one or
> two months, and then bylaws can be drafted to implement the result.
> Eventually, any bylaws changes will need to be approved by 75% majority at
> a members meeting.  Perhaps we?ll call a special meeting in November 2016
> for that purpose, and perhaps we?ll wait until May/June 2017.
>
> Alan Barrett
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>



-- 
Honest Ornella GANKPA
Network engineer


<https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail>
Garanti
sans virus. www.avast.com
<https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail>
<#DDB4FAA8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20160617/5eca9492/attachment.html>

From alan.barrett at afrinic.net  Fri Jun 17 09:51:31 2016
From: alan.barrett at afrinic.net (Alan Barrett)
Date: Fri, 17 Jun 2016 13:51:31 +0400
Subject: [Community-Discuss] Accountability assessment
In-Reply-To: <CAKZY-5aUYj=MQrayYE_rmuYA0rG6sHUeM_LFkYa7V96yRNpsAA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <66EA5281-23B7-4E2F-A866-64B2EC401FF8@afrinic.net>
 <CAEqgTWZ3J_Fj4awOcWAd=s8cHbY2VFJfAb4Pexefz85vs0Ln7Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <7BE13F94-8FC9-4BB0-AE10-A5F7DF7802EB@afrinic.net>
 <CAKZY-5aUYj=MQrayYE_rmuYA0rG6sHUeM_LFkYa7V96yRNpsAA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <07BDD314-5C81-43F6-ABAA-05D4EAC0BA19@afrinic.net>


> On 17 Jun 2016, at 13:21, Honest Ornella GANKPA <honest1989 at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Hello Mr Alan,
> 
> I have a question: I heard the term bottom up a lot during the last AIS. So it occured to me that Afrinic is driven by the community wich decides , via consensus, on policies and such. This is such a refresher from real life and politicians who enforce their rules on us...
> 
> Then I'm wondering : is this the same for bylaws then? Community draft policies and ask members for approval? Going by the same tangent (bottom up model) is it wise for the board to participate? As this could lead to unfortunate situations (like what I mentioned with real life politicians)

For number resource policies, anybody may draft a proposal, and it must reach rough consensus in the community before it is implemented.

For bylaws changes, any member may propose a change, and it must be approved by 75% vote by the members.

Board members are free to initiate policy proposals or bylaw chanegs, just like anybody else.  I would argue that proposing sensible changes is part of their job.

Alan Barrett




From akirizal at gmail.com  Fri Jun 17 10:53:47 2016
From: akirizal at gmail.com (Lydea Akiriza)
Date: Fri, 17 Jun 2016 13:53:47 +0300
Subject: [Community-Discuss] Accountability assessment
In-Reply-To: <CA+O0tSmdc4YHF4RJux+fuCRyWgHQbfhtg_56tokoqxvoEgbETQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <66EA5281-23B7-4E2F-A866-64B2EC401FF8@afrinic.net>
 <CAEqgTWZ3J_Fj4awOcWAd=s8cHbY2VFJfAb4Pexefz85vs0Ln7Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <7BE13F94-8FC9-4BB0-AE10-A5F7DF7802EB@afrinic.net>
 <CAKZY-5aUYj=MQrayYE_rmuYA0rG6sHUeM_LFkYa7V96yRNpsAA@mail.gmail.com>
 <07BDD314-5C81-43F6-ABAA-05D4EAC0BA19@afrinic.net>
 <CA+O0tS=0Oxaxr31BBR+=PHU8q3YO8F6zfyAEHz6orb1-oX-Bbw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CA+O0tSmdc4YHF4RJux+fuCRyWgHQbfhtg_56tokoqxvoEgbETQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CA+O0tS=Q4hbKWdFjgVnhmcr8=tDSO1_j0D5D74nnUM9DNk7zYw@mail.gmail.com>

Thanks Ornella for asking those questions,the responses from Alan help
alot. Now I am informed:-)
On 17 Jun 2016 12:52, "Alan Barrett" <alan.barrett at afrinic.net> wrote:


> On 17 Jun 2016, at 13:21, Honest Ornella GANKPA <honest1989 at gmail.com>
wrote:
>
> Hello Mr Alan,
>
> I have a question: I heard the term bottom up a lot during the last AIS.
So it occured to me that Afrinic is driven by the community wich decides ,
via consensus, on policies and such. This is such a refresher from real
life and politicians who enforce their rules on us...
>
> Then I'm wondering : is this the same for bylaws then? Community draft
policies and ask members for approval? Going by the same tangent (bottom up
model) is it wise for the board to participate? As this could lead to
unfortunate situations (like what I mentioned with real life politicians)

For number resource policies, anybody may draft a proposal, and it must
reach rough consensus in the community before it is implemented.

For bylaws changes, any member may propose a change, and it must be
approved by 75% vote by the members.

Board members are free to initiate policy proposals or bylaw chanegs, just
like anybody else.  I would argue that proposing sensible changes is part
of their job.

Alan Barrett


_______________________________________________
Community-Discuss mailing list
Community-Discuss at afrinic.net
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20160617/1a802bbb/attachment.html>

From jnoulaye at yahoo.fr  Sun Jun 19 18:07:46 2016
From: jnoulaye at yahoo.fr (jnoulaye at yahoo.fr)
Date: Sun, 19 Jun 2016 18:07:46 +0000 (UTC)
Subject: [Community-Discuss] [rpd] Essence of the RPD Mailing List
In-Reply-To: <1063576268.937406.1466339021680.JavaMail.zimbra@ntc.gov.sd>
References: <2125325358.937374.1466338408524.JavaMail.zimbra@ntc.gov.sd>
 <1063576268.937406.1466339021680.JavaMail.zimbra@ntc.gov.sd>
Message-ID: <847895947.9598204.1466359666186.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com>

++1 Sami.Thanks to Sami for this call to order,
It's really necessary to keep working under some global standards.I am among those who respect the single rules laid down and for me, one who deviates the rule must be sanctioned (unsubscribe from the mailing list, for eg.).In response to this call that the co-chair launched, I put in ?Cc ?the 2 other appropriate mailing lists quoted by Sami, for pursue there ?our rich current ?discussions.All discussions on the RDP mailing list must be linked to the pending policies that were the subject of discussions during the F2F meetings in Gaborone, in such that these policies either improved or withdrawn by the author.?In short, let's reframe our discusions on the right Avenue or Podium, and ?in the respect of each other opinions as usual.
Warm regards,?Janvier Ngnoulaye, PhD.CRISP team memberAfrinic RDP memberAfrinic MemberInternet Community member.....etc.
      De?: SamiSalih <sami at ntc.gov.sd>
 ??: rpd <rpd at afrinic.net> 
Cc?: Policy Development Working Group <pdwg at afrinic.net>
 Envoy? le : Dimanche 19 juin 2016 13h23
 Objet?: [rpd] Essence of the RPD Mailing List
   

Dear AfriNIC PDWG Members,

It has become necessary to remind the list members of the essence of the Resource Policy Discussion, RPD, mailing list as well as the need to be professional in the course of policy discussions.

We have to respect other opinions and be tolerant of views that are different. By reasoning out the policy issues, we will together produce policies that are in the best interest of our region and the global Internet.

Other discussion should take place in the relevant discussion platform. As a reminder, the following discussion lists are available
community-discuss at afrinic.net For community discussion of AFRINIC-related matters (Open to everyone)
members-discuss at afrinic.net For member discussion of AFRINIC-related members (Restricted to AFRINIC members)

We are a growing community and everyone's cooperation is needed in setting some minimum standards for discussions. If we allow ourselves lose control of our emotions, discussions will drift in the wrong direction. As PDWG Co-chair we will exercise our mandate to ensure constructive discussion within the PDWG (on the RPD mailing list and in face to face meetings). We believe the community is mature enough to conduct high-quality discussions and come up with good policies for the benefit of Africa.

Sincerely,
AfriNIC PDWG Co-Chairs





Dr. Sami Salih? | Assistant Professor
Sudan University of Science and Technology
Eastern Dum, P.O Box 11111-407
email: sami.salih at sustech.edu
Mob: +249122045707 


_______________________________________________
RPD mailing list
RPD at afrinic.net
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd


  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20160619/18894d59/attachment.html>

From akirizal at gmail.com  Wed Jun 22 17:45:34 2016
From: akirizal at gmail.com (Lydea Akiriza)
Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2016 20:45:34 +0300
Subject: [Community-Discuss] Legacy Resource Holders WHOIS... fees remits.
Message-ID: <CA+O0tSn=L1KGPz0-VDRxAxEOtaB+WUZhpmUpNd6orYzFx56e+g@mail.gmail.com>

Dear AFRINIC,
I have an earnest desire to learn more about Internet in Africa, for that,I
am grateful for this platform.
Today I was looking through the AFRINIC website and I came across the
Legacy Resources Holders link
http://www.afrinic.net/en/services/rs/legacy-resources-holders and
something stood out for me...

"Although there is no contractual relationship and obligation between
legacy resources holders and AFRINIC, legacy resources holders still
benefit from AFRINIC registry service support such as WHOIS, reverse DNS
and the Internet Routing Registry....There are currently around 350 legacy
resources holders registered in the AFRINIC WHOIS database...AFRINIC
encourages legacy resource holders to become AFRINIC members...."

So my question is, does this mean Legacy Resource Holders despite using
AFRINIC Registry services (like WHOIS, Reverse DNS e'tal) don't remit fees
to AFRINIC?

Thanks!
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20160622/b86462fe/attachment.html>

From adam at varud.com  Wed Jun 22 17:58:52 2016
From: adam at varud.com (Adam Nelson)
Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2016 13:58:52 -0400
Subject: [Community-Discuss] Legacy Resource Holders WHOIS... fees
	remits.
In-Reply-To: <CA+O0tSn=L1KGPz0-VDRxAxEOtaB+WUZhpmUpNd6orYzFx56e+g@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CA+O0tSn=L1KGPz0-VDRxAxEOtaB+WUZhpmUpNd6orYzFx56e+g@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAGTm15=sQCsihm267wpTghORAM8r5uwqXRwoherymSsMFhG18Q@mail.gmail.com>

Yup!  The IPs/ASNs given to the legacy holders predate the RIRs and are in
a type of limbo.  They do not currently have to pay to maintain those
numbers.  They can only be encouraged to do so.  I'm pretty sure this is
true vis-a-vis legacy holders in all of the regions.

-Adam

--
About Adam: www.linkedin.com/in/adamcnelson

On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 1:45 PM, Lydea Akiriza <akirizal at gmail.com> wrote:

> Dear AFRINIC,
> I have an earnest desire to learn more about Internet in Africa, for
> that,I am grateful for this platform.
> Today I was looking through the AFRINIC website and I came across the
> Legacy Resources Holders link
> http://www.afrinic.net/en/services/rs/legacy-resources-holders and
> something stood out for me...
>
> "Although there is no contractual relationship and obligation between
> legacy resources holders and AFRINIC, legacy resources holders still
> benefit from AFRINIC registry service support such as WHOIS, reverse DNS
> and the Internet Routing Registry....There are currently around 350 legacy
> resources holders registered in the AFRINIC WHOIS database...AFRINIC
> encourages legacy resource holders to become AFRINIC members...."
>
> So my question is, does this mean Legacy Resource Holders despite using
> AFRINIC Registry services (like WHOIS, Reverse DNS e'tal) don't remit fees
> to AFRINIC?
>
> Thanks!
>
> _______________________________________________
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20160622/85f82aa5/attachment.html>

From mje at posix.co.za  Wed Jun 22 18:20:34 2016
From: mje at posix.co.za (Mark Elkins)
Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2016 20:20:34 +0200
Subject: [Community-Discuss] Legacy Resource Holders WHOIS... fees
	remits.
In-Reply-To: <CAGTm15=sQCsihm267wpTghORAM8r5uwqXRwoherymSsMFhG18Q@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CA+O0tSn=L1KGPz0-VDRxAxEOtaB+WUZhpmUpNd6orYzFx56e+g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAGTm15=sQCsihm267wpTghORAM8r5uwqXRwoherymSsMFhG18Q@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <576AD6F2.1080802@posix.co.za>

I'm a legacy space holder. I also Signed the AFRINIC Registration
Services agreement long ago. Also became an "Individual Member" - which
has since become "Associate Member" - and since pay AFRINIC for the
pleasure. I also try and physically contribute to the Organisation.
I would suspect most Legacy Space Holders pay AFRINIC for some sort of
service - I've no idea of the stats though. I suspect most Legacy
Resource holders are in South Africa and most of those are probably
Universities.

You should consider, Legacy Members have been around since before the
beginning of the RIR System. The pioneers. I had my IPv4 address space
years before even ARIN existed.

I'd personally like all Legacy Resource holders to voluntarily become
AFRINIC Members.

On 22/06/2016 19:58, Adam Nelson wrote:
> Yup!  The IPs/ASNs given to the legacy holders predate the RIRs and are
> in a type of limbo.  They do not currently have to pay to maintain those
> numbers.  They can only be encouraged to do so.  I'm pretty sure this is
> true vis-a-vis legacy holders in all of the regions.
> 
> -Adam
> 
> --
> About Adam: www.linkedin.com/in/adamcnelson
> <https://www.linkedin.com/in/adamcnelson>
> 
> On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 1:45 PM, Lydea Akiriza <akirizal at gmail.com
> <mailto:akirizal at gmail.com>> wrote:
> 
>     Dear AFRINIC,
>     I have an earnest desire to learn more about Internet in Africa, for
>     that,I am grateful for this platform.                            
>     Today I was looking through the AFRINIC website and I came across
>     the Legacy Resources Holders
>     linkhttp://www.afrinic.net/en/services/rs/legacy-resources-holders
>     <http://www.afrinic.net/en/services/rs/legacy-resources-holders>
>     and  something stood out for me...
> 
>     "Although there is no contractual relationship and obligation
>     between legacy resources holders and AFRINIC, legacy resources
>     holders still benefit from AFRINIC registry service support such as
>     WHOIS, reverse DNS and the Internet Routing Registry....There are
>     currently around 350 legacy resources holders registered in the
>     AFRINIC WHOIS database...AFRINIC encourages legacy resource holders
>     to become AFRINIC members...."
> 
>     So my question is, does this mean Legacy Resource Holders despite
>     using AFRINIC Registry services (like WHOIS, Reverse DNS e'tal)
>     don't remit fees to AFRINIC?
> 
>     Thanks!
> 
> 
>     _______________________________________________
>     Community-Discuss mailing list
>     Community-Discuss at afrinic.net <mailto:Community-Discuss at afrinic.net>
>     https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
> 

-- 
Mark James ELKINS  -  Posix Systems - (South) Africa
mje at posix.co.za       Tel: +27.128070590  Cell: +27.826010496
For fast, reliable, low cost Internet in ZA: https://ftth.posix.co.za

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 4230 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20160622/6422037a/attachment.p7s>

From sergekbk at gmail.com  Wed Jun 22 20:05:11 2016
From: sergekbk at gmail.com (serge ilunga)
Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2016 21:05:11 +0100
Subject: [Community-Discuss] Legacy Resource Holders WHOIS... fees
	remits.
In-Reply-To: <576AD6F2.1080802@posix.co.za>
References: <CA+O0tSn=L1KGPz0-VDRxAxEOtaB+WUZhpmUpNd6orYzFx56e+g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAGTm15=sQCsihm267wpTghORAM8r5uwqXRwoherymSsMFhG18Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <576AD6F2.1080802@posix.co.za>
Message-ID: <CAHm7s1Q1iYK8NJW1E8VQDPk5a7xFC7cYh4R-tWFqj_A2kjYJow@mail.gmail.com>

Dear Community.


Thanks to Mark to show this community commitment and invite other legacy
members to do so.
In fact, our community driven and non profit organization can't survive and
achieve its mission witout members contribution.
Beyond that, a long term stratetegic plan and an plan with clear goals to
shnow how  the future of AfriNIC is seen and planned is required.
What about the strategic plan approved and announced in BW?
Is there any activity plan for the current year?

Kind Regards,

On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 7:20 PM, Mark Elkins <mje at posix.co.za> wrote:

> I'm a legacy space holder. I also Signed the AFRINIC Registration
> Services agreement long ago. Also became an "Individual Member" - which
> has since become "Associate Member" - and since pay AFRINIC for the
> pleasure. I also try and physically contribute to the Organisation.
> I would suspect most Legacy Space Holders pay AFRINIC for some sort of
> service - I've no idea of the stats though. I suspect most Legacy
> Resource holders are in South Africa and most of those are probably
> Universities.
>
> You should consider, Legacy Members have been around since before the
> beginning of the RIR System. The pioneers. I had my IPv4 address space
> years before even ARIN existed.
>
> I'd personally like all Legacy Resource holders to voluntarily become
> AFRINIC Members.
>
> On 22/06/2016 19:58, Adam Nelson wrote:
> > Yup!  The IPs/ASNs given to the legacy holders predate the RIRs and are
> > in a type of limbo.  They do not currently have to pay to maintain those
> > numbers.  They can only be encouraged to do so.  I'm pretty sure this is
> > true vis-a-vis legacy holders in all of the regions.
> >
> > -Adam
> >
> > --
> > About Adam: www.linkedin.com/in/adamcnelson
> > <https://www.linkedin.com/in/adamcnelson>
> >
> > On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 1:45 PM, Lydea Akiriza <akirizal at gmail.com
> > <mailto:akirizal at gmail.com>> wrote:
> >
> >     Dear AFRINIC,
> >     I have an earnest desire to learn more about Internet in Africa, for
> >     that,I am grateful for this platform.
> >     Today I was looking through the AFRINIC website and I came across
> >     the Legacy Resources Holders
> >     linkhttp://www.afrinic.net/en/services/rs/legacy-resources-holders
> >     <http://www.afrinic.net/en/services/rs/legacy-resources-holders>
> >     and  something stood out for me...
> >
> >     "Although there is no contractual relationship and obligation
> >     between legacy resources holders and AFRINIC, legacy resources
> >     holders still benefit from AFRINIC registry service support such as
> >     WHOIS, reverse DNS and the Internet Routing Registry....There are
> >     currently around 350 legacy resources holders registered in the
> >     AFRINIC WHOIS database...AFRINIC encourages legacy resource holders
> >     to become AFRINIC members...."
> >
> >     So my question is, does this mean Legacy Resource Holders despite
> >     using AFRINIC Registry services (like WHOIS, Reverse DNS e'tal)
> >     don't remit fees to AFRINIC?
> >
> >     Thanks!
> >
> >
> >     _______________________________________________
> >     Community-Discuss mailing list
> >     Community-Discuss at afrinic.net <mailto:Community-Discuss at afrinic.net>
> >     https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Community-Discuss mailing list
> > Community-Discuss at afrinic.net
> > https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
> >
>
> --
> Mark James ELKINS  -  Posix Systems - (South) Africa
> mje at posix.co.za       Tel: +27.128070590  Cell: +27.826010496
> For fast, reliable, low cost Internet in ZA: https://ftth.posix.co.za
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>
>


-- 
*Serge ILUNGA KABWIKA*
*Skype: sergekbk*
*Cell: +243814443160*
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20160622/109b7f05/attachment.html>

From jrhountomey at gmail.com  Thu Jun 23 04:40:23 2016
From: jrhountomey at gmail.com (Jean-Robert Hountomey)
Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2016 23:40:23 -0500
Subject: [Community-Discuss] post ipv4 depletion frauds, brokers activities
In-Reply-To: <CAGTm15=sQCsihm267wpTghORAM8r5uwqXRwoherymSsMFhG18Q@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CA+O0tSn=L1KGPz0-VDRxAxEOtaB+WUZhpmUpNd6orYzFx56e+g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAGTm15=sQCsihm267wpTghORAM8r5uwqXRwoherymSsMFhG18Q@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <e9daca4c-193e-0427-9a81-a2ccb32f40ff@gmail.com>

Fraudsters, Brokers and criminals are buying, stealing ipv4 addresses. What is the status in AfriNIC Service Region ?

Leslie Nobile's made a presentation at NANOG 67 (1) (2) one Post IPV4 depletion.

Our understanding is that Fraudsters, criminals; whatever we called them are using different methods to get IPV4; including setting up 
fake companies; looking for dormant records, legacy records and trying to establish themselves as the rightful administrator.

What is the situation within AfriNIC Region ?
               
More Information at:
(1) https://www.nanog.org/sites/default/files/Nobile_Post_Ipv4_Depletion.pdf
(2) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i7FGChQNUtA
(3) Bruce Schneier Comment here.*: *https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2016/06/fraudsters_are_.html
(4) http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/06/16/ipv4_hijacking/


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20160622/1adc150b/attachment.html>

From afahounko at gmail.com  Thu Jun 23 16:14:33 2016
From: afahounko at gmail.com (Danny)
Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2016 18:14:33 +0200
Subject: [Community-Discuss] Legacy Resource Holders WHOIS... fees
	remits.
In-Reply-To: <576AD6F2.1080802@posix.co.za>
References: <CA+O0tSn=L1KGPz0-VDRxAxEOtaB+WUZhpmUpNd6orYzFx56e+g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAGTm15=sQCsihm267wpTghORAM8r5uwqXRwoherymSsMFhG18Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <576AD6F2.1080802@posix.co.za>
Message-ID: <CA+DA2xq0gy-wVrfB++LfVJm=8HxP92Kx1OZGeVzXjyhQzoFdfg@mail.gmail.com>

Hello Marc,

1- Legacy ressources holders pay annual maintenance fees per prefix  they
have in the Whois.

2- We waive the maintenance fee for people like you who became AFRINIC
members  and is paying for other ressources they have gotten.

3- Becoming AFRINIC members remain voluntary for the Legacy-only.

351 legacy members paying 100$ per prefix, could show 35k

2016-06-22 20:20 GMT+02:00 Mark Elkins <mje at posix.co.za>:

> I'm a legacy space holder. I also Signed the AFRINIC Registration
> Services agreement long ago. Also became an "Individual Member" - which
> has since become "Associate Member" - and since pay AFRINIC for the
> pleasure. I also try and physically contribute to the Organisation.
> I would suspect most Legacy Space Holders pay AFRINIC for some sort of
> service - I've no idea of the stats though. I suspect most Legacy
> Resource holders are in South Africa and most of those are probably
> Universities.
>
> You should consider, Legacy Members have been around since before the
> beginning of the RIR System. The pioneers. I had my IPv4 address space
> years before even ARIN existed.
>
> I'd personally like all Legacy Resource holders to voluntarily become
> AFRINIC Members.
>
> On 22/06/2016 19:58, Adam Nelson wrote:
> > Yup!  The IPs/ASNs given to the legacy holders predate the RIRs and are
> > in a type of limbo.  They do not currently have to pay to maintain those
> > numbers.  They can only be encouraged to do so.  I'm pretty sure this is
> > true vis-a-vis legacy holders in all of the regions.
> >
> > -Adam
> >
> > --
> > About Adam: www.linkedin.com/in/adamcnelson
> > <https://www.linkedin.com/in/adamcnelson>
> >
> > On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 1:45 PM, Lydea Akiriza <akirizal at gmail.com
> > <mailto:akirizal at gmail.com>> wrote:
> >
> >     Dear AFRINIC,
> >     I have an earnest desire to learn more about Internet in Africa, for
> >     that,I am grateful for this platform.
> >     Today I was looking through the AFRINIC website and I came across
> >     the Legacy Resources Holders
> >     linkhttp://www.afrinic.net/en/services/rs/legacy-resources-holders
> >     <http://www.afrinic.net/en/services/rs/legacy-resources-holders>
> >     and  something stood out for me...
> >
> >     "Although there is no contractual relationship and obligation
> >     between legacy resources holders and AFRINIC, legacy resources
> >     holders still benefit from AFRINIC registry service support such as
> >     WHOIS, reverse DNS and the Internet Routing Registry....There are
> >     currently around 350 legacy resources holders registered in the
> >     AFRINIC WHOIS database...AFRINIC encourages legacy resource holders
> >     to become AFRINIC members...."
> >
> >     So my question is, does this mean Legacy Resource Holders despite
> >     using AFRINIC Registry services (like WHOIS, Reverse DNS e'tal)
> >     don't remit fees to AFRINIC?
> >
> >     Thanks!
> >
> >
> >     _______________________________________________
> >     Community-Discuss mailing list
> >     Community-Discuss at afrinic.net <mailto:Community-Discuss at afrinic.net>
> >     https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Community-Discuss mailing list
> > Community-Discuss at afrinic.net
> > https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
> >
>
> --
> Mark James ELKINS  -  Posix Systems - (South) Africa
> mje at posix.co.za       Tel: +27.128070590  Cell: +27.826010496
> For fast, reliable, low cost Internet in ZA: https://ftth.posix.co.za
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20160623/e7e0d094/attachment.html>

From akirizal at gmail.com  Thu Jun 23 16:35:20 2016
From: akirizal at gmail.com (Lydea Akiriza)
Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2016 19:35:20 +0300
Subject: [Community-Discuss] Legacy Resource Holders WHOIS... fees
	remits.
In-Reply-To: <CA+DA2xq0gy-wVrfB++LfVJm=8HxP92Kx1OZGeVzXjyhQzoFdfg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CA+O0tSn=L1KGPz0-VDRxAxEOtaB+WUZhpmUpNd6orYzFx56e+g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAGTm15=sQCsihm267wpTghORAM8r5uwqXRwoherymSsMFhG18Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <576AD6F2.1080802@posix.co.za>
 <CA+DA2xq0gy-wVrfB++LfVJm=8HxP92Kx1OZGeVzXjyhQzoFdfg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CA+O0tSmTv+qUdsHHhmdqUZXYes+qsRzqPxkrqKzot9ip6wnHeA@mail.gmail.com>

Very enlightening couple of responses.
@Mark and the rest of us that responded, thanks for the proper break down...

But now it gets me thinking...since Legacy Resource Holders have the
OPTION:-) of only becoming AFRINIC members 'voluntarily',how best would
AFRINIC as an entity encourage  Legacy Resource Holders  to actually become
members. I believe that AFRINIC is a very involved entity in taking
Africa...through the Internet to the next level...wouldn't it only be made
obvious that Legacy Resource Holder's involvement (as far as such fees are
concerned) even now would be such an amazing asset? Isn't there a way that
can be made obvious?

"These are only my two scents!"
On 23 Jun 2016 19:15, "Danny" <afahounko at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hello Marc,
>
> 1- Legacy ressources holders pay annual maintenance fees per prefix  they
> have in the Whois.
>
> 2- We waive the maintenance fee for people like you who became AFRINIC
> members  and is paying for other ressources they have gotten.
>
> 3- Becoming AFRINIC members remain voluntary for the Legacy-only.
>
> 351 legacy members paying 100$ per prefix, could show 35k
>
> 2016-06-22 20:20 GMT+02:00 Mark Elkins <mje at posix.co.za>:
>
>> I'm a legacy space holder. I also Signed the AFRINIC Registration
>> Services agreement long ago. Also became an "Individual Member" - which
>> has since become "Associate Member" - and since pay AFRINIC for the
>> pleasure. I also try and physically contribute to the Organisation.
>> I would suspect most Legacy Space Holders pay AFRINIC for some sort of
>> service - I've no idea of the stats though. I suspect most Legacy
>> Resource holders are in South Africa and most of those are probably
>> Universities.
>>
>> You should consider, Legacy Members have been around since before the
>> beginning of the RIR System. The pioneers. I had my IPv4 address space
>> years before even ARIN existed.
>>
>> I'd personally like all Legacy Resource holders to voluntarily become
>> AFRINIC Members.
>>
>> On 22/06/2016 19:58, Adam Nelson wrote:
>> > Yup!  The IPs/ASNs given to the legacy holders predate the RIRs and are
>> > in a type of limbo.  They do not currently have to pay to maintain those
>> > numbers.  They can only be encouraged to do so.  I'm pretty sure this is
>> > true vis-a-vis legacy holders in all of the regions.
>> >
>> > -Adam
>> >
>> > --
>> > About Adam: www.linkedin.com/in/adamcnelson
>> > <https://www.linkedin.com/in/adamcnelson>
>> >
>> > On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 1:45 PM, Lydea Akiriza <akirizal at gmail.com
>> > <mailto:akirizal at gmail.com>> wrote:
>> >
>> >     Dear AFRINIC,
>> >     I have an earnest desire to learn more about Internet in Africa, for
>> >     that,I am grateful for this platform.
>> >     Today I was looking through the AFRINIC website and I came across
>> >     the Legacy Resources Holders
>> >     linkhttp://www.afrinic.net/en/services/rs/legacy-resources-holders
>> >     <http://www.afrinic.net/en/services/rs/legacy-resources-holders>
>> >     and  something stood out for me...
>> >
>> >     "Although there is no contractual relationship and obligation
>> >     between legacy resources holders and AFRINIC, legacy resources
>> >     holders still benefit from AFRINIC registry service support such as
>> >     WHOIS, reverse DNS and the Internet Routing Registry....There are
>> >     currently around 350 legacy resources holders registered in the
>> >     AFRINIC WHOIS database...AFRINIC encourages legacy resource holders
>> >     to become AFRINIC members...."
>> >
>> >     So my question is, does this mean Legacy Resource Holders despite
>> >     using AFRINIC Registry services (like WHOIS, Reverse DNS e'tal)
>> >     don't remit fees to AFRINIC?
>> >
>> >     Thanks!
>> >
>> >
>> >     _______________________________________________
>> >     Community-Discuss mailing list
>> >     Community-Discuss at afrinic.net <mailto:Community-Discuss at afrinic.net
>> >
>> >     https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Community-Discuss mailing list
>> > Community-Discuss at afrinic.net
>> > https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>> >
>>
>> --
>> Mark James ELKINS  -  Posix Systems - (South) Africa
>> mje at posix.co.za       Tel: +27.128070590  Cell: +27.826010496
>> For fast, reliable, low cost Internet in ZA: https://ftth.posix.co.za
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Community-Discuss mailing list
>> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net
>> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20160623/db24132b/attachment.html>

From noah at neo.co.tz  Thu Jun 23 18:05:44 2016
From: noah at neo.co.tz (Noah)
Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2016 21:05:44 +0300
Subject: [Community-Discuss] Legacy Resource Holders WHOIS... fees
	remits.
In-Reply-To: <CAHm7s1Q1iYK8NJW1E8VQDPk5a7xFC7cYh4R-tWFqj_A2kjYJow@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CA+O0tSn=L1KGPz0-VDRxAxEOtaB+WUZhpmUpNd6orYzFx56e+g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAGTm15=sQCsihm267wpTghORAM8r5uwqXRwoherymSsMFhG18Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <576AD6F2.1080802@posix.co.za>
 <CAHm7s1Q1iYK8NJW1E8VQDPk5a7xFC7cYh4R-tWFqj_A2kjYJow@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAEqgTWY_OXO5nGsMBvbiRTNn93cFcrjAosUXH7fvpk2ApH11SA@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 11:05 PM, serge ilunga <sergekbk at gmail.com> wrote:

>
> What about the strategic plan approved and announced in BW?
>

I don?t think we went into any details of that  in BW.


> Is there any activity plan for the current year?
>

Perhaps the Board Chair can break it down for the community.


Noah
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20160623/29e2c3f0/attachment.html>

From afahounko at gmail.com  Thu Jun 23 18:28:38 2016
From: afahounko at gmail.com (Danny)
Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2016 20:28:38 +0200
Subject: [Community-Discuss] Legacy Resource Holders WHOIS... fees
	remits.
In-Reply-To: <CA+DA2xq0gy-wVrfB++LfVJm=8HxP92Kx1OZGeVzXjyhQzoFdfg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CA+O0tSn=L1KGPz0-VDRxAxEOtaB+WUZhpmUpNd6orYzFx56e+g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAGTm15=sQCsihm267wpTghORAM8r5uwqXRwoherymSsMFhG18Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <576AD6F2.1080802@posix.co.za>
 <CA+DA2xq0gy-wVrfB++LfVJm=8HxP92Kx1OZGeVzXjyhQzoFdfg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CA+DA2xp5WeyiYX27_9huBTxYKvduZgnnbzcbh-L6VHhoggCXbg@mail.gmail.com>

> 2016-06-22 20:20 GMT+02:00 Mark Elkins <mje at posix.co.za>:
>
>> I'm a legacy space holder. I also Signed the AFRINIC Registration
>> Services agreement long ago. Also became an "Individual Member" - which
>> has since become "Associate Member" - and since pay AFRINIC for the
>> pleasure. I also try and physically contribute to the Organisation.
>> I would suspect most Legacy Space Holders pay AFRINIC for some sort of
>> service - I've no idea of the stats though. I suspect most Legacy
>> Resource holders are in South Africa and most of those are probably
>> Universities.
>>
>> You should consider, Legacy Members have been around since before the
>> beginning of the RIR System. The pioneers. I had my IPv4 address space
>> years before even ARIN existed.
>>
>> I'd personally like all Legacy Resource holders to voluntarily become
>> AFRINIC Members.
>>
>
I would like:

1- Legacy ressources holders pay annual maintenance fees per prefix  they
have in the Whois.

2- We waive the maintenance fee for people like you who became AFRINIC
members  and is paying for other ressources they have gotten.

3- Becoming AFRINIC members remain voluntary for the Legacy-only.

351 legacy members paying 100$ per prefix, could show 35k that can be
interesting money for research and development.

cheers





>
>> On 22/06/2016 19:58, Adam Nelson wrote:
>> > Yup!  The IPs/ASNs given to the legacy holders predate the RIRs and are
>> > in a type of limbo.  They do not currently have to pay to maintain those
>> > numbers.  They can only be encouraged to do so.  I'm pretty sure this is
>> > true vis-a-vis legacy holders in all of the regions.
>> >
>> > -Adam
>> >
>> > --
>> > About Adam: www.linkedin.com/in/adamcnelson
>> > <https://www.linkedin.com/in/adamcnelson>
>> >
>> > On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 1:45 PM, Lydea Akiriza <akirizal at gmail.com
>> > <mailto:akirizal at gmail.com>> wrote:
>> >
>> >     Dear AFRINIC,
>> >     I have an earnest desire to learn more about Internet in Africa, for
>> >     that,I am grateful for this platform.
>> >     Today I was looking through the AFRINIC website and I came across
>> >     the Legacy Resources Holders
>> >     linkhttp://www.afrinic.net/en/services/rs/legacy-resources-holders
>> >     <http://www.afrinic.net/en/services/rs/legacy-resources-holders>
>> >     and  something stood out for me...
>> >
>> >     "Although there is no contractual relationship and obligation
>> >     between legacy resources holders and AFRINIC, legacy resources
>> >     holders still benefit from AFRINIC registry service support such as
>> >     WHOIS, reverse DNS and the Internet Routing Registry....There are
>> >     currently around 350 legacy resources holders registered in the
>> >     AFRINIC WHOIS database...AFRINIC encourages legacy resource holders
>> >     to become AFRINIC members...."
>> >
>> >     So my question is, does this mean Legacy Resource Holders despite
>> >     using AFRINIC Registry services (like WHOIS, Reverse DNS e'tal)
>> >     don't remit fees to AFRINIC?
>> >
>> >     Thanks!
>> >
>> >
>> >     _______________________________________________
>> >     Community-Discuss mailing list
>> >     Community-Discuss at afrinic.net <mailto:Community-Discuss at afrinic.net
>> >
>> >     https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Community-Discuss mailing list
>> > Community-Discuss at afrinic.net
>> > https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>> >
>>
>> --
>> Mark James ELKINS  -  Posix Systems - (South) Africa
>> mje at posix.co.za       Tel: +27.128070590  Cell: +27.826010496
>> For fast, reliable, low cost Internet in ZA: https://ftth.posix.co.za
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Community-Discuss mailing list
>> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net
>> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20160623/7162fa51/attachment.html>

From mangawilly at gmail.com  Thu Jun 23 18:51:51 2016
From: mangawilly at gmail.com (Willy MANGA)
Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2016 19:51:51 +0100
Subject: [Community-Discuss] Legacy Resource Holders WHOIS... fees
	remits.
In-Reply-To: <576AD6F2.1080802@posix.co.za>
References: <CA+O0tSn=L1KGPz0-VDRxAxEOtaB+WUZhpmUpNd6orYzFx56e+g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAGTm15=sQCsihm267wpTghORAM8r5uwqXRwoherymSsMFhG18Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <576AD6F2.1080802@posix.co.za>
Message-ID: <576C2FC7.8070208@gmail.com>


Hi,

Le 22/06/2016 19:20, Mark Elkins a ?crit :
> [...]
> You should consider, Legacy Members have been around since before the
> beginning of the RIR System. The pioneers. I had my IPv4 address space
> years before even ARIN existed.
> 
> I'd personally like all Legacy Resource holders to voluntarily become
> AFRINIC Members.

I'd like all legacy resource holders push v6 adoption AND use within
Africa . They were pioneers, they should continue to lead IMHO :)


-- 
Willy Manga
freenode: ongolaBoy
Ubuntu Cameroonian Loco Team
https://launchpad.net/~manga-willy

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20160623/374f9d0c/attachment.sig>

From noah at neo.co.tz  Thu Jun 23 19:07:56 2016
From: noah at neo.co.tz (Noah)
Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2016 22:07:56 +0300
Subject: [Community-Discuss] Legacy Resource Holders WHOIS... fees
	remits.
In-Reply-To: <CAEqgTWa6uyuyNg7rFjo-f5ptHhwLgSmSAmu7BNCtTxX2K-VS-Q@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CA+O0tSn=L1KGPz0-VDRxAxEOtaB+WUZhpmUpNd6orYzFx56e+g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAGTm15=sQCsihm267wpTghORAM8r5uwqXRwoherymSsMFhG18Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAEqgTWZVtsyCtby4POEsQb0QLdDFDXxrOJiMJMH+Y=J1DOMXow@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAEqgTWYd1QUzwYoQcjoL7g0aa-i5EjaDvTMYLfgLqc3gfKMOHg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAEqgTWaN5XodhNvJW1HmErUNi=k-+=Q5iieUi_Sg_RAT=hH1ow@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAEqgTWa6uyuyNg7rFjo-f5ptHhwLgSmSAmu7BNCtTxX2K-VS-Q@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAEqgTWY5N-uJRhCOKDycqVUZLUsY3fe_6bfJZzevSvkhcVj5pw@mail.gmail.com>

On 22 Jun 2016 21:03, "Adam Nelson" <adam at varud.com> wrote:
>
> Yup!  The IPs/ASNs given to the legacy holders predate the RIRs and are
in a type of limbo.  They do not currently have to pay to maintain those
numbers.  They can only be encouraged to do so.  I'm pretty sure this is
true vis-a-vis legacy holders in all of the regions.
>

If they do not currently pay but their legacy number resource are
maintained on AFRINIC tools, wouldnt it make sense for the contribute to
the sustainability of those systems.?

> -Adam
>

Noah
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20160623/f5b56344/attachment.html>

From nishal at controlfreak.co.za  Thu Jun 23 22:41:07 2016
From: nishal at controlfreak.co.za (Nishal Goburdhan)
Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2016 00:41:07 +0200
Subject: [Community-Discuss] Legacy Resource Holders WHOIS... fees
	remits.
In-Reply-To: <CA+O0tSmTv+qUdsHHhmdqUZXYes+qsRzqPxkrqKzot9ip6wnHeA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CA+O0tSn=L1KGPz0-VDRxAxEOtaB+WUZhpmUpNd6orYzFx56e+g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAGTm15=sQCsihm267wpTghORAM8r5uwqXRwoherymSsMFhG18Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <576AD6F2.1080802@posix.co.za>
 <CA+DA2xq0gy-wVrfB++LfVJm=8HxP92Kx1OZGeVzXjyhQzoFdfg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CA+O0tSmTv+qUdsHHhmdqUZXYes+qsRzqPxkrqKzot9ip6wnHeA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <49D07CCC-E697-487C-A12B-604513C3A2E4@controlfreak.co.za>

On 23 Jun 2016, at 18:35, Lydea Akiriza wrote:

> But now it gets me thinking...since Legacy Resource Holders have the
> OPTION:-) of only becoming AFRINIC members 'voluntarily',how best would
> AFRINIC as an entity encourage  Legacy Resource Holders  to actually become
> members.

eventually ? these resource holders will have to get ipv6.
they won?t be legacy members any longer.

qed.

?n.



From noah at neo.co.tz  Fri Jun 24 11:25:34 2016
From: noah at neo.co.tz (Noah)
Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2016 14:25:34 +0300
Subject: [Community-Discuss] AFRINIC Strategic Plan - Post 2016
Message-ID: <CAEqgTWayodveEk_orQ5GrKLfbZCVFsJFE6Krs0WPXEo+TQ_sVg@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 11:05 PM, serge ilunga <sergekbk at gmail.com> wrote:

Serge,


> What about the strategic plan approved and announced in BW?
>

Well, the BoD Chair, In his reports to the community about BoD activities
in Gaborone talked of the new Strategic Plan for the organization
post-2016.

BoD Chair, can you please share with the community the new Strategic Plan?

I couldn't find anything on the AFRINIC website.



> Is there any activity plan for the current year?
>

I think for the above, AFRINIC is best positioned to share the 2016
Activity Plan which obviously should be based on this new SP.

Noah
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20160624/ef8dcdec/attachment.html>

From diana.ikwuagwu at unn.edu.ng  Fri Jun 24 14:18:32 2016
From: diana.ikwuagwu at unn.edu.ng (Diana Ikwuagwu)
Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2016 16:18:32 +0200
Subject: [Community-Discuss] AFRINIC Strategic Plan - Post 2016
In-Reply-To: <CAEqgTWayodveEk_orQ5GrKLfbZCVFsJFE6Krs0WPXEo+TQ_sVg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAEqgTWayodveEk_orQ5GrKLfbZCVFsJFE6Krs0WPXEo+TQ_sVg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAB=5e9+1MqgRjJo8C7505A2cL=Rdok-3NVjmDptJc88oU9P_ag@mail.gmail.com>

Hi guys, I am so much thrilled about your topics, ideas and
contributions in this community discuss.  However, I just a newly
registered member and as such presently I have nothing to contribute
but will join perfectly well very soon.
I like this group. Cheers.

Ogochukwu


On 6/24/16, Noah <noah at neo.co.tz> wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 11:05 PM, serge ilunga <sergekbk at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Serge,
>
>
>> What about the strategic plan approved and announced in BW?
>>
>
> Well, the BoD Chair, In his reports to the community about BoD activities
> in Gaborone talked of the new Strategic Plan for the organization
> post-2016.
>
> BoD Chair, can you please share with the community the new Strategic Plan?
>
> I couldn't find anything on the AFRINIC website.
>
>
>
>> Is there any activity plan for the current year?
>>
>
> I think for the above, AFRINIC is best positioned to share the 2016
> Activity Plan which obviously should be based on this new SP.
>
> Noah
>



From sergekbk at gmail.com  Fri Jun 24 16:07:15 2016
From: sergekbk at gmail.com (serge ilunga)
Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2016 17:07:15 +0100
Subject: [Community-Discuss] post ipv4 depletion frauds,
	brokers activities
In-Reply-To: <e9daca4c-193e-0427-9a81-a2ccb32f40ff@gmail.com>
References: <CA+O0tSn=L1KGPz0-VDRxAxEOtaB+WUZhpmUpNd6orYzFx56e+g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAGTm15=sQCsihm267wpTghORAM8r5uwqXRwoherymSsMFhG18Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <e9daca4c-193e-0427-9a81-a2ccb32f40ff@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAHm7s1RB2OYEYMHhniFYy_L8PjqnZT97VxCO0tnKxCx=RmN=gg@mail.gmail.com>

Some of the bad things may affect us, as globally we failed to adopt RPKI*
and  to improve the IRR and the Whois.

Many dormant and weak protected records shall exist here as well.  Many
password-only protected records. I get worried when i saw people arguing
that removing BPKI certificate for accessing certain function on myAFRINIC
make it  easy to use. How and when are we  educating and pushing people to
use strong authentication/authorisation mechanisms when managing critical
ressources ?


(*)http://rpki.surfnet.nl/perrir.html

On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 5:40 AM, Jean-Robert Hountomey <
jrhountomey at gmail.com> wrote:

> Fraudsters, Brokers and criminals are buying, stealing ipv4 addresses. What is the status in AfriNIC Service Region ?
>
> Leslie Nobile's made a presentation at NANOG 67 (1) (2) one Post IPV4 depletion.
>
> Our understanding is that Fraudsters, criminals; whatever we called them are using different methods to get IPV4; including setting up
> fake companies; looking for dormant records, legacy records and trying to establish themselves as the rightful administrator.
>
> What is the situation within AfriNIC Region ?
> More Information at:
> (1) https://www.nanog.org/sites/default/files/Nobile_Post_Ipv4_Depletion.pdf
> (2) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i7FGChQNUtA
> (3) Bruce Schneier Comment here.*: *https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2016/06/fraudsters_are_.html
> (4) http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/06/16/ipv4_hijacking/
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>
>


-- 
*Serge ILUNGA KABWIKA*
*Skype: sergekbk*
*Cell: +243814443160*
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20160624/2f20e93c/attachment.html>

From honest1989 at gmail.com  Fri Jun 24 19:06:10 2016
From: honest1989 at gmail.com (Honest Ornella GANKPA)
Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2016 20:06:10 +0100
Subject: [Community-Discuss] post ipv4 depletion frauds,
	brokers activities
In-Reply-To: <CAHm7s1RB2OYEYMHhniFYy_L8PjqnZT97VxCO0tnKxCx=RmN=gg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CA+O0tSn=L1KGPz0-VDRxAxEOtaB+WUZhpmUpNd6orYzFx56e+g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAGTm15=sQCsihm267wpTghORAM8r5uwqXRwoherymSsMFhG18Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <e9daca4c-193e-0427-9a81-a2ccb32f40ff@gmail.com>
 <CAHm7s1RB2OYEYMHhniFYy_L8PjqnZT97VxCO0tnKxCx=RmN=gg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAKZY-5bcd2Zy3de807qJZFcgwHP+0si+2O3=X1tkgNr5NvcRmA@mail.gmail.com>

I agree with you Serge.

It is quite scary actually that even the RIR is promoting such bad
practices on the pretense of simplicity. And why isn't the community
consulted when such decisions are taken?

2016-06-24 17:07 GMT+01:00 serge ilunga <sergekbk at gmail.com>:

>
> Some of the bad things may affect us, as globally we failed to adopt RPKI*
> and  to improve the IRR and the Whois.
>
> Many dormant and weak protected records shall exist here as well.  Many
> password-only protected records. I get worried when i saw people arguing
> that removing BPKI certificate for accessing certain function on myAFRINIC
> make it  easy to use. How and when are we  educating and pushing people to
> use strong authentication/authorisation mechanisms when managing critical
> ressources ?
>
>
> (*)http://rpki.surfnet.nl/perrir.html
>
> On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 5:40 AM, Jean-Robert Hountomey <
> jrhountomey at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Fraudsters, Brokers and criminals are buying, stealing ipv4 addresses. What is the status in AfriNIC Service Region ?
>>
>> Leslie Nobile's made a presentation at NANOG 67 (1) (2) one Post IPV4 depletion.
>>
>> Our understanding is that Fraudsters, criminals; whatever we called them are using different methods to get IPV4; including setting up
>> fake companies; looking for dormant records, legacy records and trying to establish themselves as the rightful administrator.
>>
>> What is the situation within AfriNIC Region ?
>> More Information at:
>> (1) https://www.nanog.org/sites/default/files/Nobile_Post_Ipv4_Depletion.pdf
>> (2) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i7FGChQNUtA
>> (3) Bruce Schneier Comment here.*: *https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2016/06/fraudsters_are_.html
>> (4) http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/06/16/ipv4_hijacking/
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Community-Discuss mailing list
>> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net
>> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> *Serge ILUNGA KABWIKA*
> *Skype: sergekbk*
> *Cell: +243814443160 <%2B243814443160>*
>
> _______________________________________________
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>
>


-- 
Honest Ornella GANKPA
Network engineer
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20160624/47ac3335/attachment.html>

From amelnaud at gmail.com  Fri Jun 24 19:14:27 2016
From: amelnaud at gmail.com (Arnaud AMELINA)
Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2016 19:14:27 +0000
Subject: [Community-Discuss] Annual Reports 2014 and 2015 Missing
Message-ID: <CAGDMR_dkdKZiJPLU8Kui4wN5s-=6RPUPYOJWdf4_iCE2j0VUaA@mail.gmail.com>

Hi AFRINIC community,

After several research and consultations, It appears that the annual report
for 2015 was not presented at AfRINIC meeting in Gaborone as per the bylaws
section 7.6(iii).

http://www.afrinic.net/en/about/bylaws?start=6

Also when one looks at the AFRINIC website, Annual Reports for both 2014
and 2015 are missing. The last report to be posted was for 2013 and this is
2016.

http://www.afrinic.net/en/library/corporate-documents

Can we please know why as this reports are extremely important to the
community as stakeholders.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20160624/2986e183/attachment.html>

From seun.ojedeji at gmail.com  Fri Jun 24 21:06:34 2016
From: seun.ojedeji at gmail.com (Seun Ojedeji)
Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2016 22:06:34 +0100
Subject: [Community-Discuss] post ipv4 depletion frauds,
	brokers activities
In-Reply-To: <CAHm7s1RB2OYEYMHhniFYy_L8PjqnZT97VxCO0tnKxCx=RmN=gg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CA+O0tSn=L1KGPz0-VDRxAxEOtaB+WUZhpmUpNd6orYzFx56e+g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAGTm15=sQCsihm267wpTghORAM8r5uwqXRwoherymSsMFhG18Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <e9daca4c-193e-0427-9a81-a2ccb32f40ff@gmail.com>
 <CAHm7s1RB2OYEYMHhniFYy_L8PjqnZT97VxCO0tnKxCx=RmN=gg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAD_dc6hLGPZVvN-igfc_P3TvOXtrd+_pmc4TUzUFuAzkuGiZrQ@mail.gmail.com>

Hi Serge, all

I think we need to first acknowledge that RPKI was at no point the defacto
login option across myAFRINIC portal. I for one would prefer that (as an
authentication option) instead of a section based approach.

Speaking with NO hats on.

Regards
Sent from my LG G4
Kindly excuse brevity and typos
On 24 Jun 2016 5:08 p.m., "serge ilunga" <sergekbk at gmail.com> wrote:

>
> Some of the bad things may affect us, as globally we failed to adopt RPKI*
> and  to improve the IRR and the Whois.
>
> Many dormant and weak protected records shall exist here as well.  Many
> password-only protected records. I get worried when i saw people arguing
> that removing BPKI certificate for accessing certain function on myAFRINIC
> make it  easy to use. How and when are we  educating and pushing people to
> use strong authentication/authorisation mechanisms when managing critical
> ressources ?
>
>
> (*)http://rpki.surfnet.nl/perrir.html
>
> On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 5:40 AM, Jean-Robert Hountomey <
> jrhountomey at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Fraudsters, Brokers and criminals are buying, stealing ipv4 addresses. What is the status in AfriNIC Service Region ?
>>
>> Leslie Nobile's made a presentation at NANOG 67 (1) (2) one Post IPV4 depletion.
>>
>> Our understanding is that Fraudsters, criminals; whatever we called them are using different methods to get IPV4; including setting up
>> fake companies; looking for dormant records, legacy records and trying to establish themselves as the rightful administrator.
>>
>> What is the situation within AfriNIC Region ?
>> More Information at:
>> (1) https://www.nanog.org/sites/default/files/Nobile_Post_Ipv4_Depletion.pdf
>> (2) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i7FGChQNUtA
>> (3) Bruce Schneier Comment here.*: *https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2016/06/fraudsters_are_.html
>> (4) http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/06/16/ipv4_hijacking/
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Community-Discuss mailing list
>> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net
>> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> *Serge ILUNGA KABWIKA*
> *Skype: sergekbk*
> *Cell: +243814443160 <%2B243814443160>*
>
> _______________________________________________
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20160624/8073b8a3/attachment.html>

From nishal at controlfreak.co.za  Sat Jun 25 01:57:59 2016
From: nishal at controlfreak.co.za (Nishal Goburdhan)
Date: Sat, 25 Jun 2016 03:57:59 +0200
Subject: [Community-Discuss] post ipv4 depletion frauds,
 brokers activities
In-Reply-To: <CAHm7s1RB2OYEYMHhniFYy_L8PjqnZT97VxCO0tnKxCx=RmN=gg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CA+O0tSn=L1KGPz0-VDRxAxEOtaB+WUZhpmUpNd6orYzFx56e+g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAGTm15=sQCsihm267wpTghORAM8r5uwqXRwoherymSsMFhG18Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <e9daca4c-193e-0427-9a81-a2ccb32f40ff@gmail.com>
 <CAHm7s1RB2OYEYMHhniFYy_L8PjqnZT97VxCO0tnKxCx=RmN=gg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <803D3537-57FB-4B90-918F-05B8E3149EF0@controlfreak.co.za>

On 24 Jun 2016, at 18:07, serge ilunga wrote:

> Some of the bad things may affect us, as globally we failed to adopt 
> RPKI*
> and  to improve the IRR and the Whois.
[snip]
> (*)http://rpki.surfnet.nl/perrir.html

so, i?m guessing this is in reference, on this website, to the 
?zero? reference, in the afrinic region?
i counted thirty-two networks with ROAs listed at afrinic.
so, if the true concern is poor RPKI adoption, is your ASN in that list?
and, if not, why not?

?n.

katala%  cat asn-list | awk -F ' ' '{print $1}' | sort -u

10474
12258
22690
26106
32653
327767
327917
327940
33764
36874
36958
37100
37105
37177
37181
37199
37226
37271
37301
37356
37403
3741
37474
37519
37596
37640
37663
37668
37674
37708
60781
6083
61138
7020



From nishal at controlfreak.co.za  Sat Jun 25 02:22:06 2016
From: nishal at controlfreak.co.za (Nishal Goburdhan)
Date: Sat, 25 Jun 2016 04:22:06 +0200
Subject: [Community-Discuss] post ipv4 depletion frauds,
 brokers activities
In-Reply-To: <CAKZY-5bcd2Zy3de807qJZFcgwHP+0si+2O3=X1tkgNr5NvcRmA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CA+O0tSn=L1KGPz0-VDRxAxEOtaB+WUZhpmUpNd6orYzFx56e+g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAGTm15=sQCsihm267wpTghORAM8r5uwqXRwoherymSsMFhG18Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <e9daca4c-193e-0427-9a81-a2ccb32f40ff@gmail.com>
 <CAHm7s1RB2OYEYMHhniFYy_L8PjqnZT97VxCO0tnKxCx=RmN=gg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAKZY-5bcd2Zy3de807qJZFcgwHP+0si+2O3=X1tkgNr5NvcRmA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <FDE57639-5B35-4F7D-BF57-2494403EF0A5@controlfreak.co.za>

On 24 Jun 2016, at 21:06, Honest Ornella GANKPA wrote:

> It is quite scary actually that even the RIR is promoting such bad
> practices on the pretense of simplicity

i disagree.
and i?m not quite sure you see the double standard here.

you (meaning: a general user) are happy to use your user name and 
password, and give your credit card details (ie. real money) to the 
afrinic website, based simply on your acceptance of a perceived 3rd 
party valid certificate implying identification  (it?s true;  the 
payment bits at my.afrinic.net don?t require more than a simple 
authenticated user login).
that same set of authentication information, is needed to *manage* your 
resources - that critical thing that your network needs -  on a daily 
basis.
but yet, somehow you think that this same set of 
validation/authentication criteria isn?t good enough for specific bits 
of the website?
i like to see evidence (proof).  it could be easily argued that, since 
the e-voting process was Made Simpler (tm) more people used it this 
year;  i don?t recall the actual numbers, but i?m told that there 
were *more* e-voters users this year, than last, eh?

do i wish afrinic would improve security around my.afrinic?  heck yes;  
i logged ticket #249014 with afrinic in october 2014 asking for 2FA, 
which, i?m told is slated for sometime in 2016.  (my ticket is still 
open!)   i think that 2FA would be a better security deterrent than a 
bpki cert.  my most recent cert was copied from a laptop, put onto a 
memory stick and handed to me - i?m sure you can spot the obvious 
flaws with that .. :-)


> And why isn't the community consulted when such decisions are taken?

there was a bylaw change that was done to allow electronic voting (being 
a new means of voting).  that required membership (not community - mild 
difference!) consultation.

the *mechanics* of the system, are *operational* changes.  for that, we 
have smart people at afrinic that know how to run systems.  we should 
let them do, what they are paid to do.  do they really need to get 
community^Wmember consensus to let folks know that they are changing 
their name-server software (ie. another operational change?)   :-)

?n.



From gm at kenic.or.ke  Sat Jun 25 06:45:21 2016
From: gm at kenic.or.ke (gm)
Date: Sat, 25 Jun 2016 09:45:21 +0300
Subject: [Community-Discuss] Annual Reports 2014 and 2015 Missing
Message-ID: <jdjfrclo3rt5houp0rlaveq8.1466837121995@email.android.com>

Arnaud,

I had not observed that. Thank you.  These reports are useful for us members get more operational information. 

I request Who ever does the posting to do so.

Thank you 

On Jun 24, 2016 10:14 PM, Arnaud AMELINA <amelnaud at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi AFRINIC community,
>
> After several research and consultations, It appears that the annual report for 2015 was not presented at AfRINIC meeting in Gaborone as per the bylaws section 7.6(iii).
>
> http://www.afrinic.net/en/about/bylaws?start=6
>
> Also when one looks at the AFRINIC website, Annual Reports for both 2014 and 2015 are missing. The last report to be posted was for 2013 and this is 2016.
>
> http://www.afrinic.net/en/library/corporate-documents
>
> Can we please know why as this reports are extremely important to the community as stakeholders.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20160625/c34e8ddc/attachment.html>

From honest1989 at gmail.com  Sat Jun 25 11:54:11 2016
From: honest1989 at gmail.com (Honest Ornella GANKPA)
Date: Sat, 25 Jun 2016 12:54:11 +0100
Subject: [Community-Discuss] post ipv4 depletion frauds,
	brokers activities
In-Reply-To: <FDE57639-5B35-4F7D-BF57-2494403EF0A5@controlfreak.co.za>
References: <CA+O0tSn=L1KGPz0-VDRxAxEOtaB+WUZhpmUpNd6orYzFx56e+g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAGTm15=sQCsihm267wpTghORAM8r5uwqXRwoherymSsMFhG18Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <e9daca4c-193e-0427-9a81-a2ccb32f40ff@gmail.com>
 <CAHm7s1RB2OYEYMHhniFYy_L8PjqnZT97VxCO0tnKxCx=RmN=gg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAKZY-5bcd2Zy3de807qJZFcgwHP+0si+2O3=X1tkgNr5NvcRmA@mail.gmail.com>
 <FDE57639-5B35-4F7D-BF57-2494403EF0A5@controlfreak.co.za>
Message-ID: <CAKZY-5aX2CZq-_65q21HoaGE1u0ZuEFEcPxU1KdmOBjTqpRisg@mail.gmail.com>

Hi Nishal,


2016-06-25 3:22 GMT+01:00 Nishal Goburdhan <nishal at controlfreak.co.za>:

> On 24 Jun 2016, at 21:06, Honest Ornella GANKPA wrote:
>
> It is quite scary actually that even the RIR is promoting such bad
>> practices on the pretense of simplicity
>>
>
> i disagree.
> and i?m not quite sure you see the double standard here.
>
> you (meaning: a general user) are happy to use your user name and
> password, and give your credit card details (ie. real money) to the afrinic
> website, based simply on your acceptance of a perceived 3rd party valid
> certificate implying identification  (it?s true;  the payment bits at
> my.afrinic.net don?t require more than a simple authenticated user login).
> that same set of authentication information, is needed to *manage* your
> resources - that critical thing that your network needs -  on a daily basis.
> but yet, somehow you think that this same set of validation/authentication
> criteria isn?t good enough for specific bits of the website?
> i like to see evidence (proof).  it could be easily argued that, since the
> e-voting process was Made Simpler (tm) more people used it this year;  i
> don?t recall the actual numbers, but i?m told that there were *more*
> e-voters users this year, than last, eh?
>
> do i wish afrinic would improve security around my.afrinic?  heck yes;  i
> logged ticket #249014 with afrinic in october 2014 asking for 2FA, which,
> i?m told is slated for sometime in 2016.  (my ticket is still open!)   i
> think that 2FA would be a better security deterrent than a bpki cert.


I'm not quite sure I get where you are disagreeing with me in your email? I
believe we both agree that a more secure myAfrinic would be beneficial for
all. Now wether 2 factor authentication or rpki would be better, I would
need to research 2 factor authentication to have an opinion.


> my most recent cert was copied from a laptop, put onto a memory stick and
> handed to me - i?m sure you can spot the obvious flaws with that .. :-)
>
>
:-)


> And why isn't the community consulted when such decisions are taken?
>>
>
> there was a bylaw change that was done to allow electronic voting (being a
> new means of voting).  that required membership (not community - mild
> difference!) consultation.
>
> the *mechanics* of the system, are *operational* changes.  for that, we
> have smart people at afrinic that know how to run systems.  we should let
> them do, what they are paid to do.  do they really need to get
> community^Wmember consensus to let folks know that they are changing their
> name-server software (ie. another operational change?)   :-)
>
> Surely removing an authentication security is not just a mere operational
change? I'm not on member list so that is why I wanted to make sure that
concerned parties were informed prior that



> ?n.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>



-- 
Honest Ornella GANKPA
Network engineer
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20160625/4f1ac9ef/attachment.html>

From sergekbk at gmail.com  Sat Jun 25 12:40:08 2016
From: sergekbk at gmail.com (sergekbk)
Date: Sat, 25 Jun 2016 15:40:08 +0300
Subject: [Community-Discuss] post ipv4 depletion frauds,
 brokers activities
Message-ID: <nyngr6i7d5syk6bgwecyo7ix.1466858127933@email.android.com>


AfrNIC does have valid rpki data as one can see at the link below.
http://rpki-monitor.antd.nist.gov/?p=5&s=0
The point was about poor global adoption and how we can do better.
Regards.
Serge IlungaCell: +243814443160Skype: sergekbkR.D.Congo-------- Original message --------From: Nishal Goburdhan <nishal at controlfreak.co.za> Date: 06/25/2016  04:57  (GMT+03:00) To: General Discussions of AFRINIC <community-discuss at afrinic.net> Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] post ipv4 depletion frauds, brokers activities 
On 24 Jun 2016, at 18:07, serge ilunga wrote:

> Some of the bad things may affect us, as globally we failed to adopt 
> RPKI*
> and? to improve the IRR and the Whois.
[snip]
> (*)http://rpki.surfnet.nl/perrir.html

so, i?m guessing this is in reference, on this website, to the 
?zero? reference, in the afrinic region?
i counted thirty-two networks with ROAs listed at afrinic.
so, if the true concern is poor RPKI adoption, is your ASN in that list?
and, if not, why not?

?n.

katala%? cat asn-list | awk -F ' ' '{print $1}' | sort -u

10474
12258
22690
26106
32653
327767
327917
327940
33764
36874
36958
37100
37105
37177
37181
37199
37226
37271
37301
37356
37403
3741
37474
37519
37596
37640
37663
37668
37674
37708
60781
6083
61138
7020

_______________________________________________
Community-Discuss mailing list
Community-Discuss at afrinic.net
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20160625/7ed8f2aa/attachment.html>

From noah at neo.co.tz  Sat Jun 25 13:44:01 2016
From: noah at neo.co.tz (Noah)
Date: Sat, 25 Jun 2016 16:44:01 +0300
Subject: [Community-Discuss] post ipv4 depletion frauds,
	brokers activities
In-Reply-To: <803D3537-57FB-4B90-918F-05B8E3149EF0@controlfreak.co.za>
References: <CA+O0tSn=L1KGPz0-VDRxAxEOtaB+WUZhpmUpNd6orYzFx56e+g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAGTm15=sQCsihm267wpTghORAM8r5uwqXRwoherymSsMFhG18Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <e9daca4c-193e-0427-9a81-a2ccb32f40ff@gmail.com>
 <CAHm7s1RB2OYEYMHhniFYy_L8PjqnZT97VxCO0tnKxCx=RmN=gg@mail.gmail.com>
 <803D3537-57FB-4B90-918F-05B8E3149EF0@controlfreak.co.za>
Message-ID: <CAEqgTWafqKmGR7YqDDWxTmJKY8RxR77bPs5YjfkDCD-dcdhdwg@mail.gmail.com>

On 25 Jun 2016 05:01, "Nishal Goburdhan" <nishal at controlfreak.co.za> wrote:
>
> i counted thirty-two networks with ROAs listed at afrinic.
> so, if the true concern is poor RPKI adoption, is your ASN in that list?
> and, if not, why not?
>

It should be a serious concern when you count 32 with ROA on more that
1,428 ASNs assigned.

I am happy to see a very familiar one there, but then again, I think the
point being put forward is the failure to adopt RPKI, and the failure to
improve the IRR and the WHOIS.

And how do we do better in terms of showing ?right to use? and protecting
objects in there.

> ?n.
>

Noah
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20160625/1ca35ffc/attachment.html>

From Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com  Sat Jun 25 13:49:19 2016
From: Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com (Andrew Alston)
Date: Sat, 25 Jun 2016 13:49:19 +0000
Subject: [Community-Discuss] post ipv4 depletion frauds,
 brokers activities
In-Reply-To: <CAEqgTWafqKmGR7YqDDWxTmJKY8RxR77bPs5YjfkDCD-dcdhdwg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CA+O0tSn=L1KGPz0-VDRxAxEOtaB+WUZhpmUpNd6orYzFx56e+g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAGTm15=sQCsihm267wpTghORAM8r5uwqXRwoherymSsMFhG18Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <e9daca4c-193e-0427-9a81-a2ccb32f40ff@gmail.com>
 <CAHm7s1RB2OYEYMHhniFYy_L8PjqnZT97VxCO0tnKxCx=RmN=gg@mail.gmail.com>
 <803D3537-57FB-4B90-918F-05B8E3149EF0@controlfreak.co.za>
 <CAEqgTWafqKmGR7YqDDWxTmJKY8RxR77bPs5YjfkDCD-dcdhdwg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AMSPR03MB534E014428C8878F6340771EE2F0@AMSPR03MB534.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>

Just need to point out, RPKI is a *choice*, and there could be many reasons for people NOT running RPKI, that go beyond just AfriNIC promoting it or not.

I for one am not on that list of ASN?s, and I have zero plans to be on that list of ASN?s.  Not because I don?t know how to implement it, not because I can?t go and get it, but because I am fundamentally opposed to RPKI for various reasons.

Andrew


From: Noah [mailto:noah at neo.co.tz]
Sent: 25 June 2016 16:44
To: General Discussions of AFRINIC <community-discuss at afrinic.net>
Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] post ipv4 depletion frauds, brokers activities


On 25 Jun 2016 05:01, "Nishal Goburdhan" <nishal at controlfreak.co.za<mailto:nishal at controlfreak.co.za>> wrote:
>
> i counted thirty-two networks with ROAs listed at afrinic.
> so, if the true concern is poor RPKI adoption, is your ASN in that list?
> and, if not, why not?
>

It should be a serious concern when you count 32 with ROA on more that 1,428 ASNs assigned.

I am happy to see a very familiar one there, but then again, I think the point being put forward is the failure to adopt RPKI, and the failure to improve the IRR and the WHOIS.

And how do we do better in terms of showing ?right to use? and protecting objects in there.

> ?n.
>

Noah
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20160625/d6d2b59e/attachment.html>

From alan.barrett at afrinic.net  Sat Jun 25 14:35:17 2016
From: alan.barrett at afrinic.net (Alan Barrett)
Date: Sat, 25 Jun 2016 17:35:17 +0300
Subject: [Community-Discuss] post ipv4 depletion frauds,
	brokers activities
In-Reply-To: <CAKZY-5bcd2Zy3de807qJZFcgwHP+0si+2O3=X1tkgNr5NvcRmA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CA+O0tSn=L1KGPz0-VDRxAxEOtaB+WUZhpmUpNd6orYzFx56e+g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAGTm15=sQCsihm267wpTghORAM8r5uwqXRwoherymSsMFhG18Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <e9daca4c-193e-0427-9a81-a2ccb32f40ff@gmail.com>
 <CAHm7s1RB2OYEYMHhniFYy_L8PjqnZT97VxCO0tnKxCx=RmN=gg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAKZY-5bcd2Zy3de807qJZFcgwHP+0si+2O3=X1tkgNr5NvcRmA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <E0AFD0CF-6DB0-4369-A315-A24E74CD2182@afrinic.net>


> On 24 Jun 2016, at 22:06, Honest Ornella GANKPA <honest1989 at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> I agree with you Serge. 
> 
> It is quite scary actually that even the RIR is promoting such bad practices on the pretense of simplicity. And why isn't the community consulted when such decisions are taken?

What bad practices is the RIR promoting?

Alan Barrett




From aalain at trstech.net  Sat Jun 25 14:42:59 2016
From: aalain at trstech.net (ALAIN AINA)
Date: Sat, 25 Jun 2016 18:42:59 +0400
Subject: [Community-Discuss] post ipv4 depletion frauds,
	brokers activities
In-Reply-To: <AMSPR03MB534E014428C8878F6340771EE2F0@AMSPR03MB534.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
References: <CA+O0tSn=L1KGPz0-VDRxAxEOtaB+WUZhpmUpNd6orYzFx56e+g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAGTm15=sQCsihm267wpTghORAM8r5uwqXRwoherymSsMFhG18Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <e9daca4c-193e-0427-9a81-a2ccb32f40ff@gmail.com>
 <CAHm7s1RB2OYEYMHhniFYy_L8PjqnZT97VxCO0tnKxCx=RmN=gg@mail.gmail.com>
 <803D3537-57FB-4B90-918F-05B8E3149EF0@controlfreak.co.za>
 <CAEqgTWafqKmGR7YqDDWxTmJKY8RxR77bPs5YjfkDCD-dcdhdwg@mail.gmail.com>
 <AMSPR03MB534E014428C8878F6340771EE2F0@AMSPR03MB534.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
Message-ID: <91BAF554-DA28-425D-B7C4-862D81B58BAE@trstech.net>

Hi,

The only option we may have is to deploy and encourage use of strong authentication/authorisation mechanisms to protect objects in WHOIS and IRR and monitor the objects. Perform audit/review to detect dormant and others and help members do the right things. 
An Assisted Registry Check ?

?Alain




> On Jun 25, 2016, at 5:49 PM, Andrew Alston <Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com> wrote:
> 
> Just need to point out, RPKI is a *choice*, and there could be many reasons for people NOT running RPKI, that go beyond just AfriNIC promoting it or not.
>  
> I for one am not on that list of ASN?s, and I have zero plans to be on that list of ASN?s.  Not because I don?t know how to implement it, not because I can?t go and get it, but because I am fundamentally opposed to RPKI for various reasons.
>  
> Andrew
>  
>  
> From: Noah [mailto:noah at neo.co.tz] 
> Sent: 25 June 2016 16:44
> To: General Discussions of AFRINIC <community-discuss at afrinic.net>
> Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] post ipv4 depletion frauds, brokers activities
>  
> 
> On 25 Jun 2016 05:01, "Nishal Goburdhan" <nishal at controlfreak.co.za <mailto:nishal at controlfreak.co.za>> wrote:
> >
> > i counted thirty-two networks with ROAs listed at afrinic.
> > so, if the true concern is poor RPKI adoption, is your ASN in that list?
> > and, if not, why not?
> >
> 
> It should be a serious concern when you count 32 with ROA on more that 1,428 ASNs assigned.
> 
> I am happy to see a very familiar one there, but then again, I think the point being put forward is the failure to adopt RPKI, and the failure to improve the IRR and the WHOIS.
> 
> And how do we do better in terms of showing ?right to use? and protecting objects in there.
> 
> > ?n.
> >
> 
> Noah
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20160625/2e8b3238/attachment.html>

From alan.barrett at afrinic.net  Sat Jun 25 14:58:46 2016
From: alan.barrett at afrinic.net (Alan Barrett)
Date: Sat, 25 Jun 2016 17:58:46 +0300
Subject: [Community-Discuss] Annual Reports 2014 and 2015 Missing
In-Reply-To: <CAGDMR_dkdKZiJPLU8Kui4wN5s-=6RPUPYOJWdf4_iCE2j0VUaA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAGDMR_dkdKZiJPLU8Kui4wN5s-=6RPUPYOJWdf4_iCE2j0VUaA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <91FD928B-3601-4784-A24A-3A8651EA7739@afrinic.net>


> On 24 Jun 2016, at 22:14, Arnaud AMELINA <amelnaud at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi AFRINIC community,
> 
> After several research and consultations, It appears that the annual report for 2015 was not presented at AfRINIC meeting in Gaborone as per the bylaws section 7.6(iii).

The annual report mentioned in legislation is little more than the financial statement, and that was presented.  We are in the process of preparing a much more detailed 2015 annual report, and it will be published before the end of July.  The detailed 2014 annual report was delayed, but will also be published by the end of July 2016.

Alan Barrett


From aalain at trstech.net  Sat Jun 25 15:45:29 2016
From: aalain at trstech.net (ALAIN AINA)
Date: Sat, 25 Jun 2016 19:45:29 +0400
Subject: [Community-Discuss] post ipv4 depletion frauds,
	brokers activities
In-Reply-To: <FDE57639-5B35-4F7D-BF57-2494403EF0A5@controlfreak.co.za>
References: <CA+O0tSn=L1KGPz0-VDRxAxEOtaB+WUZhpmUpNd6orYzFx56e+g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAGTm15=sQCsihm267wpTghORAM8r5uwqXRwoherymSsMFhG18Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <e9daca4c-193e-0427-9a81-a2ccb32f40ff@gmail.com>
 <CAHm7s1RB2OYEYMHhniFYy_L8PjqnZT97VxCO0tnKxCx=RmN=gg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAKZY-5bcd2Zy3de807qJZFcgwHP+0si+2O3=X1tkgNr5NvcRmA@mail.gmail.com>
 <FDE57639-5B35-4F7D-BF57-2494403EF0A5@controlfreak.co.za>
Message-ID: <6C358979-F7D6-49DB-BE90-00CB8E9738B1@trstech.net>


> On Jun 25, 2016, at 6:22 AM, Nishal Goburdhan <nishal at controlfreak.co.za> wrote:
> 
> On 24 Jun 2016, at 21:06, Honest Ornella GANKPA wrote:
> 
>> It is quite scary actually that even the RIR is promoting such bad
>> practices on the pretense of simplicity
> 
> i disagree.
> and i?m not quite sure you see the double standard here.
> 
> you (meaning: a general user) are happy to use your user name and password, and give your credit card details (ie. real money) to the afrinic website, based simply on your acceptance of a perceived 3rd party valid certificate implying identification  

Those who do have enough trust in  what you just describe, prefer other payment mechanisms


> (it?s true;  the payment bits at my.afrinic.net don?t require more than a simple authenticated user login).

Yes, The authentication needed here  is to associate the payment to the org. the rest is more on how the payment is processed.


> that same set of authentication information, is needed to *manage* your resources - that critical thing that your network needs -  on a daily basis.
> but yet, somehow you think that this same set of validation/authentication criteria isn?t good enough for specific bits of the website?

No, here we need more and strong ones as you tried to obtain via your ticket. We all agree long ago, password-only protection is weak. 

?Alain

> i like to see evidence (proof).  it could be easily argued that, since the e-voting process was Made Simpler (tm) more people used it this year;  i don?t recall the actual numbers, but i?m told that there were *more* e-voters users this year, than last, eh?
> 
> do i wish afrinic would improve security around my.afrinic?  heck yes;  i logged ticket #249014 with afrinic in october 2014 asking for 2FA, which, i?m told is slated for sometime in 2016.  (my ticket is still open!)   i think that 2FA would be a better security deterrent than a bpki cert.  my most recent cert was copied from a laptop, put onto a memory stick and handed to me - i?m sure you can spot the obvious flaws with that .. :-)
> 
> 
>> And why isn't the community consulted when such decisions are taken?
> 
> there was a bylaw change that was done to allow electronic voting (being a new means of voting).  that required membership (not community - mild difference!) consultation.
> 
> the *mechanics* of the system, are *operational* changes.  for that, we have smart people at afrinic that know how to run systems.  we should let them do, what they are paid to do.  do they really need to get community^Wmember consensus to let folks know that they are changing their name-server software (ie. another operational change?)   :-)
> 
> ?n.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss




From aalain at trstech.net  Sat Jun 25 15:46:14 2016
From: aalain at trstech.net (ALAIN AINA)
Date: Sat, 25 Jun 2016 19:46:14 +0400
Subject: [Community-Discuss] post ipv4 depletion frauds,
	brokers activities
In-Reply-To: <FDE57639-5B35-4F7D-BF57-2494403EF0A5@controlfreak.co.za>
References: <CA+O0tSn=L1KGPz0-VDRxAxEOtaB+WUZhpmUpNd6orYzFx56e+g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAGTm15=sQCsihm267wpTghORAM8r5uwqXRwoherymSsMFhG18Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <e9daca4c-193e-0427-9a81-a2ccb32f40ff@gmail.com>
 <CAHm7s1RB2OYEYMHhniFYy_L8PjqnZT97VxCO0tnKxCx=RmN=gg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAKZY-5bcd2Zy3de807qJZFcgwHP+0si+2O3=X1tkgNr5NvcRmA@mail.gmail.com>
 <FDE57639-5B35-4F7D-BF57-2494403EF0A5@controlfreak.co.za>
Message-ID: <B6963F6C-C110-4C10-8E0A-F222309E956E@trstech.net>


> On Jun 25, 2016, at 6:22 AM, Nishal Goburdhan <nishal at controlfreak.co.za> wrote:
> 
> On 24 Jun 2016, at 21:06, Honest Ornella GANKPA wrote:
> 
>> It is quite scary actually that even the RIR is promoting such bad
>> practices on the pretense of simplicity
> 
> i disagree.
> and i?m not quite sure you see the double standard here.
> 
> you (meaning: a general user) are happy to use your user name and password, and give your credit card details (ie. real money) to the afrinic website, based simply on your acceptance of a perceived 3rd party valid certificate implying identification  

Those who do have enough trust in  what you just describe, prefer other payment mechanisms


> (it?s true;  the payment bits at my.afrinic.net don?t require more than a simple authenticated user login).

Yes, the authentication needed here  is to associate the payment to the org. the rest is more on how the payment is processed.


> that same set of authentication information, is needed to *manage* your resources - that critical thing that your network needs -  on a daily basis.
> but yet, somehow you think that this same set of validation/authentication criteria isn?t good enough for specific bits of the website?

No, here we need more and strong ones as you tried to obtain via your ticket. We all agree long ago, password-only protection is weak. 

?Alain

> i like to see evidence (proof).  it could be easily argued that, since the e-voting process was Made Simpler (tm) more people used it this year;  i don?t recall the actual numbers, but i?m told that there were *more* e-voters users this year, than last, eh?
> 
> do i wish afrinic would improve security around my.afrinic?  heck yes;  i logged ticket #249014 with afrinic in october 2014 asking for 2FA, which, i?m told is slated for sometime in 2016.  (my ticket is still open!)   i think that 2FA would be a better security deterrent than a bpki cert.  my most recent cert was copied from a laptop, put onto a memory stick and handed to me - i?m sure you can spot the obvious flaws with that .. :-)
> 
> 
>> And why isn't the community consulted when such decisions are taken?
> 
> there was a bylaw change that was done to allow electronic voting (being a new means of voting).  that required membership (not community - mild difference!) consultation.
> 
> the *mechanics* of the system, are *operational* changes.  for that, we have smart people at afrinic that know how to run systems.  we should let them do, what they are paid to do.  do they really need to get community^Wmember consensus to let folks know that they are changing their name-server software (ie. another operational change?)   :-)
> 
> ?n.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss




From madomey at hotmail.com  Sun Jun 26 11:17:30 2016
From: madomey at hotmail.com (Marcus K. G. Adomey)
Date: Sun, 26 Jun 2016 11:17:30 +0000
Subject: [Community-Discuss] Resolution 201604.274 about Set-Up fees
Message-ID: <DUB119-W44FB800BC35A476D27252EB9200@phx.gbl>

Dear Chairman and CEO of AfriNIC,

The Bylaw states in the article 4.2 that ?The fees mentioned in Article 4.1 above shall be subject to review from time to time by the Board.? The important. Word   which  I am interested in is REVIEW. The board is supposed to review, yet the Board has unilaterally validated the FEES as it is stated on the website http://www.afrinic.net/en/services/rs/membership-fees. 
 
The community has not been inform and/or involved in any discussion and suddenly a ?Resolution 201604.274 about Set-Up fees?. This is unreasonable because decisions like this ought to be more inclusive   Is AfriNIC  moving away from bottom-up approach to a more  top-down?

This raises some questions
What problem are solving? What options have been evaluated?What is the meaning of the membership fees, which increase with my category If i have to pay allocations fees anytime i request additional resources?Shouldn?t the membership fees be turned to a lower maintenance fees at a lower price?Have we done impact analysis? 
What is the foreseen negative impact on membership and how do we mitigate? (Some may not come for additional allocation as they have to pay allocation fees plus increase in membership fees.. )What is expected  impact on revenue and how we plan to use it?
Thank you,



Marcus

 		 	   		  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20160626/ed9c1139/attachment.html>

From nishal at controlfreak.co.za  Sun Jun 26 11:35:13 2016
From: nishal at controlfreak.co.za (Nishal Goburdhan)
Date: Sun, 26 Jun 2016 13:35:13 +0200
Subject: [Community-Discuss] post ipv4 depletion frauds,
 brokers activities
In-Reply-To: <nyngr6i7d5syk6bgwecyo7ix.1466858127933@email.android.com>
References: <nyngr6i7d5syk6bgwecyo7ix.1466858127933@email.android.com>
Message-ID: <F6BD3323-CF47-49D1-9DB8-0D9527034F15@controlfreak.co.za>

On 25 Jun 2016, at 14:40, sergekbk wrote:


> The point was about poor global adoption and how we can do better.

.. and i?ll ask again:  (if this matters to you (generic netop), as it 
clearly did to the OP), is your ASN listed, and if not why not ?

?n.



From nishal at controlfreak.co.za  Sun Jun 26 11:35:17 2016
From: nishal at controlfreak.co.za (Nishal Goburdhan)
Date: Sun, 26 Jun 2016 13:35:17 +0200
Subject: [Community-Discuss] post ipv4 depletion frauds,
 brokers activities
In-Reply-To: <AMSPR03MB534E014428C8878F6340771EE2F0@AMSPR03MB534.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
References: <CA+O0tSn=L1KGPz0-VDRxAxEOtaB+WUZhpmUpNd6orYzFx56e+g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAGTm15=sQCsihm267wpTghORAM8r5uwqXRwoherymSsMFhG18Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <e9daca4c-193e-0427-9a81-a2ccb32f40ff@gmail.com>
 <CAHm7s1RB2OYEYMHhniFYy_L8PjqnZT97VxCO0tnKxCx=RmN=gg@mail.gmail.com>
 <803D3537-57FB-4B90-918F-05B8E3149EF0@controlfreak.co.za>
 <CAEqgTWafqKmGR7YqDDWxTmJKY8RxR77bPs5YjfkDCD-dcdhdwg@mail.gmail.com>
 <AMSPR03MB534E014428C8878F6340771EE2F0@AMSPR03MB534.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
Message-ID: <042E58A5-6619-42E5-96EA-B31AB39EFE8D@controlfreak.co.za>

On 25 Jun 2016, at 15:49, Andrew Alston wrote:

> Just need to point out, RPKI is a *choice*, and there could be many 
> reasons for people NOT running RPKI, that go beyond just AfriNIC 
> promoting it or not.

correct.  no-one is forcing anything on anyone, andrew  :-)


> I for one am not on that list of ASN?s, and I have zero plans to be 
> on that list of ASN?s.  Not because I don?t know how to implement 
> it, not because I can?t go and get it, but because I am 
> fundamentally opposed to RPKI for various reasons.

i think my subtle point was missed ..
if it matters to you - and, if you?re going to complain about, the 
poor adoption of RPKI/IPv6/DNSSEC/blah/, start first by implementing it 
in your own network.

to paraphrase someone much wiser than i am:  ?be the change, you want 
to see in the network .. ?

?n.



From nishal at controlfreak.co.za  Sun Jun 26 11:35:10 2016
From: nishal at controlfreak.co.za (Nishal Goburdhan)
Date: Sun, 26 Jun 2016 13:35:10 +0200
Subject: [Community-Discuss] post ipv4 depletion frauds,
 brokers activities
In-Reply-To: <CAKZY-5aX2CZq-_65q21HoaGE1u0ZuEFEcPxU1KdmOBjTqpRisg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CA+O0tSn=L1KGPz0-VDRxAxEOtaB+WUZhpmUpNd6orYzFx56e+g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAGTm15=sQCsihm267wpTghORAM8r5uwqXRwoherymSsMFhG18Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <e9daca4c-193e-0427-9a81-a2ccb32f40ff@gmail.com>
 <CAHm7s1RB2OYEYMHhniFYy_L8PjqnZT97VxCO0tnKxCx=RmN=gg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAKZY-5bcd2Zy3de807qJZFcgwHP+0si+2O3=X1tkgNr5NvcRmA@mail.gmail.com>
 <FDE57639-5B35-4F7D-BF57-2494403EF0A5@controlfreak.co.za>
 <CAKZY-5aX2CZq-_65q21HoaGE1u0ZuEFEcPxU1KdmOBjTqpRisg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <F65B1BAA-0691-4490-9BAE-FAB32CB21C4C@controlfreak.co.za>

On 25 Jun 2016, at 13:54, Honest Ornella GANKPA wrote:

> Hi Nishal,

hi,

> 2016-06-25 3:22 GMT+01:00 Nishal Goburdhan 
> <nishal at controlfreak.co.za>:
>
>> On 24 Jun 2016, at 21:06, Honest Ornella GANKPA wrote:
>>
>> It is quite scary actually that even the RIR is promoting such bad
>>> practices on the pretense of simplicity
>>
>> i disagree.
>> and i?m not quite sure you see the double standard here.
>>
>> you (meaning: a general user) are happy to use your user name and
>> password, and give your credit card details (ie. real money) to the 
>> afrinic
>> website, based simply on your acceptance of a perceived 3rd party 
>> valid
>> certificate implying identification  (it?s true;  the payment bits 
>> at
>> my.afrinic.net don?t require more than a simple authenticated user 
>> login).
>> that same set of authentication information, is needed to *manage* 
>> your
>> resources - that critical thing that your network needs -  on a daily 
>> basis.
>> but yet, somehow you think that this same set of 
>> validation/authentication
>> criteria isn?t good enough for specific bits of the website?
>> i like to see evidence (proof).  it could be easily argued that, 
>> since the
>> e-voting process was Made Simpler (tm) more people used it this year; 
>>  i
>> don?t recall the actual numbers, but i?m told that there were 
>> *more*
>> e-voters users this year, than last, eh?
>>
>> do i wish afrinic would improve security around my.afrinic?  heck 
>> yes;  i
>> logged ticket #249014 with afrinic in october 2014 asking for 2FA, 
>> which,
>> i?m told is slated for sometime in 2016.  (my ticket is still 
>> open!)   i
>> think that 2FA would be a better security deterrent than a bpki cert.
>
>
> I'm not quite sure I get where you are disagreeing with me in your 
> email?

you asserted:
?RIR is promoting such bad practices?
i disagree;  i don?t see afrinic as promoting any bad practice.

you asserted:
?..pretense of simplicity?
i disagree;  i don?t think this is a pretence.

i genuinely think that this was an attempt to make access, to more of 
the member portal, easier and simpler to use.
(and - this year at least - the online voting community seems to agree 
with me)


> I believe we both agree that a more secure myAfrinic would be 
> beneficial for
> all. Now wether 2 factor authentication or rpki would be better, I 
> would
> need to research 2 factor authentication to have an opinion.

to be clear, rpki is not necessary for access to all of the 
my.afrinic.net portal (although that, itself, is an interesting idea 
;-))
you need a certificate attesting to your identity to access part of the 
member portal.
this certificate is issue by afrinic;  what?s loosely been called a 
?bpki certificate?



> Surely removing an authentication security is not just a mere 
> operational
> change?

i believe it is;  in keeping with me earlier mentioned DNS example, 
there was no consensus required when afrinic changes TSIG keys were 
changed from once type to another?   or when SSL was removed from the 
member portal, in favour of TLS.  or .. ?

let?s use the example i mentioned;  afrinic is hopefully working on my 
(and other members? requests) to get 2FA working.
i don?t think they need member consensus to do that (ie. perform work 
to get this working).  hopefully, afrinic?s technical management 
understood the use-case here, and were able to allocate it a relative 
priority in their internal development process, and provide a simple 
yay/nay/say-when type of answer.  they certainly do not need me, or 
anyone else, telling them if/when/how to implement.
and when (see, i?m hopeful! :-))  2FA is available, i don?t expect a 
bylaw change.  nor member consensus to use, or activate, it.

i would *like* - nay, prefer - afrinic to offer the option to members to 
use the service, or not.  (ie.  not force member?s into one particular 
route).  and i?m eager to see how they approach this.

?n.



From Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com  Sun Jun 26 13:09:14 2016
From: Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com (Andrew Alston)
Date: Sun, 26 Jun 2016 13:09:14 +0000
Subject: [Community-Discuss] post ipv4 depletion frauds,
 brokers activities
In-Reply-To: <042E58A5-6619-42E5-96EA-B31AB39EFE8D@controlfreak.co.za>
References: <CA+O0tSn=L1KGPz0-VDRxAxEOtaB+WUZhpmUpNd6orYzFx56e+g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAGTm15=sQCsihm267wpTghORAM8r5uwqXRwoherymSsMFhG18Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <e9daca4c-193e-0427-9a81-a2ccb32f40ff@gmail.com>
 <CAHm7s1RB2OYEYMHhniFYy_L8PjqnZT97VxCO0tnKxCx=RmN=gg@mail.gmail.com>
 <803D3537-57FB-4B90-918F-05B8E3149EF0@controlfreak.co.za>
 <CAEqgTWafqKmGR7YqDDWxTmJKY8RxR77bPs5YjfkDCD-dcdhdwg@mail.gmail.com>
 <AMSPR03MB534E014428C8878F6340771EE2F0@AMSPR03MB534.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
 <042E58A5-6619-42E5-96EA-B31AB39EFE8D@controlfreak.co.za>
Message-ID: <9D4CE1AA-8F32-429C-BFE7-CBF4E4CD281B@liquidtelecom.com>

Hi Nishal,

You and I are actually very much on the same page here.  

What I am seeing on this list of late is people attempting to ?force? their opinions on others.  Yet, at the same time, I don?t see the same people who are yelling about things actually doing them themselves.  I keep hearing how people need to adopt RPKI and how there is something wrong that it isn?t being implemented ? I don?t agree with this stance, it?s a choice, if people are rejecting it then it is no one?s right to tell these people to suddenly implement it.  I see people trying to ?force? ipv6 adoption, and again, I think this is a very bad way to go about it.  People will implement what they want to implement for their own reasons (normally commercial).

The other phrase I keep hearing is that ?The big operators should do v6 and the small ones can have the v4?, and again, I disagree, each operator will make its own choices as to when and how it is ready.  With those choices will come consequences that the operator will have to deal with.  It is not the job of this community to enforce its views on commercial operations of any provider.  You cannot mandate someone use ipv6 if they don?t want to, you cannot mandate someone use RPKI if they don?t want to.  What you can do is encourage it (and even potentially make it *FAR* more expensive for them NOT to do it), but you can?t force it.  And if you DO attempt to force it, you have to do it unilaterally, it applies to everyone, from the smallest to the biggest, with no exceptions.

That?s just my personal opinion though.

Andrew


On 26/06/2016, 2:35 PM, "Nishal Goburdhan" <nishal at controlfreak.co.za> wrote:

On 25 Jun 2016, at 15:49, Andrew Alston wrote:

> Just need to point out, RPKI is a *choice*, and there could be many 
> reasons for people NOT running RPKI, that go beyond just AfriNIC 
> promoting it or not.

correct.  no-one is forcing anything on anyone, andrew  :-)


> I for one am not on that list of ASN?s, and I have zero plans to be 
> on that list of ASN?s.  Not because I don?t know how to implement 
> it, not because I can?t go and get it, but because I am 
> fundamentally opposed to RPKI for various reasons.

i think my subtle point was missed ..
if it matters to you - and, if you?re going to complain about, the 
poor adoption of RPKI/IPv6/DNSSEC/blah/, start first by implementing it 
in your own network.

to paraphrase someone much wiser than i am:  ?be the change, you want 
to see in the network .. ?

?n.

_______________________________________________
Community-Discuss mailing list
Community-Discuss at afrinic.net
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss



From noah at neo.co.tz  Sun Jun 26 14:14:01 2016
From: noah at neo.co.tz (Noah)
Date: Sun, 26 Jun 2016 17:14:01 +0300
Subject: [Community-Discuss] post ipv4 depletion frauds,
	brokers activities
In-Reply-To: <AMSPR03MB534E014428C8878F6340771EE2F0@AMSPR03MB534.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
References: <CA+O0tSn=L1KGPz0-VDRxAxEOtaB+WUZhpmUpNd6orYzFx56e+g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAGTm15=sQCsihm267wpTghORAM8r5uwqXRwoherymSsMFhG18Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <e9daca4c-193e-0427-9a81-a2ccb32f40ff@gmail.com>
 <CAHm7s1RB2OYEYMHhniFYy_L8PjqnZT97VxCO0tnKxCx=RmN=gg@mail.gmail.com>
 <803D3537-57FB-4B90-918F-05B8E3149EF0@controlfreak.co.za>
 <CAEqgTWafqKmGR7YqDDWxTmJKY8RxR77bPs5YjfkDCD-dcdhdwg@mail.gmail.com>
 <AMSPR03MB534E014428C8878F6340771EE2F0@AMSPR03MB534.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
Message-ID: <CAEqgTWYoSD_=fp50i-acnOmbEFBcQXWaMrrw43xMX7cRw3-+RQ@mail.gmail.com>

On 25 Jun 2016 16:51, "Andrew Alston" <Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com>
wrote:
>
> Just need to point out, RPKI is a *choice*, and there could be many
reasons for people NOT running RPKI, that go beyond just AfriNIC promoting
it or not.
>

No one disagreed and yes its your choice.

The point being put forward is "Its a best practise to do it" because its
important to support any initiative that tries to promote improved security
of Internet routing.

There were valid reasons that compeled the community that was involved in
the RPKI proposition and drafts until some folks startes implementing.

https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6480

>
>
> I for one am not on that list of ASN?s, and I have zero plans to be on
that list of ASN?s.  Not because I don?t know how to implement it, not
because I can?t go and get it, but because I am fundamentally opposed to
RPKI for various reasons.
>

And what are those fundamental reason if you may?

>
> Andrew
>

Noah
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20160626/ae9ff244/attachment.html>

From Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com  Sun Jun 26 14:37:31 2016
From: Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com (Andrew Alston)
Date: Sun, 26 Jun 2016 14:37:31 +0000
Subject: [Community-Discuss] post ipv4 depletion frauds,
 brokers activities
In-Reply-To: <CAEqgTWYoSD_=fp50i-acnOmbEFBcQXWaMrrw43xMX7cRw3-+RQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CA+O0tSn=L1KGPz0-VDRxAxEOtaB+WUZhpmUpNd6orYzFx56e+g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAGTm15=sQCsihm267wpTghORAM8r5uwqXRwoherymSsMFhG18Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <e9daca4c-193e-0427-9a81-a2ccb32f40ff@gmail.com>
 <CAHm7s1RB2OYEYMHhniFYy_L8PjqnZT97VxCO0tnKxCx=RmN=gg@mail.gmail.com>
 <803D3537-57FB-4B90-918F-05B8E3149EF0@controlfreak.co.za>
 <CAEqgTWafqKmGR7YqDDWxTmJKY8RxR77bPs5YjfkDCD-dcdhdwg@mail.gmail.com>
 <AMSPR03MB534E014428C8878F6340771EE2F0@AMSPR03MB534.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>,
 <CAEqgTWYoSD_=fp50i-acnOmbEFBcQXWaMrrw43xMX7cRw3-+RQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <BF16758858CA16EF.07CD9C22-6306-4215-972A-C68BEC6A81B3@mail.outlook.com>

Noah is it best practice? Under who's definition? Best practice to centralize something that has grown organically and found its very success in its decentralized anarchical structures? I don't think so.

I have fundamental problems with the centralization involved in RPKI, which creates unique security problems in and of itself in my view.

And I also point out that security is NOT always best practice, because security is very often a trade off. For example, is it best practice for a company to invest in security infrastructure it cannot afford and thereby risk bankcrucpy? Of course it isn't.  Best practice is not a globally holistic thing, what is best for one region may not be best for another.

There is a saying, one mans food is another mans poison. This can be applied to rpki as well imho.

You might wanna ask why there was never consensus in the RIPE region about rpki and the policy working groups could never get it passed, so ripe to push RPKI put it through a non standard membership vote which passed by a very small majority with a large number of abstentions.

There was never consensus

Andrew

Get Outlook for iOS<https://aka.ms/o0ukef>




On Sun, Jun 26, 2016 at 5:15 PM +0300, "Noah" <noah at neo.co.tz<mailto:noah at neo.co.tz>> wrote:


On 25 Jun 2016 16:51, "Andrew Alston" <Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com<mailto:Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com>> wrote:
>
> Just need to point out, RPKI is a *choice*, and there could be many reasons for people NOT running RPKI, that go beyond just AfriNIC promoting it or not.
>

No one disagreed and yes its your choice.

The point being put forward is "Its a best practise to do it" because its important to support any initiative that tries to promote improved security of Internet routing.

There were valid reasons that compeled the community that was involved in the RPKI proposition and drafts until some folks startes implementing.

https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6480

>
>
> I for one am not on that list of ASN's, and I have zero plans to be on that list of ASN's.  Not because I don't know how to implement it, not because I can't go and get it, but because I am fundamentally opposed to RPKI for various reasons.
>

And what are those fundamental reason if you may?

>
> Andrew
>

Noah
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20160626/b03be428/attachment.html>

From randy at psg.com  Sun Jun 26 14:53:22 2016
From: randy at psg.com (Randy Bush)
Date: Sun, 26 Jun 2016 23:53:22 +0900
Subject: [Community-Discuss] post ipv4 depletion frauds,
	brokers activities
In-Reply-To: <CAEqgTWYoSD_=fp50i-acnOmbEFBcQXWaMrrw43xMX7cRw3-+RQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CA+O0tSn=L1KGPz0-VDRxAxEOtaB+WUZhpmUpNd6orYzFx56e+g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAGTm15=sQCsihm267wpTghORAM8r5uwqXRwoherymSsMFhG18Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <e9daca4c-193e-0427-9a81-a2ccb32f40ff@gmail.com>
 <CAHm7s1RB2OYEYMHhniFYy_L8PjqnZT97VxCO0tnKxCx=RmN=gg@mail.gmail.com>
 <803D3537-57FB-4B90-918F-05B8E3149EF0@controlfreak.co.za>
 <CAEqgTWafqKmGR7YqDDWxTmJKY8RxR77bPs5YjfkDCD-dcdhdwg@mail.gmail.com>
 <AMSPR03MB534E014428C8878F6340771EE2F0@AMSPR03MB534.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
 <CAEqgTWYoSD_=fp50i-acnOmbEFBcQXWaMrrw43xMX7cRw3-+RQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <m2bn2ouhlp.wl%randy@psg.com>

this discussion is technically bogus.

the rpki is a certificate hierarchy of attestation of resource
ownership.

in current implementations, in order to have keys with which to
authenticate rpki elements in transport, there is a _second_ pki,
referred to as the BPKI, or business pki, which is used by the business
entities concerned.

using the rpki to authenticate web users is a broken and bogus concept.
using certificates and keys of business relationships is congruent with
the trust model of web customers/members.

and we now return you to accusing your internet registry of deriliction
of duty, high crimes, and treason.

randy



From noah at neo.co.tz  Sun Jun 26 15:03:18 2016
From: noah at neo.co.tz (Noah)
Date: Sun, 26 Jun 2016 18:03:18 +0300
Subject: [Community-Discuss] post ipv4 depletion frauds,
	brokers activities
In-Reply-To: <m2bn2ouhlp.wl%randy@psg.com>
References: <CA+O0tSn=L1KGPz0-VDRxAxEOtaB+WUZhpmUpNd6orYzFx56e+g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAGTm15=sQCsihm267wpTghORAM8r5uwqXRwoherymSsMFhG18Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <e9daca4c-193e-0427-9a81-a2ccb32f40ff@gmail.com>
 <CAHm7s1RB2OYEYMHhniFYy_L8PjqnZT97VxCO0tnKxCx=RmN=gg@mail.gmail.com>
 <803D3537-57FB-4B90-918F-05B8E3149EF0@controlfreak.co.za>
 <CAEqgTWafqKmGR7YqDDWxTmJKY8RxR77bPs5YjfkDCD-dcdhdwg@mail.gmail.com>
 <AMSPR03MB534E014428C8878F6340771EE2F0@AMSPR03MB534.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
 <CAEqgTWYoSD_=fp50i-acnOmbEFBcQXWaMrrw43xMX7cRw3-+RQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <m2bn2ouhlp.wl%randy@psg.com>
Message-ID: <CAEqgTWYHUZ7a1GwMHh9uk7nxbSm_X7emf+m44jqvKXCxeBpM0A@mail.gmail.com>

On 26 Jun 2016 17:53, "Randy Bush" <randy at psg.com> wrote:
>
> this discussion is technically bogus.
>

Innuendo

> the rpki is a certificate hierarchy of attestation of resource
> ownership.
>

And I shall refer you back to the original email of this thread.

>
> randy

Noah
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20160626/27a59903/attachment.html>

From noah at neo.co.tz  Sun Jun 26 15:26:32 2016
From: noah at neo.co.tz (Noah)
Date: Sun, 26 Jun 2016 18:26:32 +0300
Subject: [Community-Discuss] post ipv4 depletion frauds,
	brokers activities
In-Reply-To: <BF16758858CA16EF.07CD9C22-6306-4215-972A-C68BEC6A81B3@mail.outlook.com>
References: <CA+O0tSn=L1KGPz0-VDRxAxEOtaB+WUZhpmUpNd6orYzFx56e+g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAGTm15=sQCsihm267wpTghORAM8r5uwqXRwoherymSsMFhG18Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <e9daca4c-193e-0427-9a81-a2ccb32f40ff@gmail.com>
 <CAHm7s1RB2OYEYMHhniFYy_L8PjqnZT97VxCO0tnKxCx=RmN=gg@mail.gmail.com>
 <803D3537-57FB-4B90-918F-05B8E3149EF0@controlfreak.co.za>
 <CAEqgTWafqKmGR7YqDDWxTmJKY8RxR77bPs5YjfkDCD-dcdhdwg@mail.gmail.com>
 <AMSPR03MB534E014428C8878F6340771EE2F0@AMSPR03MB534.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
 <CAEqgTWYoSD_=fp50i-acnOmbEFBcQXWaMrrw43xMX7cRw3-+RQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <BF16758858CA16EF.07CD9C22-6306-4215-972A-C68BEC6A81B3@mail.outlook.com>
Message-ID: <CAEqgTWYFA207o6ZmPsKJyqtTcsiHHZiXP-XQBWu6o61B35O4Mg@mail.gmail.com>

On 26 Jun 2016 17:39, "Andrew Alston" <Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com>
wrote:
>
> Noah is it best practice? Under who's definition?
>

Best practise urgement was subjective to me.

> I have fundamental problems with the centralization involved in RPKI,
which creates unique security problems in and of itself in my view.
>

Fair enough as that is at least from your point of view.

>
> You might wanna ask why there was never consensus in the RIPE region
about rpki and the policy working groups could never get it passed, so ripe
to push RPKI put it through a non standard membership vote which passed by
a very small majority with a large number of abstentions.
>

Isn't it obvious now.

That the IPv4 market is a multimillion $$$$ venture out there.

>
> There was never consensus

That is normal where there is a discourse and that is why we are attempting
to discuss the same here as a community.

>
> Andrew
>

Noah
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20160626/c87e7990/attachment.html>

From Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com  Sun Jun 26 15:37:52 2016
From: Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com (Andrew Alston)
Date: Sun, 26 Jun 2016 15:37:52 +0000
Subject: [Community-Discuss] post ipv4 depletion frauds,
 brokers activities
In-Reply-To: <CAEqgTWYFA207o6ZmPsKJyqtTcsiHHZiXP-XQBWu6o61B35O4Mg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CA+O0tSn=L1KGPz0-VDRxAxEOtaB+WUZhpmUpNd6orYzFx56e+g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAGTm15=sQCsihm267wpTghORAM8r5uwqXRwoherymSsMFhG18Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <e9daca4c-193e-0427-9a81-a2ccb32f40ff@gmail.com>
 <CAHm7s1RB2OYEYMHhniFYy_L8PjqnZT97VxCO0tnKxCx=RmN=gg@mail.gmail.com>
 <803D3537-57FB-4B90-918F-05B8E3149EF0@controlfreak.co.za>
 <CAEqgTWafqKmGR7YqDDWxTmJKY8RxR77bPs5YjfkDCD-dcdhdwg@mail.gmail.com>
 <AMSPR03MB534E014428C8878F6340771EE2F0@AMSPR03MB534.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
 <CAEqgTWYoSD_=fp50i-acnOmbEFBcQXWaMrrw43xMX7cRw3-+RQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <BF16758858CA16EF.07CD9C22-6306-4215-972A-C68BEC6A81B3@mail.outlook.com>
 <CAEqgTWYFA207o6ZmPsKJyqtTcsiHHZiXP-XQBWu6o61B35O4Mg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <73F0E732-080B-4474-9233-770958C005BA@liquidtelecom.com>

Noah,

Isn't it obvious now.

That the IPv4 market is a multimillion $$$$ venture out there.

Can you explain and expand on this a bit more?  Because it?s far from obvious to me what you are implying here.

Andrew




-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20160626/6feca62c/attachment.html>

From jrhountomey at gmail.com  Mon Jun 27 08:43:22 2016
From: jrhountomey at gmail.com (Jean-Robert Hountomey)
Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2016 03:43:22 -0500
Subject: [Community-Discuss] post ipv4 depletion frauds,
 brokers activities
In-Reply-To: <CAEqgTWYHUZ7a1GwMHh9uk7nxbSm_X7emf+m44jqvKXCxeBpM0A@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CA+O0tSn=L1KGPz0-VDRxAxEOtaB+WUZhpmUpNd6orYzFx56e+g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAGTm15=sQCsihm267wpTghORAM8r5uwqXRwoherymSsMFhG18Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <e9daca4c-193e-0427-9a81-a2ccb32f40ff@gmail.com>
 <CAHm7s1RB2OYEYMHhniFYy_L8PjqnZT97VxCO0tnKxCx=RmN=gg@mail.gmail.com>
 <803D3537-57FB-4B90-918F-05B8E3149EF0@controlfreak.co.za>
 <CAEqgTWafqKmGR7YqDDWxTmJKY8RxR77bPs5YjfkDCD-dcdhdwg@mail.gmail.com>
 <AMSPR03MB534E014428C8878F6340771EE2F0@AMSPR03MB534.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
 <CAEqgTWYoSD_=fp50i-acnOmbEFBcQXWaMrrw43xMX7cRw3-+RQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <m2bn2ouhlp.wl%randy@psg.com>
 <CAEqgTWYHUZ7a1GwMHh9uk7nxbSm_X7emf+m44jqvKXCxeBpM0A@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1b18af84-09f0-0fa4-89d6-f9940278233d@gmail.com>

Thanks all, for providing various perspectives. I believe that is what the community is about:being able to educate one 
seeking information. 

We indeed discuss a lot of things; may be should we add a summary of key issues, trends, best current practices etc on 
AfriNIC?s blog to educate more people.

Moving further with the topic, I also recall IP addresses theft (to generate money) reported earlier this year (1); 
over four million stolen IPv4 blocks allocated to internet providers in the APNIC Community have been hijacked by 
spammers and routed through an ISP in the US.  

In the incident Response community the success rate of reaching AfriNIC' whois database contacts is still low when 
it comes to specific countries (less than 40%).

I have specific questions to AfriNIC Organization about what is done done in the administrative part or how we are being prepared:

Noble outlined trends in the ARIN Region:

- unauthorized changes made to database records to gain control of IP resources
- what I would call IP Address recycling thought an ecosystem of brokers
- Fraudsters setting up shell companies to hoard IPv4 space just before depletion

Questions

1. Do we see similar trends in the Region ?
2. Do you know case of companies registering in Africa for IPv4 addresses and for malicious intent?
3. If yes how are we dealing with that ?
4. Are we getting prepared to face similar issues?
5. How are we educating users ?
6. What is the current rate of response to POC Validation requests ?

I have also read that in other regions there are reclaimed addresses obtained via the Recovery of unused address space policy 
or when Members' accounts are closed

7. Do we have something similar in AfriNIC?s region?

Thanks.

Jean-Robert

(1). http://www.itnews.com.au/news/verizon-accused-of-ignoring-spammers-ip-address-theft-413607




From noah at neo.co.tz  Mon Jun 27 10:18:03 2016
From: noah at neo.co.tz (Noah)
Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2016 13:18:03 +0300
Subject: [Community-Discuss] post ipv4 depletion frauds,
	brokers activities
In-Reply-To: <73F0E732-080B-4474-9233-770958C005BA@liquidtelecom.com>
References: <CA+O0tSn=L1KGPz0-VDRxAxEOtaB+WUZhpmUpNd6orYzFx56e+g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAGTm15=sQCsihm267wpTghORAM8r5uwqXRwoherymSsMFhG18Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <e9daca4c-193e-0427-9a81-a2ccb32f40ff@gmail.com>
 <CAHm7s1RB2OYEYMHhniFYy_L8PjqnZT97VxCO0tnKxCx=RmN=gg@mail.gmail.com>
 <803D3537-57FB-4B90-918F-05B8E3149EF0@controlfreak.co.za>
 <CAEqgTWafqKmGR7YqDDWxTmJKY8RxR77bPs5YjfkDCD-dcdhdwg@mail.gmail.com>
 <AMSPR03MB534E014428C8878F6340771EE2F0@AMSPR03MB534.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
 <CAEqgTWYoSD_=fp50i-acnOmbEFBcQXWaMrrw43xMX7cRw3-+RQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <BF16758858CA16EF.07CD9C22-6306-4215-972A-C68BEC6A81B3@mail.outlook.com>
 <CAEqgTWYFA207o6ZmPsKJyqtTcsiHHZiXP-XQBWu6o61B35O4Mg@mail.gmail.com>
 <73F0E732-080B-4474-9233-770958C005BA@liquidtelecom.com>
Message-ID: <CAEqgTWbdV_xzu17vtn5kOVj8ALdauLBw_FxNsymw3ghRo6x3dw@mail.gmail.com>

On 26 Jun 2016 18:39, "Andrew Alston" <Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com>
wrote:
>
> Noah,
>
> Isn't it obvious now.
>
> That the IPv4 market is a multimillion $$$$ venture out there.
>
> Can you explain and expand on this a bit more?  Because it?s far from
obvious to me what you are implying here.
>
Andrew,

PS: I am not sure if number resources were meant to be a commodity but that
is what they are turning into.

NOTE:  The idea was for them [Number Resources] to be allocated on needs
basis and at some administrative fees and if company 'foo'  run out of
business and couldn't use them any longer, they were then returned to the
parent RIR for re-allocation.

Now, to drive my argument home....see links below....

https://www.apnic.net/manage-ip/manage-resources/transfer-resources/transfer-facilitators

http://ipv4marketgroup.com/

http://www.hilcostreambank.com/ipv4-brokerage

http://www.iptrading.com/

http://www.gtri.com/how-to-buy-or-sell-ipv4-addresses/   ---- This explains
it even more....

https://conference.apnic.net/data/41/apricot-2016-ipv4-market-group-final_1456115892.pdf
.

And just before you point out that, there is no relation with the RPKI
argument, those seeking to benefit from whatever loophole they may abuse,
wont stop at nothing since its all about money. But to whose benefit. [1]

And that is why the original post of this thread was "shedding some light"
on what is happening at ARIN and why we should also engage in a discourse
on what the situation is on the ground within the AFRINIC region.

Which is why RPKI surfaced in the discussion because of its benefits and to
quote a text from one of the responses to this thread..

"the rpki is a certificate hierarchy of attestation of resource
ownership".  As in, can HELP keep hijackers off some org allocated space.

> Andrew
>

Noah

[1] The internet is the only space where no one has control and everyone
wants it that way. Number resources that she depends on are therefore
critical.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20160627/8e8572af/attachment.html>

From amelnaud at gmail.com  Mon Jun 27 10:40:22 2016
From: amelnaud at gmail.com (Arnaud AMELINA)
Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2016 10:40:22 +0000
Subject: [Community-Discuss] Annual Reports 2014 and 2015 Missing
In-Reply-To: <91FD928B-3601-4784-A24A-3A8651EA7739@afrinic.net>
References: <CAGDMR_dkdKZiJPLU8Kui4wN5s-=6RPUPYOJWdf4_iCE2j0VUaA@mail.gmail.com>
 <91FD928B-3601-4784-A24A-3A8651EA7739@afrinic.net>
Message-ID: <CAGDMR_cgmRA2QGQCUnPuDzJ2sAwNA2Y+gAUTainm1FseH2Q-Zg@mail.gmail.com>

Dear CEO,

Thank you for your response.

However, I am very surprised to read from you that the Annual
Report is less important than the financial report, According to the
Company Act in Mauritius, the Annual Report is required as well as the
financial report, and shall [Annual Report] be available no later than 6
months after the closing of the annual balance sheet.

This report, according to the Company Act, must be made availed
to members by the Board 14 days before the AGM together with the financial
report and the audit report duly signed. This is described in the Caompany
Act Sections 218 to 220.

Compared to all the above how can you explain the delay of the 2014 annual
report.

Regards

Arnaud

> On 24 Jun 2016, at 22:14, Arnaud AMELINA <amelnaud at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi AFRINIC community,
>
> After several research and consultations, It appears that the annual
report for 2015 was not presented at AfRINIC meeting in Gaborone as per the
bylaws section 7.6(iii).

The annual report mentioned in legislation is little more than the
financial statement, and that was presented.  We are in the process of
preparing a much more detailed 2015 annual report, and it will be published
before the end of July.  The detailed 2014 annual report was delayed, but
will also be published by the end of July 2016.

Alan Barrett
_______________________________________________
Community-Discuss mailing list
Community-Discuss at afrinic.net
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20160627/8f004d3b/attachment.html>

From alan.barrett at afrinic.net  Mon Jun 27 10:48:59 2016
From: alan.barrett at afrinic.net (Alan Barrett)
Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2016 13:48:59 +0300
Subject: [Community-Discuss] Annual Reports 2014 and 2015 Missing
In-Reply-To: <CAGDMR_cgmRA2QGQCUnPuDzJ2sAwNA2Y+gAUTainm1FseH2Q-Zg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAGDMR_dkdKZiJPLU8Kui4wN5s-=6RPUPYOJWdf4_iCE2j0VUaA@mail.gmail.com>
 <91FD928B-3601-4784-A24A-3A8651EA7739@afrinic.net>
 <CAGDMR_cgmRA2QGQCUnPuDzJ2sAwNA2Y+gAUTainm1FseH2Q-Zg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <3CC3CDF9-3DA8-41E1-8CC0-FB81D35A2951@afrinic.net>


> On 27 Jun 2016, at 13:40, Arnaud AMELINA <amelnaud at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Dear CEO,
> 
> Thank you for your response. 
> 
> However, I am very surprised to read from you that the Annual Report is less important than the financial report,

I didn?t say that.

> According to the Company Act in Mauritius, the Annual Report is required as well as the financial report, and shall [Annual Report] be available no later than 6 months after the closing of the annual balance sheet. 
> 
> This report, according to the Company Act, must be made availed to members by the Board 14 days before the AGM together with the financial report and the audit report duly signed. This is described in the Caompany Act Sections 218 to 220.
> 
> Compared to all the above how can you explain the delay of the 2014 annual report.

I will not attempt to explain the delay, except to say that I am still learning the requirements, and we will try to do better in future.

Alan Barrett




From silber.mike at gmail.com  Mon Jun 27 11:07:36 2016
From: silber.mike at gmail.com (Mike Silber)
Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2016 13:07:36 +0200
Subject: [Community-Discuss] post ipv4 depletion frauds,
	brokers activities
In-Reply-To: <CAEqgTWbdV_xzu17vtn5kOVj8ALdauLBw_FxNsymw3ghRo6x3dw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CA+O0tSn=L1KGPz0-VDRxAxEOtaB+WUZhpmUpNd6orYzFx56e+g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAGTm15=sQCsihm267wpTghORAM8r5uwqXRwoherymSsMFhG18Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <e9daca4c-193e-0427-9a81-a2ccb32f40ff@gmail.com>
 <CAHm7s1RB2OYEYMHhniFYy_L8PjqnZT97VxCO0tnKxCx=RmN=gg@mail.gmail.com>
 <803D3537-57FB-4B90-918F-05B8E3149EF0@controlfreak.co.za>
 <CAEqgTWafqKmGR7YqDDWxTmJKY8RxR77bPs5YjfkDCD-dcdhdwg@mail.gmail.com>
 <AMSPR03MB534E014428C8878F6340771EE2F0@AMSPR03MB534.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
 <CAEqgTWYoSD_=fp50i-acnOmbEFBcQXWaMrrw43xMX7cRw3-+RQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <BF16758858CA16EF.07CD9C22-6306-4215-972A-C68BEC6A81B3@mail.outlook.com>
 <CAEqgTWYFA207o6ZmPsKJyqtTcsiHHZiXP-XQBWu6o61B35O4Mg@mail.gmail.com>
 <73F0E732-080B-4474-9233-770958C005BA@liquidtelecom.com>
 <CAEqgTWbdV_xzu17vtn5kOVj8ALdauLBw_FxNsymw3ghRo6x3dw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <27CED47D-97B2-43B0-A1FD-17D905BC8047@gmail.com>

Noah

> On 27 Jun 2016, at 12:18, Noah <noah at neo.co.tz> wrote:
> 
> 
> And just before you point out that, there is no relation with the RPKI argument, those seeking to benefit from whatever loophole they may abuse, wont stop at nothing since its all about money. But to whose benefit. [1]
> 
> And that is why the original post of this thread was "shedding some light" on what is happening at ARIN and why we should also engage in a discourse on what the situation is on the ground within the AFRINIC region.
> 
> Which is why RPKI surfaced in the discussion because of its benefits and to quote a text from one of the responses to this thread..
> 
> "the rpki is a certificate hierarchy of attestation of resource ownership".  As in, can HELP keep hijackers off some org allocated space.

You may want to consider the Internet Draft submitted by Xiaodong Lee et al: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-lee-sidr-rpki-deployment-01

It may give you some insight into the concerns that are being raised as to the risks associated with RPKI and some of the implementation complexity.

I think the point is that some of these tools may need some refinement and adoption can be encouraged however it does come with attendant risks.

Regards

Mike






From mark.tinka at seacom.mu  Mon Jun 27 11:36:01 2016
From: mark.tinka at seacom.mu (Mark Tinka)
Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2016 13:36:01 +0200
Subject: [Community-Discuss] post ipv4 depletion frauds,
 brokers activities
In-Reply-To: <27CED47D-97B2-43B0-A1FD-17D905BC8047@gmail.com>
References: <CA+O0tSn=L1KGPz0-VDRxAxEOtaB+WUZhpmUpNd6orYzFx56e+g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAGTm15=sQCsihm267wpTghORAM8r5uwqXRwoherymSsMFhG18Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <e9daca4c-193e-0427-9a81-a2ccb32f40ff@gmail.com>
 <CAHm7s1RB2OYEYMHhniFYy_L8PjqnZT97VxCO0tnKxCx=RmN=gg@mail.gmail.com>
 <803D3537-57FB-4B90-918F-05B8E3149EF0@controlfreak.co.za>
 <CAEqgTWafqKmGR7YqDDWxTmJKY8RxR77bPs5YjfkDCD-dcdhdwg@mail.gmail.com>
 <AMSPR03MB534E014428C8878F6340771EE2F0@AMSPR03MB534.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
 <CAEqgTWYoSD_=fp50i-acnOmbEFBcQXWaMrrw43xMX7cRw3-+RQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <BF16758858CA16EF.07CD9C22-6306-4215-972A-C68BEC6A81B3@mail.outlook.com>
 <CAEqgTWYFA207o6ZmPsKJyqtTcsiHHZiXP-XQBWu6o61B35O4Mg@mail.gmail.com>
 <73F0E732-080B-4474-9233-770958C005BA@liquidtelecom.com>
 <CAEqgTWbdV_xzu17vtn5kOVj8ALdauLBw_FxNsymw3ghRo6x3dw@mail.gmail.com>
 <27CED47D-97B2-43B0-A1FD-17D905BC8047@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <b069af27-fe3e-77e2-c05f-1d75746080a7@seacom.mu>



On 27/Jun/16 13:07, Mike Silber wrote:

> You may want to consider the Internet Draft submitted by Xiaodong Lee et al: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-lee-sidr-rpki-deployment-01
>
> It may give you some insight into the concerns that are being raised as to the risks associated with RPKI and some of the implementation complexity.
>
> I think the point is that some of these tools may need some refinement and adoption can be encouraged however it does come with attendant risks.

Protocol and implementation issues can be resolved with deployment. If
no one deploys, it is hard to refine things.

In general, I agree that forcing things down people's throats is not
kosher. But from a practical standpoint, we (SEACOM) have deployed RPKI
and have helped to refine the implementation we use over the past 3
years through operational feedback to the various vendors in our network.

I understand the issues around some being concerned about the
centralized nature of the RPKI. There have been suggestions put forward
to mitigate that, in the same way we trust the centralized model of the DNS.

Mark.



From ali at hussein.me.ke  Mon Jun 27 11:48:49 2016
From: ali at hussein.me.ke (Ali Hussein)
Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2016 14:48:49 +0300
Subject: [Community-Discuss] Annual Reports 2014 and 2015 Missing
In-Reply-To: <3CC3CDF9-3DA8-41E1-8CC0-FB81D35A2951@afrinic.net>
References: <CAGDMR_dkdKZiJPLU8Kui4wN5s-=6RPUPYOJWdf4_iCE2j0VUaA@mail.gmail.com>
 <91FD928B-3601-4784-A24A-3A8651EA7739@afrinic.net>
 <CAGDMR_cgmRA2QGQCUnPuDzJ2sAwNA2Y+gAUTainm1FseH2Q-Zg@mail.gmail.com>
 <3CC3CDF9-3DA8-41E1-8CC0-FB81D35A2951@afrinic.net>
Message-ID: <2E009947-488C-486B-9B52-48AE4B6310BB@hussein.me.ke>

Great response from Alan. As leaders we must understand that our learning curve will continue to be just that - a learning curve. 

May I humbly suggest a checklist against regulatory requirements before any major meeting will go a long way in harmonizing the requirements for such meetings.

Ali Hussein
Principal
Hussein & Associates
+254 0713 601113 / 0770906375

Twitter: @AliHKassim
Skype: abu-jomo
LinkedIn: http://ke.linkedin.com/in/alihkassim


"Discovery consists in seeing what everyone else has seen and thinking what no one else has thought".  ~ Albert Szent-Gy?rgyi

Sent from my iPad

> On 27 Jun 2016, at 1:48 PM, Alan Barrett <alan.barrett at afrinic.net> wrote:
> 
> 
>> On 27 Jun 2016, at 13:40, Arnaud AMELINA <amelnaud at gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>> Dear CEO,
>> 
>> Thank you for your response. 
>> 
>> However, I am very surprised to read from you that the Annual Report is less important than the financial report,
> 
> I didn?t say that.
> 
>> According to the Company Act in Mauritius, the Annual Report is required as well as the financial report, and shall [Annual Report] be available no later than 6 months after the closing of the annual balance sheet. 
>> 
>> This report, according to the Company Act, must be made availed to members by the Board 14 days before the AGM together with the financial report and the audit report duly signed. This is described in the Caompany Act Sections 218 to 220.
>> 
>> Compared to all the above how can you explain the delay of the 2014 annual report.
> 
> I will not attempt to explain the delay, except to say that I am still learning the requirements, and we will try to do better in future.
> 
> Alan Barrett
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20160627/f4f0b156/attachment.html>

From mirriamlauren at yahoo.com  Mon Jun 27 12:51:07 2016
From: mirriamlauren at yahoo.com (Mirriam Namwau)
Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2016 12:51:07 +0000 (UTC)
Subject: [Community-Discuss] Annual Reports 2014 and 2015 Missing
References: <873018586.2101273.1467031867019.JavaMail.yahoo.ref@mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <873018586.2101273.1467031867019.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com>


On 27 Jun 2016 13:50, "Alan Barrett" <alan.barrett at afrinic.net> wrote:
>
>
> > On 27 Jun 2016, at 13:40, Arnaud AMELINA <amelnaud at gmail.com> wrote:>
> > Dear CEO,
> > 
> > Compared to all the above how can you explain the delay of the 2014 annual report.
>
> I will not attempt to explain the delay, except to say that I am still learning the requirements, and we will try to do better in future.
>Thank you for your frank response and the community hopes that the future will look different. Please note that this is a requirement for the board and "some" board members were there when 2013 report was presented and the organization must have memory. We as a community can't afford to remind those responsible for their duties especially when reports for 2014 and 2015 are not presented or available on line in year 2016. MirriamLadiesInTech
South Sudan
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20160627/80aba6ec/attachment.html>

From amelnaud at gmail.com  Mon Jun 27 13:08:28 2016
From: amelnaud at gmail.com (Arnaud AMELINA)
Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2016 13:08:28 +0000
Subject: [Community-Discuss] Annual Reports 2014 and 2015 Missing
In-Reply-To: <873018586.2101273.1467031867019.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com>
References: <873018586.2101273.1467031867019.JavaMail.yahoo.ref@mail.yahoo.com>
 <873018586.2101273.1467031867019.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <CAGDMR_etAVFVLJn4qz=ekn9T=ULjtX2EvZ4pfKPDOjXuBTEntA@mail.gmail.com>

+1 to Marriam N.
Le 27 juin 2016 12:53, "Mirriam Namwau" <mirriamlauren at yahoo.com> a ?crit :

>
> On 27 Jun 2016 13:50, "Alan Barrett" <alan.barrett at afrinic.net> wrote:
> >
> >
> > > On 27 Jun 2016, at 13:40, Arnaud AMELINA <amelnaud at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Dear CEO,
> > >
> > > Compared to all the above how can you explain the delay of the 2014
> annual report.
> >
> > I will not attempt to explain the delay, except to say that I am still
> learning the requirements, and we will try to do better in future.
> >
> Thank you for your frank response and the community hopes that the future
> will look different. Please note that this is a requirement for the board
> and "some" board members were there when 2013 report was presented and the
> organization must have memory. We as a community can't afford to remind
> those responsible for their duties especially when reports for 2014 and
> 2015 are not presented or available on line in year 2016.
> Mirriam
> LadiesInTech
> South Sudan
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20160627/02b4e648/attachment.html>

From badru.ntege at nftconsult.com  Mon Jun 27 14:04:13 2016
From: badru.ntege at nftconsult.com (Badru Ntege)
Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2016 17:04:13 +0300
Subject: [Community-Discuss] Annual Reports 2014 and 2015 Missing
In-Reply-To: <873018586.2101273.1467031867019.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com>
References: <873018586.2101273.1467031867019.JavaMail.yahoo.ref@mail.yahoo.com>
 <873018586.2101273.1467031867019.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <82E64662-A369-48DD-BC45-506D6B6DC754@nftconsult.com>


 +1  

I hope there?s nothing in the mauritian companies act preventing this from  happening.

  

On 6/27/16, 3:51 PM, "Mirriam Namwau" <mirriamlauren at yahoo.com> wrote:


On 27 Jun 2016 13:50, "Alan Barrett" <alan.barrett at afrinic.net> wrote:
>
>
> > On 27 Jun 2016, at 13:40, Arnaud AMELINA <amelnaud at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Dear CEO,
> > 
> > Compared to all the above how can you explain the delay of the 2014 annual report.
>
> I will not attempt to explain the delay, except to say that I am still learning the requirements, and we will try to do better in future.
>
Thank you for your frank response and the community hopes that the future will look different. Please note that this is a requirement for the board and "some" board members were there when 2013 report was presented and the organization must have memory. We as a community can't afford to remind those responsible for their duties especially when reports for 2014 and 2015 are not presented or available on line in year 2016.
 
Mirriam
LadiesInTech
South Sudan

_______________________________________________ Community-Discuss mailing list Community-Discuss at afrinic.net https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20160627/be78e89d/attachment.html>

From sfolayan at skannet.com  Tue Jun 28 13:05:41 2016
From: sfolayan at skannet.com (Sunday Folayan)
Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2016 14:05:41 +0100
Subject: [Community-Discuss] Resolution 201604.274 about Set-Up fees
In-Reply-To: <DUB119-W44FB800BC35A476D27252EB9200@phx.gbl>
References: <DUB119-W44FB800BC35A476D27252EB9200@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <57727625.5040506@skannet.com>

Dear Members and others in the Community,

1. The Board has always been responsible for setting the fees. ?Review? includes the right to change the fees.
2. The problem being addressed is that every allocation or assignment event requires effort from staff, and it is not fair for that effort to sometimes be undertaken free of charge.
3. AFRINIC requires more revenue, not less.
4. If the proposed charging scheme had been in place during 2015, then income from allocation and assignment fees would have been about USD 550k.  Actual income from allocation and assignment fees in 2015 was about USD 350k. Therefore, the clarification that allocation or assignment fees are once per allocation or assignment, not once per member, is expected to raise about USD 200k per year.
5. Since it is being introduced in the middle of 2016, the impact on the 2016 revenue is expected to be an additional USD 100k.

Best Regards ...

Sunday Folayan.
Chair, AFRINIC Board

On 26/06/2016 12:17, Marcus K. G. Adomey wrote:
> Dear Chairman and CEO of AfriNIC,
>
> The Bylaw states in the article 4.2 that ?The fees mentioned in 
> Article 4.1 above shall be subject to review from time to time by the 
> Board.? The important. Word   which  I am interested in is REVIEW. The 
> board is supposed to review, yet the Board has unilaterally validated 
> the FEES as it is stated on the website 
> http://www.afrinic.net/en/services/rs/membership-fees.
>
> The community has not been inform and/or involved in any discussion 
> and suddenly a ?Resolution 201604.274 about Set-Up fees?. This is 
> unreasonable because decisions like this ought to be more inclusive   
> Is AfriNIC  moving away from bottom-up approach to a more  top-down?
>
> This raises some questions
>
>   * What problem are solving?
>   * What options have been evaluated?
>   * What is the meaning of the membership fees, which increase with my
>     category If i have to pay allocations fees anytime i request
>     additional resources?
>   * Shouldn?t the membership fees be turned to a lower maintenance
>     fees at a lower price?
>   * Have we done impact analysis?
>   * What is the foreseen negative impact on membership and how do we
>     mitigate? (Some may not come for additional allocation as they
>     have to pay allocation fees plus increase in membership fees.. )
>   * What is expected  impact on revenue and how we plan to use it?
>
>
> Thank you,
>
>
>
> Marcus
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20160628/f98d916e/attachment.html>

From Omo.Oaiya at wacren.net  Tue Jun 28 13:20:51 2016
From: Omo.Oaiya at wacren.net (Omo Oaiya)
Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2016 14:20:51 +0100
Subject: [Community-Discuss] [members-discuss] Accountability assessment
Message-ID: <CAG1eoi3eWuJYmbZa+s2nMnGMHHTRyDLQ9L0NakR5y8ZMwShpiw@mail.gmail.com>

On 10 June 2016 at 11:18, Alan Barrett <alan.barrett at afrinic.net> wrote:

> Arising from a review of AFRINIC?s Bylaws and other documents, several
> potential areas for improvement were identified.
>
> The attached document was presented to the AFRINIC Membership and the
> community during the AGMM in Gaborone, Botswana, on 9 June 2016.
>
> I invite the community and the membership to comment on these suggestions,
> or any other areas where the Bylaws could be improved.  Comments should be
> sent to the community-discuss at afrinic.net mailing list.  In due course,
> Bylaws changes will be drafted to implement the suggestions (and additional
> points that might be identified).
>
> Alan Barrett
> CEO, AFRINIC
>
>

Thanks Alan.  Comments below


>>>1 ......  but there is a conflict between 7.2(i) and 13.7(i) on whether
> or not Associate Members may vote in elections forDirectors. This conflict
> must be resolved one way or another.
> We need to decide whether or not Associate Members should vote, and modify
> the Bylaws to give effect to that decision


Just a matter of ambiguity in the statement in 7.2(i) to straighten out.
The bylaws are consistent.  Registered and Resource members vote. Associate
members observe.


>>>2.  Interchangeable use of the terms ?Bylaw? or ?Bylaws? and
> ?Constitution?:...... Suggest adding a clause 1.3 to clarify that this
> document may be referred to by the term ?Bylaws? or ?Constitution?, and is
> intended to serve the function of the Constitution in terms of the
> Companies Act of Mauritius.


Supported


>>3- Clarification that all Registered Members in terms of Bylaws 6.3, and
> only such Registered Members, must be registered in terms of the Companies
> Act as members of the company.


Supported but we shall seriously consider moving from this Private company
model to a more community oriented model, where all members are considered.


> >>4 - Term limits: Consider adding a term limit for elected Board members.
> >> We need to decide whether or not to add a limit, and what the limit
> should be.


Proposal :  One term and at least an election before another nomination


> >>> 5- Independence of Directors: Consider adding a limit to the number of
> Directors who may work for the same organisation.
>
> >>> We need to decide whether or not to add a limit, and what the limit
> should be.


We need to keep refreshing the board with independence, expertise and
skills so a better managed succession process is a must.  I propose with
the exclusion of the CEO that we have

-  Max 1 per org/company
-  Max 1 per country
 - Max 2  per region

 - Not more than one Director may have employment, consultancy or advisory
relationships with the same Company or Organization and/or with one of its
Related Companies or Organizations established or not in the same country.

- not more than one Director may be domiciled in the same country. Should a
candidate for a position on the Board of Directors have more than one
domicile, one of which involves a presumed incompatibility, in order to
analyze his/her case for usual country of residence, the country where the
company or organization he/she is a part of or works for is established,
and/or any other relevant data shall be considered;

 - not more than two Directors may be domiciled in the same region.


> >>>6- Regional representation: Consider modifying 13.5 to state that
> Directors must act in the interests of AFRINIC as a whole,regardless of
> their regional affiliation.


Supported

>>>7.  Conflict of interest: Consider adding a requirement for Directors to
> disclose any conflict of interest, and to recuse themselves from voting on
> any matter where they have a conflict of interest.


Supported.  In addition, the Board must have a Conflict of Interest Policy
and enforce it.

>>> 8- Separation of powers: Consider adding a requirement that no more
> than one key position (Board Chair, Vice Chair, Chief Executive Officer,
> Chief Financial Officer) may be occupied by the same person.


Supported


> >>> 9- Replacement of Directors: The bylaws sections 13.1, 13.8, 13.10,
> and 13.14 give  different methods of replacing Directors for  different
> reasons. Consider  harmonising this.


Harmonisation supported but the preferred option should be replacement
through election at the next AGMM.


> >>> 10- Board approval of nominations: The Board can approve or disapprove
>  nominations for Board elections in terms of the Bylaws section 12.14(i).
> Consider requiring a supermajority of two thirds of the Board to disapprove
> any nomination


We should remove this approval and strengthen NOMCOM.  NOMCOM composition
and operation should be reviewed and improved.   We can have the legal
advisor and past NOMCOM chair as non-voting members and make the
appointment of the other members by the board more transparent, fair and
unbiased.

The election timeline also needs to be revisited to allow enough time for
proper NOMCOM operation.


>>>11-  Modification to the Bylaws or Constitution: The Bylaws say how the
> AFRINIC Members may change the Bylaws, but the Companies Act say that the
>  Registered Members can change it. Consider requiring that the
>  Bylaws/Constitution may be changed only after a Special Resolution by all
> AFRINIC Members in terms of Bylaws 7.6(vi),so that the Registered
> Members (the same nine people as the Directors) cannot act without broader
> approval.


Registered members only MUST never amend  the bylaws.  Amendment of Bylaws
beyond regulatory compliance must require general membership notice and
consultation.

The proposed amendment should be published not less than 60 days and not
more than 90 days before with provisions for members to comment online and
in any meeting held during the consultation


> >>>12- Policies introduced by the Board: In terms of the Bylaws section
> 11.4, the Board may adopt policy changes that did not go through the normal
> PDP. Consider giving the community the right to reject such policy changes
> introduced by the Board.


Section 11.5 seems to give this right to the community but endorsement may
be open to misinterpretation so we shall just remove this.  In case of
emergency, section 8 of PDP on varying the policy process applies.

11.5:  Any policy adopted by the Board under the provisions of Article 11.4
> shall be submitted to the community for endorsement at the next public
> policy meeting.



Best wishes

-- 
Omo Oaiya
CTO/Directeur Technique, WACREN
Mobile: +234 808 888 1571 , +221 784 305 224
Skype: kodion <http:>
http://www.wacren.net
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20160628/63da5913/attachment.html>

From madomey at hotmail.com  Tue Jun 28 16:05:31 2016
From: madomey at hotmail.com (Marcus K. G. Adomey)
Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2016 16:05:31 +0000
Subject: [Community-Discuss] Resolution 201604.274 about Set-Up fees
In-Reply-To: <57727625.5040506@skannet.com>
References: <DUB119-W44FB800BC35A476D27252EB9200@phx.gbl>,
 <57727625.5040506@skannet.com>
Message-ID: <DUB119-W41E44D1E38709F25D54D90B9220@phx.gbl>

Dear Chairman 

Thank you Mr. Chairman for your response which unfortunately has not addressed the two main issues I raised in my email.

First of all, <<?Review? includes the right to change the fees>> is your meaning of REVIEW not the universally accepted meaning. Kindly, use any dictionary or Google to assess the meaning of REVIEW. The validation, as you are aware, in this community goes through bottom-up approach.

Second, I agree that << AFRINIC requires more revenue, not less >> but the increment should not be done at the shrug of one?s shoulder. The scanty explanation you have given does not answer in anyway my questions. Those questions were asked to check whether the right procedure has been followed to arrive at conclusion acceptable to all and convince the community that they are the right fees to pay. 

Allow me to restate the questions here once again:
What problem are solving?What options have been evaluated?What is the meaning of the membership fees, which increase with my category If i have to pay allocations fees anytime i request additional resources?Shouldn?t the membership fees be turned to a lower maintenance fees at a lower price?Have we done impact analysis?What is the foreseen negative impact on membership and how do we mitigate? (Some may not come for additional allocation as they have to pay allocation fees plus increase in membership fees.. )What is expected impact on revenue and how we plan to use it?
Thank you,



Marcus

    


To: community-discuss at afrinic.net; members-discuss at afrinic.net
From: sfolayan at skannet.com
Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2016 14:05:41 +0100
Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] Resolution 201604.274 about Set-Up fees


  
    
  
  
    Dear Members and others in the Community,

1. The Board has always been responsible for setting the fees. ?Review? includes the right to change the fees.
2. The problem being addressed is that every allocation or assignment event requires effort from staff, and it is not fair for that effort to sometimes be undertaken free of charge.
3. AFRINIC requires more revenue, not less.
4. If the proposed charging scheme had been in place during 2015, then income from allocation and assignment fees would have been about USD 550k.  Actual income from allocation and assignment fees in 2015 was about USD 350k. Therefore, the clarification that allocation or assignment fees are once per allocation or assignment, not once per member, is expected to raise about USD 200k per year.
5. Since it is being introduced in the middle of 2016, the impact on the 2016 revenue is expected to be an additional USD 100k.

Best Regards ...

Sunday Folayan.
Chair, AFRINIC Board
    On 26/06/2016 12:17, Marcus K. G.
      Adomey wrote:

    
    
      
      Dear Chairman and CEO of AfriNIC,

        

        The Bylaw states in the article 4.2 that ?The fees mentioned in
        Article 4.1 above shall be subject to review from time to time
        by the Board.? The important. Word   which  I am interested in
        is REVIEW. The board is supposed to review, yet the Board has
        unilaterally validated the FEES as it is stated on the website
        http://www.afrinic.net/en/services/rs/membership-fees. 

         

        The community has not been inform and/or involved in any
        discussion and suddenly a ?Resolution 201604.274 about Set-Up
        fees?. This is unreasonable because decisions like this ought to
        be more inclusive   Is AfriNIC  moving away from bottom-up
        approach to a more  top-down?

        

        This raises some questions

        
          What problem are solving? 
          What options have been evaluated?
          What is the meaning of the membership fees, which increase
            with my category If i have to pay allocations fees anytime i
            request additional resources?
          Shouldn?t the membership fees be turned to a lower
            maintenance fees at a lower price?
          Have we done impact analysis? 

          
          What is the foreseen negative impact on membership and how
            do we mitigate? (Some may not come for additional allocation
            as they have to pay allocation fees plus increase in
            membership fees.. )
          What is expected  impact on revenue and how we plan to use
            it?
        
        

        Thank you,

        

        

        

        Marcus

        

      
      

      
      

      _______________________________________________
Community-Discuss mailing list
Community-Discuss at afrinic.net
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss

    
    

  


_______________________________________________
Community-Discuss mailing list
Community-Discuss at afrinic.net
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss 		 	   		  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20160628/fe2d8544/attachment.html>

From aalain at trstech.net  Tue Jun 28 16:10:01 2016
From: aalain at trstech.net (ALAIN AINA)
Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2016 20:10:01 +0400
Subject: [Community-Discuss] [members-discuss] Accountability assessment
In-Reply-To: <CAG1eoi3eWuJYmbZa+s2nMnGMHHTRyDLQ9L0NakR5y8ZMwShpiw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAG1eoi3eWuJYmbZa+s2nMnGMHHTRyDLQ9L0NakR5y8ZMwShpiw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <36C7DEA2-B556-4842-89AC-6BFD62CE8BA8@trstech.net>

Hello,

I support these proposals of amendments of the bylaws.  They will improve the governance and make sure all parties are represented and heard on important issues.

Cheers

?Alain


> On Jun 28, 2016, at 5:20 PM, Omo Oaiya <Omo.Oaiya at wacren.net> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> On 10 June 2016 at 11:18, Alan Barrett <alan.barrett at afrinic.net <mailto:alan.barrett at afrinic.net>> wrote:
> Arising from a review of AFRINIC?s Bylaws and other documents, several potential areas for improvement were identified.
> 
> The attached document was presented to the AFRINIC Membership and the community during the AGMM in Gaborone, Botswana, on 9 June 2016.
> 
> I invite the community and the membership to comment on these suggestions, or any other areas where the Bylaws could be improved.  Comments should be sent to the community-discuss at afrinic.net <mailto:community-discuss at afrinic.net> mailing list.  In due course, Bylaws changes will be drafted to implement the suggestions (and additional points that might be identified).
> 
> Alan Barrett
> CEO, AFRINIC
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks Alan.  Comments below
> 
> 
> >>>1 ......  but there is a conflict between 7.2(i) and 13.7(i) on whether or not Associate Members may vote in elections forDirectors. This conflict must be resolved one way or another.
> We need to decide whether or not Associate Members should vote, and modify the Bylaws to give effect to that decision
> 
> Just a matter of ambiguity in the statement in 7.2(i) to straighten out. The bylaws are consistent.  Registered and Resource members vote. Associate members observe.  
> 
> 
> >>>2.  Interchangeable use of the terms ?Bylaw? or ?Bylaws? and ?Constitution?:...... Suggest adding a clause 1.3 to clarify that this document may be referred to by the term ?Bylaws? or ?Constitution?, and is intended to serve the function of the Constitution in terms of the Companies Act of Mauritius.
> 
> Supported
> 
> 
> >>3- Clarification that all Registered Members in terms of Bylaws 6.3, and only such Registered Members, must be registered in terms of the Companies Act as members of the company.
> 
> Supported but we shall seriously consider moving from this Private company model to a more community oriented model, where all members are considered. 
> 
> 
> >>4 - Term limits: Consider adding a term limit for elected Board members.
> >> We need to decide whether or not to add a limit, and what the limit should be.
> 
> Proposal :  One term and at least an election before another nomination
> 
> 
> >>> 5- Independence of Directors: Consider adding a limit to the number of Directors who may work for the same organisation.
>  
> >>> We need to decide whether or not to add a limit, and what the limit should be.
> 
> We need to keep refreshing the board with independence, expertise and skills so a better managed succession process is a must.  I propose with the exclusion of the CEO that we have
> 
> -  Max 1 per org/company
> -  Max 1 per country
>  - Max 2  per region
> 
>  - Not more than one Director may have employment, consultancy or advisory relationships with the same Company or Organization and/or with one of its Related Companies or Organizations established or not in the same country.
> 
> - not more than one Director may be domiciled in the same country. Should a candidate for a position on the Board of Directors have more than one domicile, one of which involves a presumed incompatibility, in order to analyze his/her case for usual country of residence, the country where the company or organization he/she is a part of or works for is established, and/or any other relevant data shall be considered;
> 
>  - not more than two Directors may be domiciled in the same region. 
> 
> 
> >>>6- Regional representation: Consider modifying 13.5 to state that Directors must act in the interests of AFRINIC as a whole,regardless of their regional affiliation.
> 
> Supported
> 
> >>>7.  Conflict of interest: Consider adding a requirement for Directors to disclose any conflict of interest, and to recuse themselves from voting on any matter where they have a conflict of interest.
> 
> Supported.  In addition, the Board must have a Conflict of Interest Policy and enforce it. 
> 
> >>> 8- Separation of powers: Consider adding a requirement that no more than one key position (Board Chair, Vice Chair, Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer) may be occupied by the same person.
> 
> Supported
> 
> 
> >>> 9- Replacement of Directors: The bylaws sections 13.1, 13.8, 13.10, and 13.14 give  different methods of replacing Directors for  different reasons. Consider  harmonising this.
> 
> Harmonisation supported but the preferred option should be replacement through election at the next AGMM. 
> 
> 
> >>> 10- Board approval of nominations: The Board can approve or disapprove  nominations for Board elections in terms of the Bylaws section 12.14(i). Consider requiring a supermajority of two thirds of the Board to disapprove any nomination
> 
> We should remove this approval and strengthen NOMCOM.  NOMCOM composition and operation should be reviewed and improved.   We can have the legal advisor and past NOMCOM chair as non-voting members and make the appointment of the other members by the board more transparent, fair and unbiased.   
> 
> The election timeline also needs to be revisited to allow enough time for proper NOMCOM operation.
> 
> 
> >>>11-  Modification to the Bylaws or Constitution: The Bylaws say how the AFRINIC Members may change the Bylaws, but the Companies Act say that the  Registered Members can change it. Consider requiring that the  Bylaws/Constitution may be changed only after a Special Resolution by all AFRINIC Members in terms of Bylaws 7.6(vi),so that the Registered Members (the same nine people as the Directors) cannot act without broader approval.
> 
> Registered members only MUST never amend  the bylaws.  Amendment of Bylaws beyond regulatory compliance must require general membership notice and consultation.  
> 
> The proposed amendment should be published not less than 60 days and not more than 90 days before with provisions for members to comment online and in any meeting held during the consultation
> 
> 
> >>>12- Policies introduced by the Board: In terms of the Bylaws section 11.4, the Board may adopt policy changes that did not go through the normal PDP. Consider giving the community the right to reject such policy changes introduced by the Board.
> 
> Section 11.5 seems to give this right to the community but endorsement may be open to misinterpretation so we shall just remove this.  In case of emergency, section 8 of PDP on varying the policy process applies.
> 
> 11.5:  Any policy adopted by the Board under the provisions of Article 11.4 shall be submitted to the community for endorsement at the next public policy meeting.
>  
> 
> Best wishes
> 
> -- 
> Omo Oaiya
> CTO/Directeur Technique, WACREN 
> Mobile: +234 808 888 1571 , +221 784 305 224
> Skype: kodion <http:/>
> http://www.wacren.net <http://www.wacren.net/>
>  
>  <http:/>_______________________________________________
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20160628/cab309ac/attachment.html>

From kn at millenium.net.mu  Tue Jun 28 16:12:45 2016
From: kn at millenium.net.mu (Keshwarsingh Nadan)
Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2016 16:12:45 +0000
Subject: [Community-Discuss] Resolution 201604.274 about Set-Up fees
In-Reply-To: <57727625.5040506@skannet.com>
References: <DUB119-W44FB800BC35A476D27252EB9200@phx.gbl>
 <57727625.5040506@skannet.com>
Message-ID: <HE1PR0801MB1577B5CB44FBFE74CEAFFCB4E6220@HE1PR0801MB1577.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com>

Dear Chair,



1. The Board has always been responsible for setting the fees. "Review" includes the right to change the fees.



Agree on this one.



2. The problem being addressed is that every allocation or assignment event requires effort from staff, and it is not fair for that effort to sometimes be undertaken free of charge.



The staff has always been and is presently remunerated for that effort, so how come that remunerated effort is sometimes undertaken free of charge ? Underpaid staff ?



3. AFRINIC requires more revenue, not less.



Why does AFRINIC requires more revenue ? For what purpose ?



4. If the proposed charging scheme had been in place during 2015, then income from allocation and assignment fees would have been about USD 550k.  Actual income from allocation and assignment fees in 2015 was about USD 350k. Therefore, the clarification that allocation or assignment fees are once per allocation or assignment, not once per member, is expected to raise about USD 200k per year.



Motive behind an expected US $200k/yr?



5. Since it is being introduced in the middle of 2016, the impact on the 2016 revenue is expected to be an additional USD 100k.



Motive behind an expected additional US $100k for 2016?



Regards,

K
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20160628/d72641a8/attachment.html>

From noah at neo.co.tz  Tue Jun 28 18:17:49 2016
From: noah at neo.co.tz (Noah)
Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2016 21:17:49 +0300
Subject: [Community-Discuss] [members-discuss] Accountability assessment
In-Reply-To: <CAG1eoi3eWuJYmbZa+s2nMnGMHHTRyDLQ9L0NakR5y8ZMwShpiw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAG1eoi3eWuJYmbZa+s2nMnGMHHTRyDLQ9L0NakR5y8ZMwShpiw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAEqgTWYK67FcKEm5K9MXNZZ_ymKYnaF4ve004otXfNk5W2n9CQ@mail.gmail.com>

On 28 Jun 2016 16:25, "Omo Oaiya" <Omo.Oaiya at wacren.net> wrote:
>>
>>
>
> On 10 June 2016 at 11:18, Alan Barrett <alan.barrett at afrinic.net> wrote:
>>

>> >>4 - Term limits: Consider adding a term limit for elected Board
members.
>> >> We need to decide whether or not to add a limit, and what the limit
should be.
>
>
> Proposal :  One term and at least an election before another nomination
>
>>

+1 to this suggestion as one term limit would give other capable members of
the community the opportunity to serve.

>> >>> 5- Independence of Directors: Consider adding a limit to the number
of Directors who may work for the same organisation.
>>

+1 as we need to make sure we avoid the capture of the organisation by an
entity. No single company nepotism should be tolerated.

>
> We need to keep refreshing the board with independence, expertise and
skills so a better managed succession process is a must.  I propose with
the exclusion of the CEO that we have
>
> -  Max 1 per org/company
> -  Max 1 per country
>  - Max 2  per region
>

The non regional representation needs to be revisited if some of this
occurances of 2 aspiring candidates from same country keep happening.

This year 2 nominated candidates from the same country were elected to the
board  as directors and i believe this has happened before and ought to be
avoided if we are to really champion spirit of diversity.

>
>  - not more than two Directors may be domiciled in the same region.
>
>>

Yes and in agreement and the above should be highly considered.

New bylawys should somehow give nomcom guidance on how to avoid slating 2
individuals for nomination from same organisation or same country...

SPIRIT OF DIVERSITY...

This continent is not one country or 3 countries or one company.

Noah
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20160628/e793de88/attachment.html>

From kmw.elitcha at gmail.com  Tue Jun 28 18:32:05 2016
From: kmw.elitcha at gmail.com (abel ELITCHA)
Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2016 18:32:05 +0000
Subject: [Community-Discuss] [members-discuss] Accountability assessment
In-Reply-To: <CAG1eoi3eWuJYmbZa+s2nMnGMHHTRyDLQ9L0NakR5y8ZMwShpiw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAG1eoi3eWuJYmbZa+s2nMnGMHHTRyDLQ9L0NakR5y8ZMwShpiw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAN0q0kEG9sGBsMUp4LwOXEQS0UcFkQvyvXcAZjY4jXqVDECFGw@mail.gmail.com>

I can't agree more with you Omo.
This...



>>>12- Policies introduced by the Board: In terms of the Bylaws section
> 11.4, the Board may adopt policy changes that did not go through the normal
> PDP. Consider giving the community the right to reject such policy changes
> introduced by the Board.


*Section 11.5 seems to give this right to the community but endorsement may
be open to misinterpretation so we shall just remove this.  In case of
emergency, section 8 of PDP on varying the policy process applies.*

will make sure there is no abuse and help improve the bottom-up process.
I fully support your proposals as they underline africa's diversity and
they sustain fairness inside the AFRINIC community.

+1

2016-06-28 13:20 GMT+00:00 Omo Oaiya <Omo.Oaiya at wacren.net>:

>
>
> On 10 June 2016 at 11:18, Alan Barrett <alan.barrett at afrinic.net> wrote:
>
>> Arising from a review of AFRINIC?s Bylaws and other documents, several
>> potential areas for improvement were identified.
>>
>> The attached document was presented to the AFRINIC Membership and the
>> community during the AGMM in Gaborone, Botswana, on 9 June 2016.
>>
>> I invite the community and the membership to comment on these
>> suggestions, or any other areas where the Bylaws could be improved.
>> Comments should be sent to the community-discuss at afrinic.net mailing
>> list.  In due course, Bylaws changes will be drafted to implement the
>> suggestions (and additional points that might be identified).
>>
>> Alan Barrett
>> CEO, AFRINIC
>>
>>
>
> Thanks Alan.  Comments below
>
>
> >>>1 ......  but there is a conflict between 7.2(i) and 13.7(i) on whether
>> or not Associate Members may vote in elections forDirectors. This conflict
>> must be resolved one way or another.
>> We need to decide whether or not Associate Members should vote, and
>> modify the Bylaws to give effect to that decision
>
>
> Just a matter of ambiguity in the statement in 7.2(i) to straighten out.
> The bylaws are consistent.  Registered and Resource members vote. Associate
> members observe.
>
>
> >>>2.  Interchangeable use of the terms ?Bylaw? or ?Bylaws? and
>> ?Constitution?:...... Suggest adding a clause 1.3 to clarify that this
>> document may be referred to by the term ?Bylaws? or ?Constitution?, and is
>> intended to serve the function of the Constitution in terms of the
>> Companies Act of Mauritius.
>
>
> Supported
>
>
> >>3- Clarification that all Registered Members in terms of Bylaws 6.3, and
>> only such Registered Members, must be registered in terms of the Companies
>> Act as members of the company.
>
>
> Supported but we shall seriously consider moving from this Private company
> model to a more community oriented model, where all members are considered.
>
>
>> >>4 - Term limits: Consider adding a term limit for elected Board members.
>> >> We need to decide whether or not to add a limit, and what the limit
>> should be.
>
>
> Proposal :  One term and at least an election before another nomination
>
>
>> >>> 5- Independence of Directors: Consider adding a limit to the number
>> of Directors who may work for the same organisation.
>>
>> >>> We need to decide whether or not to add a limit, and what the limit
>> should be.
>
>
> We need to keep refreshing the board with independence, expertise and
> skills so a better managed succession process is a must.  I propose with
> the exclusion of the CEO that we have
>
> -  Max 1 per org/company
> -  Max 1 per country
>  - Max 2  per region
>
>  - Not more than one Director may have employment, consultancy or advisory
> relationships with the same Company or Organization and/or with one of its
> Related Companies or Organizations established or not in the same country.
>
> - not more than one Director may be domiciled in the same country. Should
> a candidate for a position on the Board of Directors have more than one
> domicile, one of which involves a presumed incompatibility, in order to
> analyze his/her case for usual country of residence, the country where the
> company or organization he/she is a part of or works for is established,
> and/or any other relevant data shall be considered;
>
>  - not more than two Directors may be domiciled in the same region.
>
>
>> >>>6- Regional representation: Consider modifying 13.5 to state that
>> Directors must act in the interests of AFRINIC as a whole,regardless of
>> their regional affiliation.
>
>
> Supported
>
> >>>7.  Conflict of interest: Consider adding a requirement for Directors
>> to disclose any conflict of interest, and to recuse themselves from voting
>> on any matter where they have a conflict of interest.
>
>
> Supported.  In addition, the Board must have a Conflict of Interest Policy
> and enforce it.
>
> >>> 8- Separation of powers: Consider adding a requirement that no more
>> than one key position (Board Chair, Vice Chair, Chief Executive Officer,
>> Chief Financial Officer) may be occupied by the same person.
>
>
> Supported
>
>
>> >>> 9- Replacement of Directors: The bylaws sections 13.1, 13.8, 13.10,
>> and 13.14 give  different methods of replacing Directors for  different
>> reasons. Consider  harmonising this.
>
>
> Harmonisation supported but the preferred option should be replacement
> through election at the next AGMM.
>
>
>> >>> 10- Board approval of nominations: The Board can approve or
>> disapprove  nominations for Board elections in terms of the Bylaws section
>> 12.14(i). Consider requiring a supermajority of two thirds of the Board to
>> disapprove any nomination
>
>
> We should remove this approval and strengthen NOMCOM.  NOMCOM composition
> and operation should be reviewed and improved.   We can have the legal
> advisor and past NOMCOM chair as non-voting members and make the
> appointment of the other members by the board more transparent, fair and
> unbiased.
>
> The election timeline also needs to be revisited to allow enough time for
> proper NOMCOM operation.
>
>
> >>>11-  Modification to the Bylaws or Constitution: The Bylaws say how the
>> AFRINIC Members may change the Bylaws, but the Companies Act say that the
>>  Registered Members can change it. Consider requiring that the
>>  Bylaws/Constitution may be changed only after a Special Resolution by all
>> AFRINIC Members in terms of Bylaws 7.6(vi),so that the Registered
>> Members (the same nine people as the Directors) cannot act without broader
>> approval.
>
>
> Registered members only MUST never amend  the bylaws.  Amendment of Bylaws
> beyond regulatory compliance must require general membership notice and
> consultation.
>
> The proposed amendment should be published not less than 60 days and not
> more than 90 days before with provisions for members to comment online and
> in any meeting held during the consultation
>
>
>> >>>12- Policies introduced by the Board: In terms of the Bylaws section
>> 11.4, the Board may adopt policy changes that did not go through the normal
>> PDP. Consider giving the community the right to reject such policy changes
>> introduced by the Board.
>
>
> Section 11.5 seems to give this right to the community but endorsement may
> be open to misinterpretation so we shall just remove this.  In case of
> emergency, section 8 of PDP on varying the policy process applies.
>
> 11.5:  Any policy adopted by the Board under the provisions of Article
>> 11.4 shall be submitted to the community for endorsement at the next public
>> policy meeting.
>
>
>
> Best wishes
>
> --
> Omo Oaiya
> CTO/Directeur Technique, WACREN
> Mobile: +234 808 888 1571 , +221 784 305 224
> Skype: kodion
> http://www.wacren.net
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>
>


-- 
Best regards,

--Komi A. Elitcha
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20160628/02a2367f/attachment.html>

From Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com  Tue Jun 28 19:56:57 2016
From: Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com (Andrew Alston)
Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2016 19:56:57 +0000
Subject: [Community-Discuss] [members-discuss] Accountability assessment
In-Reply-To: <CAG1eoi3eWuJYmbZa+s2nMnGMHHTRyDLQ9L0NakR5y8ZMwShpiw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAG1eoi3eWuJYmbZa+s2nMnGMHHTRyDLQ9L0NakR5y8ZMwShpiw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <177FD5F8-7B1B-45CE-81D3-D87D5207625C@liquidtelecom.com>

Comments below

Please note ? I am posting here purely in my capacity as a resource member.

>>>1 ......  but there is a conflict between 7.2(i) and 13.7(i) on whether or not Associate Members may vote in elections forDirectors. This conflict must be resolved one way or another.
We need to decide whether or not Associate Members should vote, and modify the Bylaws to give effect to that decision

> Just a matter of ambiguity in the statement in 7.2(i) to straighten out. The bylaws are consistent.  Registered and Resource members vote. Associate members observe.

I tend to agree here and woud be in favour of an amendment to fix the ambiguity


>>>2.  Interchangeable use of the terms ?Bylaw? or ?Bylaws? and ?Constitution?:...... Suggest adding a clause 1.3 to clarify that this document may be referred to by the term ?Bylaws? or ?Constitution?, and is intended to serve the function of the Constitution in terms of the Companies Act of Mauritius.

> Supported
Supported as well
>>4 - Term limits: Consider adding a term limit for elected Board members.
>> We need to decide whether or not to add a limit, and what the limit should be.

> Proposal :  One term and at least an election before another nomination
Agree with term limits ? would not however support a single term ? there has to be some continuity and it takes any director time to get up to speed with everything in the organization as well.  Two terms with a two term break seems far more reasonable to me, and I would support such

>>> 5- Independence of Directors: Consider adding a limit to the number of Directors who may work for the same organisation.

>>> We need to decide whether or not to add a limit, and what the limit should be.

> We need to keep refreshing the board with independence, expertise and skills so a better managed succession process is a must.  I propose with the exclusion of the CEO that we have

> -  Max 1 per org/company
> -  Max 1 per country
> - Max 2  per region

 > - Not more than one Director may have employment, consultancy or advisory relationships with the same Company or Organization and/or with one of its Related Companies or Organizations established or not in the > same country.

> - not more than one Director may be domiciled in the same country. Should a candidate for a position on the Board of Directors have more than one domicile, one of which involves a presumed incompatibility, in order > to analyze his/her case for usual country of residence, the country where the company or organization he/she is a part of or works for is established, and/or any other relevant data shall be considered;

> - not more than two Directors may be domiciled in the same region.
I do not support this at all and would vote against any such change.  I believe that the members are free to nominate who they want, and the vote at the ballot box should be the deciding factor.  If the community wishes to elect a number of people from the same <insert criteria> that is the communities choice, and I don?t think we should be attempting to code in limitations to this.  There is however one except, I would support an amendment that says no more than two directors from the same organization (on a 9 man board, I don?t believe this is a number high enough that 2 people could have any meaningful sway).  With regards to the regional and who is domiciled where, I strongly oppose.  I point out at under the current bylaws a director may be domiciled in a particular place when he stands and may relocate during his term (including off the continent) ? under this proposal a director who moved to a country where another director was domiciled during his term would have to forfeit his duly elected seat.  Sorry, can?t support that.


>>>6- Regional representation: Consider modifying 13.5 to state that Directors must act in the interests of AFRINIC as a whole,regardless of their regional affiliation.

> Supported
Supported
>>>7.  Conflict of interest: Consider adding a requirement for Directors to disclose any conflict of interest, and to recuse themselves from voting on any matter where they have a conflict of interest.

> Supported.  In addition, the Board must have a Conflict of Interest Policy and enforce it.
Strongly supported and would go so far as to say that a director should sign a conflict of interest register when they accept the position, that clearly states any affiliations they have where such conflict could arise (Basically any additional board seats, any companies  they are renumerated by, and any companies they hold in excess of 5% shareholding in)
>>> 8- Separation of powers: Consider adding a requirement that no more than one key position (Board Chair, Vice Chair, Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer) may be occupied by the same person.

> Supported

Supported


>>> 9- Replacement of Directors: The bylaws sections 13.1, 13.8, 13.10, and 13.14 give  different methods of replacing Directors for  different reasons. Consider  harmonising this.

> Harmonisation supported but the preferred option should be replacement through election at the next AGMM.

Supported ? though I would add SGM as a possibility for replacement.  In the event of losing multiple directors at a single time through some unforeseen event it may become necessary to call an SGM for this purpose and the bylaws need to allow for it.  The risk of tying this to an AGMM is that the board could be down to a skeleton for close to a year if we don?t allow for SGM?s.


>>> 10- Board approval of nominations: The Board can approve or disapprove  nominations for Board elections in terms of the Bylaws section 12.14(i). Consider requiring a supermajority of two thirds of the Board to disapprove any nomination

> We should remove this approval and strengthen NOMCOM.  NOMCOM composition and operation should be reviewed and improved.   We can have the legal advisor and past NOMCOM chair as non-voting
> members and make the appointment of the other members by the board more transparent, fair and unbiased.

I agree with the original proposal that states a super majority.  I believe that the board should have the right to reject candidates if certain situations.

>>>11-  Modification to the Bylaws or Constitution: The Bylaws say how the AFRINIC Members may change the Bylaws, but the Companies Act say that the  Registered Members can change it. Consider requiring that the  Bylaws/Constitution may be changed only after a Special Resolution by all AFRINIC Members in terms of Bylaws 7.6(vi),so that the Registered Members (the same nine people as the Directors) cannot act without broader approval.

> Registered members only MUST never amend  the bylaws.  Amendment of Bylaws beyond regulatory compliance must require general membership notice and consultation.

>The proposed amendment should be published not less than 60 days and not more than 90 days before with provisions for members to comment online and in any meeting held during the consultation
Am not sure we can legally override the companies act in this regard and would like to see legal opinion on this.  In principle I agree that the board should never change the bylaws without a super majority special resolution of the community at either an SGM or AGMM, I am just not sure we can have the bylaws match the companies act in this regard.

>>>12- Policies introduced by the Board: In terms of the Bylaws section 11.4, the Board may adopt policy changes that did not go through the normal PDP. Consider giving the community the right to reject such policy changes introduced by the Board.

> Section 11.5 seems to give this right to the community but endorsement may be open to misinterpretation so we shall just remove this.  In case of emergency, section 8 of PDP on varying the policy process applies.

11.5:  Any policy adopted by the Board under the provisions of Article 11.4 shall be submitted to the community for endorsement at the next public policy meeting.

Agree with the original proposal, the community should have the right to reject policy adopted by the board.  I still believe that the board needs the right to adopt emergency policy to protect the organization if it deems necessary, and have the community reject it at the next meeting if they feel it necessary.

Thanks

Andrew

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20160628/8bb31888/attachment.html>

From aalain at trstech.net  Wed Jun 29 12:04:47 2016
From: aalain at trstech.net (ALAIN AINA)
Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2016 16:04:47 +0400
Subject: [Community-Discuss] [members-discuss] Accountability assessment
In-Reply-To: <CAG1eoi3eWuJYmbZa+s2nMnGMHHTRyDLQ9L0NakR5y8ZMwShpiw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAG1eoi3eWuJYmbZa+s2nMnGMHHTRyDLQ9L0NakR5y8ZMwShpiw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <F6A04D7B-DD18-44BE-A6C4-7C799AE22C3A@trstech.net>


Hello,

Other points we may want to consider. See below:

1- Amend 4.2 to add membership consultation and community notification for at least 6 months before applying adopted new fees schedule.

"Fees review must be done in consultation with the members and community must be notified at least six(6) months before new adopted fees schedule takes effect."

++++++ current
4.2 The fees mentioned in Article 4.1 above shall be subject to review from time to time by the Board.
++++++


2- Amend 13.4 to clarify that all directors are elected upon recommendations by NOMCOM, while keep the competency requirements for the non regional.

+++++ current
13.4 The Board shall comprise of nine (9) Directors appointed as follows:

(i) Six Directors elected by the Annual General Member Meeting called under Article 11.1 of this Constitution to represent each of the regions listed in Article 13.5; (Seats 1 to 6)

(ii) Two Directors elected by the Annual General Member Meeting called under Article 11.1 upon the recommendation of the NomCom based on their competencies and not their regional representation; and (Seats 7 and 8)

(iii) The Chief Executive Officer. (Seat 9)
+++++

3-   Amend  14 to add provisions for director recall by the membership :

- Process starts by petition of minimum 10% of the total membership 
- Challenged director given opportunity to address the community 
- Recall approved by 75% of the votes

++++ current
14 REMOVAL OF DIRECTORS

14.1 A Director shall hold office until:

(i) his term of office expires, without prejudice to Article 13;

(ii) he/she signs a written notice of resignation and delivers it to the address for service on the Company, which notice shall be effective when it is received at that address or at such later time as may be specified in the notice;

(iii) he/she is removed by the affirmative vote of two-thirds of all other Directors;

(iv) he/she otherwise ceases to be a Director pursuant to Section 139 of the Act; or

(v) the Director being the Chief Executive Officer, on the Board terminating his employment as Chief Executive Officer.
+++++


4-  Amend 12.10 (ii)   to set the quorum at 10% of the total membership either present physically or remotely 


+++++++ current
12.10 Quorum.

(ii) The quorum for an Annual General Member meeting shall be composed of minimum of ten (10) members in person comprising:

a) Four (4) Directors elected to represent a region;

b) One (1) Director elected on a non-regional criterion; and

c) Five (5) Resource Members.
+++++++


5- Amend 12.11 to set  minimum number of votes. For all vote, a minimum of votes from 10% of the total eligible voters required.


Cheers

?Alain






> On Jun 28, 2016, at 5:20 PM, Omo Oaiya <Omo.Oaiya at wacren.net> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> On 10 June 2016 at 11:18, Alan Barrett <alan.barrett at afrinic.net <mailto:alan.barrett at afrinic.net>> wrote:
> Arising from a review of AFRINIC?s Bylaws and other documents, several potential areas for improvement were identified.
> 
> The attached document was presented to the AFRINIC Membership and the community during the AGMM in Gaborone, Botswana, on 9 June 2016.
> 
> I invite the community and the membership to comment on these suggestions, or any other areas where the Bylaws could be improved.  Comments should be sent to the community-discuss at afrinic.net <mailto:community-discuss at afrinic.net> mailing list.  In due course, Bylaws changes will be drafted to implement the suggestions (and additional points that might be identified).
> 
> Alan Barrett
> CEO, AFRINIC
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks Alan.  Comments below
> 
> 
> >>>1 ......  but there is a conflict between 7.2(i) and 13.7(i) on whether or not Associate Members may vote in elections forDirectors. This conflict must be resolved one way or another.
> We need to decide whether or not Associate Members should vote, and modify the Bylaws to give effect to that decision
> 
> Just a matter of ambiguity in the statement in 7.2(i) to straighten out. The bylaws are consistent.  Registered and Resource members vote. Associate members observe.  
> 
> 
> >>>2.  Interchangeable use of the terms ?Bylaw? or ?Bylaws? and ?Constitution?:...... Suggest adding a clause 1.3 to clarify that this document may be referred to by the term ?Bylaws? or ?Constitution?, and is intended to serve the function of the Constitution in terms of the Companies Act of Mauritius.
> 
> Supported
> 
> 
> >>3- Clarification that all Registered Members in terms of Bylaws 6.3, and only such Registered Members, must be registered in terms of the Companies Act as members of the company.
> 
> Supported but we shall seriously consider moving from this Private company model to a more community oriented model, where all members are considered. 
> 
> 
> >>4 - Term limits: Consider adding a term limit for elected Board members.
> >> We need to decide whether or not to add a limit, and what the limit should be.
> 
> Proposal :  One term and at least an election before another nomination
> 
> 
> >>> 5- Independence of Directors: Consider adding a limit to the number of Directors who may work for the same organisation.
>  
> >>> We need to decide whether or not to add a limit, and what the limit should be.
> 
> We need to keep refreshing the board with independence, expertise and skills so a better managed succession process is a must.  I propose with the exclusion of the CEO that we have
> 
> -  Max 1 per org/company
> -  Max 1 per country
>  - Max 2  per region
> 
>  - Not more than one Director may have employment, consultancy or advisory relationships with the same Company or Organization and/or with one of its Related Companies or Organizations established or not in the same country.
> 
> - not more than one Director may be domiciled in the same country. Should a candidate for a position on the Board of Directors have more than one domicile, one of which involves a presumed incompatibility, in order to analyze his/her case for usual country of residence, the country where the company or organization he/she is a part of or works for is established, and/or any other relevant data shall be considered;
> 
>  - not more than two Directors may be domiciled in the same region. 
> 
> 
> >>>6- Regional representation: Consider modifying 13.5 to state that Directors must act in the interests of AFRINIC as a whole,regardless of their regional affiliation.
> 
> Supported
> 
> >>>7.  Conflict of interest: Consider adding a requirement for Directors to disclose any conflict of interest, and to recuse themselves from voting on any matter where they have a conflict of interest.
> 
> Supported.  In addition, the Board must have a Conflict of Interest Policy and enforce it. 
> 
> >>> 8- Separation of powers: Consider adding a requirement that no more than one key position (Board Chair, Vice Chair, Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer) may be occupied by the same person.
> 
> Supported
> 
> 
> >>> 9- Replacement of Directors: The bylaws sections 13.1, 13.8, 13.10, and 13.14 give  different methods of replacing Directors for  different reasons. Consider  harmonising this.
> 
> Harmonisation supported but the preferred option should be replacement through election at the next AGMM. 
> 
> 
> >>> 10- Board approval of nominations: The Board can approve or disapprove  nominations for Board elections in terms of the Bylaws section 12.14(i). Consider requiring a supermajority of two thirds of the Board to disapprove any nomination
> 
> We should remove this approval and strengthen NOMCOM.  NOMCOM composition and operation should be reviewed and improved.   We can have the legal advisor and past NOMCOM chair as non-voting members and make the appointment of the other members by the board more transparent, fair and unbiased.   
> 
> The election timeline also needs to be revisited to allow enough time for proper NOMCOM operation.
> 
> 
> >>>11-  Modification to the Bylaws or Constitution: The Bylaws say how the AFRINIC Members may change the Bylaws, but the Companies Act say that the  Registered Members can change it. Consider requiring that the  Bylaws/Constitution may be changed only after a Special Resolution by all AFRINIC Members in terms of Bylaws 7.6(vi),so that the Registered Members (the same nine people as the Directors) cannot act without broader approval.
> 
> Registered members only MUST never amend  the bylaws.  Amendment of Bylaws beyond regulatory compliance must require general membership notice and consultation.  
> 
> The proposed amendment should be published not less than 60 days and not more than 90 days before with provisions for members to comment online and in any meeting held during the consultation
> 
> 
> >>>12- Policies introduced by the Board: In terms of the Bylaws section 11.4, the Board may adopt policy changes that did not go through the normal PDP. Consider giving the community the right to reject such policy changes introduced by the Board.
> 
> Section 11.5 seems to give this right to the community but endorsement may be open to misinterpretation so we shall just remove this.  In case of emergency, section 8 of PDP on varying the policy process applies.
> 
> 11.5:  Any policy adopted by the Board under the provisions of Article 11.4 shall be submitted to the community for endorsement at the next public policy meeting.
>  
> 
> Best wishes
> 
> -- 
> Omo Oaiya
> CTO/Directeur Technique, WACREN 
> Mobile: +234 808 888 1571 , +221 784 305 224
> Skype: kodion <http:/>
> http://www.wacren.net <http://www.wacren.net/>
>  
>  <http:/>_______________________________________________
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20160629/b64c5240/attachment.html>

From aalain at trstech.net  Wed Jun 29 12:11:04 2016
From: aalain at trstech.net (ALAIN AINA)
Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2016 16:11:04 +0400
Subject: [Community-Discuss] [members-discuss] Accountability assessment
In-Reply-To: <177FD5F8-7B1B-45CE-81D3-D87D5207625C@liquidtelecom.com>
References: <CAG1eoi3eWuJYmbZa+s2nMnGMHHTRyDLQ9L0NakR5y8ZMwShpiw@mail.gmail.com>
 <177FD5F8-7B1B-45CE-81D3-D87D5207625C@liquidtelecom.com>
Message-ID: <3AA63019-4315-4909-99B1-5E1F914F0B56@trstech.net>

Can we stay discussion and consensus oriented  here instead of  ??. I would vote against? ?


Thanks

?Alain 


> On Jun 28, 2016, at 11:56 PM, Andrew Alston <Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com> wrote:
> 
> Comments below
>  
> Please note ? I am posting here purely in my capacity as a resource member.
>  
>> >>>1 ......  but there is a conflict between 7.2(i) and 13.7(i) on whether or not Associate Members may vote in elections forDirectors. This conflict must be resolved one way or another.
>> We need to decide whether or not Associate Members should vote, and modify the Bylaws to give effect to that decision
> 
> > Just a matter of ambiguity in the statement in 7.2(i) to straighten out. The bylaws are consistent.  Registered and Resource members vote. Associate members observe.  
>  
> I tend to agree here and woud be in favour of an amendment to fix the ambiguity
>  
>  
>> >>>2.  Interchangeable use of the terms ?Bylaw? or ?Bylaws? and ?Constitution?:...... Suggest adding a clause 1.3 to clarify that this document may be referred to by the term ?Bylaws? or ?Constitution?, and is intended to serve the function of the Constitution in terms of the Companies Act of Mauritius.
> 
> > Supported
> 
> Supported as well
> 
>> >>4 - Term limits: Consider adding a term limit for elected Board members.
>> >> We need to decide whether or not to add a limit, and what the limit should be.
> 
> > Proposal :  One term and at least an election before another nomination
> 
> Agree with term limits ? would not however support a single term ? there has to be some continuity and it takes any director time to get up to speed with everything in the organization as well.  Two terms with a two term break seems far more reasonable to me, and I would support such
> 
>> 
>> >>> 5- Independence of Directors: Consider adding a limit to the number of Directors who may work for the same organisation.
>>  
>> >>> We need to decide whether or not to add a limit, and what the limit should be.
> 
> > We need to keep refreshing the board with independence, expertise and skills so a better managed succession process is a must.  I propose with the exclusion of the CEO that we have
> 
> > -  Max 1 per org/company
> > -  Max 1 per country
> > - Max 2  per region
> 
>  > - Not more than one Director may have employment, consultancy or advisory relationships with the same Company or Organization and/or with one of its Related Companies or Organizations established or not in the > same country.
> 
> > - not more than one Director may be domiciled in the same country. Should a candidate for a position on the Board of Directors have more than one domicile, one of which involves a presumed incompatibility, in order > to analyze his/her case for usual country of residence, the country where the company or organization he/she is a part of or works for is established, and/or any other relevant data shall be considered;
> 
> > - not more than two Directors may be domiciled in the same region. 
> 
> I do not support this at all and would vote against any such change.  I believe that the members are free to nominate who they want, and the vote at the ballot box should be the deciding factor.  If the community wishes to elect a number of people from the same <insert criteria> that is the communities choice, and I don?t think we should be attempting to code in limitations to this.  There is however one except, I would support an amendment that says no more than two directors from the same organization (on a 9 man board, I don?t believe this is a number high enough that 2 people could have any meaningful sway).  With regards to the regional and who is domiciled where, I strongly oppose.  I point out at under the current bylaws a director may be domiciled in a particular place when he stands and may relocate during his term (including off the continent) ? under this proposal a director who moved to a country where another director was domiciled during his term would have to forfeit his duly elected seat.  Sorry, can?t support that.
> 
>  
> 
>> 
>> >>>6- Regional representation: Consider modifying 13.5 to state that Directors must act in the interests of AFRINIC as a whole,regardless of their regional affiliation.
> 
> > Supported
> 
> Supported
> 
>> >>>7.  Conflict of interest: Consider adding a requirement for Directors to disclose any conflict of interest, and to recuse themselves from voting on any matter where they have a conflict of interest.
> 
> > Supported.  In addition, the Board must have a Conflict of Interest Policy and enforce it. 
> 
> Strongly supported and would go so far as to say that a director should sign a conflict of interest register when they accept the position, that clearly states any affiliations they have where such conflict could arise (Basically any additional board seats, any companies  they are renumerated by, and any companies they hold in excess of 5% shareholding in)
> 
>> >>> 8- Separation of powers: Consider adding a requirement that no more than one key position (Board Chair, Vice Chair, Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer) may be occupied by the same person.
> 
> > Supported
>  
> Supported
>  
>> 
>> >>> 9- Replacement of Directors: The bylaws sections 13.1, 13.8, 13.10, and 13.14 give  different methods of replacing Directors for  different reasons. Consider  harmonising this.
> 
> > Harmonisation supported but the preferred option should be replacement through election at the next AGMM. 
>  
> Supported ? though I would add SGM as a possibility for replacement.  In the event of losing multiple directors at a single time through some unforeseen event it may become necessary to call an SGM for this purpose and the bylaws need to allow for it.  The risk of tying this to an AGMM is that the board could be down to a skeleton for close to a year if we don?t allow for SGM?s.
>  
>> 
>> >>> 10- Board approval of nominations: The Board can approve or disapprove  nominations for Board elections in terms of the Bylaws section 12.14(i). Consider requiring a supermajority of two thirds of the Board to disapprove any nomination
> 
> > We should remove this approval and strengthen NOMCOM.  NOMCOM composition and operation should be reviewed and improved.   We can have the legal advisor and past NOMCOM chair as non-voting
> > members and make the appointment of the other members by the board more transparent, fair and unbiased.  
>  
> I agree with the original proposal that states a super majority.  I believe that the board should have the right to reject candidates if certain situations. 
>  
> 
>> >>>11-  Modification to the Bylaws or Constitution: The Bylaws say how the AFRINIC Members may change the Bylaws, but the Companies Act say that the  Registered Members can change it. Consider requiring that the  Bylaws/Constitution may be changed only after a Special Resolution by all AFRINIC Members in terms of Bylaws 7.6(vi),so that the Registered Members (the same nine people as the Directors) cannot act without broader approval.
> 
> > Registered members only MUST never amend  the bylaws.  Amendment of Bylaws beyond regulatory compliance must require general membership notice and consultation.  
>  
> >The proposed amendment should be published not less than 60 days and not more than 90 days before with provisions for members to comment online and in any meeting held during the consultation
> 
> Am not sure we can legally override the companies act in this regard and would like to see legal opinion on this.  In principle I agree that the board should never change the bylaws without a super majority special resolution of the community at either an SGM or AGMM, I am just not sure we can have the bylaws match the companies act in this regard. 
> 
>> 
>> >>>12- Policies introduced by the Board: In terms of the Bylaws section 11.4, the Board may adopt policy changes that did not go through the normal PDP. Consider giving the community the right to reject such policy changes introduced by the Board.
> 
> > Section 11.5 seems to give this right to the community but endorsement may be open to misinterpretation so we shall just remove this.  In case of emergency, section 8 of PDP on varying the policy process applies.
>  
>>> 11.5:  Any policy adopted by the Board under the provisions of Article 11.4 shall be submitted to the community for endorsement at the next public policy meeting.
>  
> Agree with the original proposal, the community should have the right to reject policy adopted by the board.  I still believe that the board needs the right to adopt emergency policy to protect the organization if it deems necessary, and have the community reject it at the next meeting if they feel it necessary.
>  
> Thanks
>  
> Andrew
>  
> _______________________________________________
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20160629/adccb74e/attachment.html>

From Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com  Wed Jun 29 12:48:49 2016
From: Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com (Andrew Alston)
Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2016 12:48:49 +0000
Subject: [Community-Discuss] [members-discuss] Accountability assessment
In-Reply-To: <3AA63019-4315-4909-99B1-5E1F914F0B56@trstech.net>
References: <CAG1eoi3eWuJYmbZa+s2nMnGMHHTRyDLQ9L0NakR5y8ZMwShpiw@mail.gmail.com>
 <177FD5F8-7B1B-45CE-81D3-D87D5207625C@liquidtelecom.com>
 <3AA63019-4315-4909-99B1-5E1F914F0B56@trstech.net>
Message-ID: <C3FBFCEE-D9D0-407A-8C05-18344F41FD34@liquidtelecom.com>

Alain,

As much as we can have a community discussion about this, this is still a member vote issue.  I see no harm in members stating which way they stand in a clear and unequivocal manner.  Fact is, bylaw changes are NOT done by consensus, they are done by a super majority vote of the members.  If we wish to forge ahead with bylaw changes, and I personally think there are numerous changes which are welcome, it is good to know where we stand on the votes that will eventually decide if this passes or not.

Consensus states until all reasonable objections have been addressed, however, we can have all the consensus in the world on these issues but there are those who may still choose to reject the changes at the ballot box for reasons that are non-substantive and the changes will not occur.  Hence, where the votes sit on this issue is a valid question.

Andrew


From: ALAIN AINA <aalain at trstech.net>
Reply-To: General Discussions of AFRINIC <community-discuss at afrinic.net>
Date: Wednesday, 29 June 2016 at 3:11 PM
To: General Discussions of AFRINIC <community-discuss at afrinic.net>
Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] [members-discuss] Accountability assessment

Can we stay discussion and consensus oriented  here instead of  ??. I would vote against? ?


Thanks

?Alain


On Jun 28, 2016, at 11:56 PM, Andrew Alston <Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com<mailto:Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com>> wrote:

Comments below

Please note ? I am posting here purely in my capacity as a resource member.

>>>1 ......  but there is a conflict between 7.2(i) and 13.7(i) on whether or not Associate Members may vote in elections forDirectors. This conflict must be resolved one way or another.
We need to decide whether or not Associate Members should vote, and modify the Bylaws to give effect to that decision

> Just a matter of ambiguity in the statement in 7.2(i) to straighten out. The bylaws are consistent.  Registered and Resource members vote. Associate members observe.

I tend to agree here and woud be in favour of an amendment to fix the ambiguity


>>>2.  Interchangeable use of the terms ?Bylaw? or ?Bylaws? and ?Constitution?:...... Suggest adding a clause 1.3 to clarify that this document may be referred to by the term ?Bylaws? or ?Constitution?, and is intended to serve the function of the Constitution in terms of the Companies Act of Mauritius.

> Supported
Supported as well
>>4 - Term limits: Consider adding a term limit for elected Board members.
>> We need to decide whether or not to add a limit, and what the limit should be.

> Proposal :  One term and at least an election before another nomination
Agree with term limits ? would not however support a single term ? there has to be some continuity and it takes any director time to get up to speed with everything in the organization as well.  Two terms with a two term break seems far more reasonable to me, and I would support such

>>> 5- Independence of Directors: Consider adding a limit to the number of Directors who may work for the same organisation.

>>> We need to decide whether or not to add a limit, and what the limit should be.

> We need to keep refreshing the board with independence, expertise and skills so a better managed succession process is a must.  I propose with the exclusion of the CEO that we have

> -  Max 1 per org/company
> -  Max 1 per country
> - Max 2  per region

 > - Not more than one Director may have employment, consultancy or advisory relationships with the same Company or Organization and/or with one of its Related Companies or Organizations established or not in the > same country.

> - not more than one Director may be domiciled in the same country. Should a candidate for a position on the Board of Directors have more than one domicile, one of which involves a presumed incompatibility, in order > to analyze his/her case for usual country of residence, the country where the company or organization he/she is a part of or works for is established, and/or any other relevant data shall be considered;

> - not more than two Directors may be domiciled in the same region.
I do not support this at all and would vote against any such change.  I believe that the members are free to nominate who they want, and the vote at the ballot box should be the deciding factor.  If the community wishes to elect a number of people from the same <insert criteria> that is the communities choice, and I don?t think we should be attempting to code in limitations to this.  There is however one except, I would support an amendment that says no more than two directors from the same organization (on a 9 man board, I don?t believe this is a number high enough that 2 people could have any meaningful sway).  With regards to the regional and who is domiciled where, I strongly oppose.  I point out at under the current bylaws a director may be domiciled in a particular place when he stands and may relocate during his term (including off the continent) ? under this proposal a director who moved to a country where another director was domiciled during his term would have to forfeit his duly elected seat.  Sorry, can?t support that.


>>>6- Regional representation: Consider modifying 13.5 to state that Directors must act in the interests of AFRINIC as a whole,regardless of their regional affiliation.

> Supported
Supported
>>>7.  Conflict of interest: Consider adding a requirement for Directors to disclose any conflict of interest, and to recuse themselves from voting on any matter where they have a conflict of interest.

> Supported.  In addition, the Board must have a Conflict of Interest Policy and enforce it.
Strongly supported and would go so far as to say that a director should sign a conflict of interest register when they accept the position, that clearly states any affiliations they have where such conflict could arise (Basically any additional board seats, any companies  they are renumerated by, and any companies they hold in excess of 5% shareholding in)
>>> 8- Separation of powers: Consider adding a requirement that no more than one key position (Board Chair, Vice Chair, Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer) may be occupied by the same person.

> Supported

Supported


>>> 9- Replacement of Directors: The bylaws sections 13.1, 13.8, 13.10, and 13.14 give  different methods of replacing Directors for  different reasons. Consider  harmonising this.

> Harmonisation supported but the preferred option should be replacement through election at the next AGMM.

Supported ? though I would add SGM as a possibility for replacement.  In the event of losing multiple directors at a single time through some unforeseen event it may become necessary to call an SGM for this purpose and the bylaws need to allow for it.  The risk of tying this to an AGMM is that the board could be down to a skeleton for close to a year if we don?t allow for SGM?s.


>>> 10- Board approval of nominations: The Board can approve or disapprove  nominations for Board elections in terms of the Bylaws section 12.14(i). Consider requiring a supermajority of two thirds of the Board to disapprove any nomination

> We should remove this approval and strengthen NOMCOM.  NOMCOM composition and operation should be reviewed and improved.   We can have the legal advisor and past NOMCOM chair as non-voting
> members and make the appointment of the other members by the board more transparent, fair and unbiased.

I agree with the original proposal that states a super majority.  I believe that the board should have the right to reject candidates if certain situations.

>>>11-  Modification to the Bylaws or Constitution: The Bylaws say how the AFRINIC Members may change the Bylaws, but the Companies Act say that the  Registered Members can change it. Consider requiring that the  Bylaws/Constitution may be changed only after a Special Resolution by all AFRINIC Members in terms of Bylaws 7.6(vi),so that the Registered Members (the same nine people as the Directors) cannot act without broader approval.

> Registered members only MUST never amend  the bylaws.  Amendment of Bylaws beyond regulatory compliance must require general membership notice and consultation.

>The proposed amendment should be published not less than 60 days and not more than 90 days before with provisions for members to comment online and in any meeting held during the consultation
Am not sure we can legally override the companies act in this regard and would like to see legal opinion on this.  In principle I agree that the board should never change the bylaws without a super majority special resolution of the community at either an SGM or AGMM, I am just not sure we can have the bylaws match the companies act in this regard.

>>>12- Policies introduced by the Board: In terms of the Bylaws section 11.4, the Board may adopt policy changes that did not go through the normal PDP. Consider giving the community the right to reject such policy changes introduced by the Board.

> Section 11.5 seems to give this right to the community but endorsement may be open to misinterpretation so we shall just remove this.  In case of emergency, section 8 of PDP on varying the policy process applies.

11.5:  Any policy adopted by the Board under the provisions of Article 11.4 shall be submitted to the community for endorsement at the next public policy meeting.

Agree with the original proposal, the community should have the right to reject policy adopted by the board.  I still believe that the board needs the right to adopt emergency policy to protect the organization if it deems necessary, and have the community reject it at the next meeting if they feel it necessary.

Thanks

Andrew

_______________________________________________
Community-Discuss mailing list
Community-Discuss at afrinic.net<mailto:Community-Discuss at afrinic.net>
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20160629/4d3ad56e/attachment.html>

From diana.ikwuagwu at unn.edu.ng  Wed Jun 29 14:25:25 2016
From: diana.ikwuagwu at unn.edu.ng (Diana Ikwuagwu)
Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2016 16:25:25 +0200
Subject: [Community-Discuss] Resolution 201604.274 about Set-Up fees
In-Reply-To: <HE1PR0801MB1577B5CB44FBFE74CEAFFCB4E6220@HE1PR0801MB1577.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com>
References: <DUB119-W44FB800BC35A476D27252EB9200@phx.gbl>
 <57727625.5040506@skannet.com>
 <HE1PR0801MB1577B5CB44FBFE74CEAFFCB4E6220@HE1PR0801MB1577.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com>
Message-ID: <CAB=5e9Ly4q0NaHC+-_AAuotZ_8=W0rTxGRQcv_D5JgUSuXteBA@mail.gmail.com>

I think it will be very good if the membership maintenance price be
lowered.  Please let the board look into this.


Ogoo

On 6/28/16, Keshwarsingh Nadan <kn at millenium.net.mu> wrote:
> Dear Chair,
>
>
>
> 1. The Board has always been responsible for setting the fees. "Review"
> includes the right to change the fees.
>
>
>
> Agree on this one.
>
>
>
> 2. The problem being addressed is that every allocation or assignment event
> requires effort from staff, and it is not fair for that effort to sometimes
> be undertaken free of charge.
>
>
>
> The staff has always been and is presently remunerated for that effort, so
> how come that remunerated effort is sometimes undertaken free of charge ?
> Underpaid staff ?
>
>
>
> 3. AFRINIC requires more revenue, not less.
>
>
>
> Why does AFRINIC requires more revenue ? For what purpose ?
>
>
>
> 4. If the proposed charging scheme had been in place during 2015, then
> income from allocation and assignment fees would have been about USD 550k.
> Actual income from allocation and assignment fees in 2015 was about USD
> 350k. Therefore, the clarification that allocation or assignment fees are
> once per allocation or assignment, not once per member, is expected to raise
> about USD 200k per year.
>
>
>
> Motive behind an expected US $200k/yr?
>
>
>
> 5. Since it is being introduced in the middle of 2016, the impact on the
> 2016 revenue is expected to be an additional USD 100k.
>
>
>
> Motive behind an expected additional US $100k for 2016?
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> K
>



From badru.ntege at nftconsult.com  Wed Jun 29 14:43:16 2016
From: badru.ntege at nftconsult.com (Badru Ntege)
Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2016 14:43:16 +0000
Subject: [Community-Discuss] [members-discuss] Accountability assessment
In-Reply-To: <C3FBFCEE-D9D0-407A-8C05-18344F41FD34@liquidtelecom.com>
References: <CAG1eoi3eWuJYmbZa+s2nMnGMHHTRyDLQ9L0NakR5y8ZMwShpiw@mail.gmail.com>
 <177FD5F8-7B1B-45CE-81D3-D87D5207625C@liquidtelecom.com>
 <3AA63019-4315-4909-99B1-5E1F914F0B56@trstech.net>,
 <C3FBFCEE-D9D0-407A-8C05-18344F41FD34@liquidtelecom.com>
Message-ID: <9FF46A62-D606-4D30-9EC9-F9B08541D28F@nftconsult.com>

Andrew

I think what Alain is suggesting is we should be open to listen to other views and maybe someone might have a better idea than either of us have which might in a way influence our position.

Yes based on the current position you can either support a position or not. But by stating our position immediately we close our mince to another opinion and thus kill the concept of consensus.

I hope this clarifies.

Let's open the floor to as many views as possible our diversity is our strengths.

Regards

Badru Ntege
CEO
NFT Consult Ltd
Www.Nftconsult.com<http://Www.Nftconsult.com>

?Vision without execution is hallucination.?
? Thomas A. Edison






On 29 Jun 2016, at 3:49 pm, Andrew Alston <Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com<mailto:Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com>> wrote:

Alain,

As much as we can have a community discussion about this, this is still a member vote issue.  I see no harm in members stating which way they stand in a clear and unequivocal manner.  Fact is, bylaw changes are NOT done by consensus, they are done by a super majority vote of the members.  If we wish to forge ahead with bylaw changes, and I personally think there are numerous changes which are welcome, it is good to know where we stand on the votes that will eventually decide if this passes or not.

Consensus states until all reasonable objections have been addressed, however, we can have all the consensus in the world on these issues but there are those who may still choose to reject the changes at the ballot box for reasons that are non-substantive and the changes will not occur.  Hence, where the votes sit on this issue is a valid question.

Andrew


From: ALAIN AINA <aalain at trstech.net<mailto:aalain at trstech.net>>
Reply-To: General Discussions of AFRINIC <community-discuss at afrinic.net<mailto:community-discuss at afrinic.net>>
Date: Wednesday, 29 June 2016 at 3:11 PM
To: General Discussions of AFRINIC <community-discuss at afrinic.net<mailto:community-discuss at afrinic.net>>
Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] [members-discuss] Accountability assessment

Can we stay discussion and consensus oriented  here instead of  ??. I would vote against? ?


Thanks

?Alain


On Jun 28, 2016, at 11:56 PM, Andrew Alston <Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com<mailto:Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com>> wrote:

Comments below

Please note ? I am posting here purely in my capacity as a resource member.

>>>1 ......  but there is a conflict between 7.2(i) and 13.7(i) on whether or not Associate Members may vote in elections forDirectors. This conflict must be resolved one way or another.
We need to decide whether or not Associate Members should vote, and modify the Bylaws to give effect to that decision

> Just a matter of ambiguity in the statement in 7.2(i) to straighten out. The bylaws are consistent.  Registered and Resource members vote. Associate members observe.

I tend to agree here and woud be in favour of an amendment to fix the ambiguity


>>>2.  Interchangeable use of the terms ?Bylaw? or ?Bylaws? and ?Constitution?:...... Suggest adding a clause 1.3 to clarify that this document may be referred to by the term ?Bylaws? or ?Constitution?, and is intended to serve the function of the Constitution in terms of the Companies Act of Mauritius.

> Supported
Supported as well
>>4 - Term limits: Consider adding a term limit for elected Board members.
>> We need to decide whether or not to add a limit, and what the limit should be.

> Proposal :  One term and at least an election before another nomination
Agree with term limits ? would not however support a single term ? there has to be some continuity and it takes any director time to get up to speed with everything in the organization as well.  Two terms with a two term break seems far more reasonable to me, and I would support such

>>> 5- Independence of Directors: Consider adding a limit to the number of Directors who may work for the same organisation.

>>> We need to decide whether or not to add a limit, and what the limit should be.

> We need to keep refreshing the board with independence, expertise and skills so a better managed succession process is a must.  I propose with the exclusion of the CEO that we have

> -  Max 1 per org/company
> -  Max 1 per country
> - Max 2  per region

 > - Not more than one Director may have employment, consultancy or advisory relationships with the same Company or Organization and/or with one of its Related Companies or Organizations established or not in the > same country.

> - not more than one Director may be domiciled in the same country. Should a candidate for a position on the Board of Directors have more than one domicile, one of which involves a presumed incompatibility, in order > to analyze his/her case for usual country of residence, the country where the company or organization he/she is a part of or works for is established, and/or any other relevant data shall be considered;

> - not more than two Directors may be domiciled in the same region.
I do not support this at all and would vote against any such change.  I believe that the members are free to nominate who they want, and the vote at the ballot box should be the deciding factor.  If the community wishes to elect a number of people from the same <insert criteria> that is the communities choice, and I don?t think we should be attempting to code in limitations to this.  There is however one except, I would support an amendment that says no more than two directors from the same organization (on a 9 man board, I don?t believe this is a number high enough that 2 people could have any meaningful sway).  With regards to the regional and who is domiciled where, I strongly oppose.  I point out at under the current bylaws a director may be domiciled in a particular place when he stands and may relocate during his term (including off the continent) ? under this proposal a director who moved to a country where another director was domiciled during his term would have to forfeit his duly elected seat.  Sorry, can?t support that.


>>>6- Regional representation: Consider modifying 13.5 to state that Directors must act in the interests of AFRINIC as a whole,regardless of their regional affiliation.

> Supported
Supported
>>>7.  Conflict of interest: Consider adding a requirement for Directors to disclose any conflict of interest, and to recuse themselves from voting on any matter where they have a conflict of interest.

> Supported.  In addition, the Board must have a Conflict of Interest Policy and enforce it.
Strongly supported and would go so far as to say that a director should sign a conflict of interest register when they accept the position, that clearly states any affiliations they have where such conflict could arise (Basically any additional board seats, any companies  they are renumerated by, and any companies they hold in excess of 5% shareholding in)
>>> 8- Separation of powers: Consider adding a requirement that no more than one key position (Board Chair, Vice Chair, Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer) may be occupied by the same person.

> Supported

Supported


>>> 9- Replacement of Directors: The bylaws sections 13.1, 13.8, 13.10, and 13.14 give  different methods of replacing Directors for  different reasons. Consider  harmonising this.

> Harmonisation supported but the preferred option should be replacement through election at the next AGMM.

Supported ? though I would add SGM as a possibility for replacement.  In the event of losing multiple directors at a single time through some unforeseen event it may become necessary to call an SGM for this purpose and the bylaws need to allow for it.  The risk of tying this to an AGMM is that the board could be down to a skeleton for close to a year if we don?t allow for SGM?s.


>>> 10- Board approval of nominations: The Board can approve or disapprove  nominations for Board elections in terms of the Bylaws section 12.14(i). Consider requiring a supermajority of two thirds of the Board to disapprove any nomination

> We should remove this approval and strengthen NOMCOM.  NOMCOM composition and operation should be reviewed and improved.   We can have the legal advisor and past NOMCOM chair as non-voting
> members and make the appointment of the other members by the board more transparent, fair and unbiased.

I agree with the original proposal that states a super majority.  I believe that the board should have the right to reject candidates if certain situations.

>>>11-  Modification to the Bylaws or Constitution: The Bylaws say how the AFRINIC Members may change the Bylaws, but the Companies Act say that the  Registered Members can change it. Consider requiring that the  Bylaws/Constitution may be changed only after a Special Resolution by all AFRINIC Members in terms of Bylaws 7.6(vi),so that the Registered Members (the same nine people as the Directors) cannot act without broader approval.

> Registered members only MUST never amend  the bylaws.  Amendment of Bylaws beyond regulatory compliance must require general membership notice and consultation.

>The proposed amendment should be published not less than 60 days and not more than 90 days before with provisions for members to comment online and in any meeting held during the consultation
Am not sure we can legally override the companies act in this regard and would like to see legal opinion on this.  In principle I agree that the board should never change the bylaws without a super majority special resolution of the community at either an SGM or AGMM, I am just not sure we can have the bylaws match the companies act in this regard.

>>>12- Policies introduced by the Board: In terms of the Bylaws section 11.4, the Board may adopt policy changes that did not go through the normal PDP. Consider giving the community the right to reject such policy changes introduced by the Board.

> Section 11.5 seems to give this right to the community but endorsement may be open to misinterpretation so we shall just remove this.  In case of emergency, section 8 of PDP on varying the policy process applies.

11.5:  Any policy adopted by the Board under the provisions of Article 11.4 shall be submitted to the community for endorsement at the next public policy meeting.

Agree with the original proposal, the community should have the right to reject policy adopted by the board.  I still believe that the board needs the right to adopt emergency policy to protect the organization if it deems necessary, and have the community reject it at the next meeting if they feel it necessary.

Thanks

Andrew

_______________________________________________
Community-Discuss mailing list
Community-Discuss at afrinic.net<mailto:Community-Discuss at afrinic.net>
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss

_______________________________________________
Community-Discuss mailing list
Community-Discuss at afrinic.net<mailto:Community-Discuss at afrinic.net>
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20160629/1a65eb99/attachment.html>

From Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com  Wed Jun 29 15:46:07 2016
From: Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com (Andrew Alston)
Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2016 15:46:07 +0000
Subject: [Community-Discuss] [members-discuss] Accountability assessment
In-Reply-To: <9FF46A62-D606-4D30-9EC9-F9B08541D28F@nftconsult.com>
References: <CAG1eoi3eWuJYmbZa+s2nMnGMHHTRyDLQ9L0NakR5y8ZMwShpiw@mail.gmail.com>
 <177FD5F8-7B1B-45CE-81D3-D87D5207625C@liquidtelecom.com>
 <3AA63019-4315-4909-99B1-5E1F914F0B56@trstech.net>
 <C3FBFCEE-D9D0-407A-8C05-18344F41FD34@liquidtelecom.com>
 <9FF46A62-D606-4D30-9EC9-F9B08541D28F@nftconsult.com>
Message-ID: <DBE6F685-2D56-4DC9-91B8-C721B16189BB@liquidtelecom.com>

Hi Badru,

If you read my email carefully, you will see that I am not stating that I am not open to coming to an amicable position, infact I clearly stated which parts of this I would support and even offered a compromise on the parts I said I would vote against, stating that I would support a limit on the number of individuals from a single company.

Let us be clear here, if people are not prepared to CLEARLY state what they will not support we could easily end up in a situation where nothing gets passed at all because of the very high bar necessary to pass a bylaw change.  Getting a 75% majority is no small feat, and to do that, we need to understand each other and what our points of compromise are, and what points are deal breakers.  This is in my view, almost like a negotiation, we debate, we find points of compromise, and we also have points that are deal breakers in terms of how we will vote.  We need to clearly understand what is a point we?ll shift on and what are points that are complete deal breakers where there will be no affirmative vote if the point doesn?t change.  That?s standard negotiation 101

Andrew


From: Badru Ntege <badru.ntege at nftconsult.com>
Reply-To: General Discussions of AFRINIC <community-discuss at afrinic.net>
Date: Wednesday, 29 June 2016 at 5:43 PM
To: General Discussions of AFRINIC <community-discuss at afrinic.net>
Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] [members-discuss] Accountability assessment

Andrew

I think what Alain is suggesting is we should be open to listen to other views and maybe someone might have a better idea than either of us have which might in a way influence our position.

Yes based on the current position you can either support a position or not. But by stating our position immediately we close our mince to another opinion and thus kill the concept of consensus.

I hope this clarifies.

Let's open the floor to as many views as possible our diversity is our strengths.

Regards
Badru Ntege
CEO
NFT Consult Ltd
Www.Nftconsult.com<http://Www.Nftconsult.com>

?Vision without execution is hallucination.?
? Thomas A. Edison










On 29 Jun 2016, at 3:49 pm, Andrew Alston <Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com<mailto:Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com>> wrote:
Alain,

As much as we can have a community discussion about this, this is still a member vote issue.  I see no harm in members stating which way they stand in a clear and unequivocal manner.  Fact is, bylaw changes are NOT done by consensus, they are done by a super majority vote of the members.  If we wish to forge ahead with bylaw changes, and I personally think there are numerous changes which are welcome, it is good to know where we stand on the votes that will eventually decide if this passes or not.

Consensus states until all reasonable objections have been addressed, however, we can have all the consensus in the world on these issues but there are those who may still choose to reject the changes at the ballot box for reasons that are non-substantive and the changes will not occur.  Hence, where the votes sit on this issue is a valid question.

Andrew


From: ALAIN AINA <aalain at trstech.net<mailto:aalain at trstech.net>>
Reply-To: General Discussions of AFRINIC <community-discuss at afrinic.net<mailto:community-discuss at afrinic.net>>
Date: Wednesday, 29 June 2016 at 3:11 PM
To: General Discussions of AFRINIC <community-discuss at afrinic.net<mailto:community-discuss at afrinic.net>>
Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] [members-discuss] Accountability assessment

Can we stay discussion and consensus oriented  here instead of  ??. I would vote against? ?


Thanks

?Alain


On Jun 28, 2016, at 11:56 PM, Andrew Alston <Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com<mailto:Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com>> wrote:

Comments below

Please note ? I am posting here purely in my capacity as a resource member.

>>>1 ......  but there is a conflict between 7.2(i) and 13.7(i) on whether or not Associate Members may vote in elections forDirectors. This conflict must be resolved one way or another.
We need to decide whether or not Associate Members should vote, and modify the Bylaws to give effect to that decision

> Just a matter of ambiguity in the statement in 7.2(i) to straighten out. The bylaws are consistent.  Registered and Resource members vote. Associate members observe.

I tend to agree here and woud be in favour of an amendment to fix the ambiguity


>>>2.  Interchangeable use of the terms ?Bylaw? or ?Bylaws? and ?Constitution?:...... Suggest adding a clause 1.3 to clarify that this document may be referred to by the term ?Bylaws? or ?Constitution?, and is intended to serve the function of the Constitution in terms of the Companies Act of Mauritius.

> Supported
Supported as well
>>4 - Term limits: Consider adding a term limit for elected Board members.
>> We need to decide whether or not to add a limit, and what the limit should be.

> Proposal :  One term and at least an election before another nomination
Agree with term limits ? would not however support a single term ? there has to be some continuity and it takes any director time to get up to speed with everything in the organization as well.  Two terms with a two term break seems far more reasonable to me, and I would support such

>>> 5- Independence of Directors: Consider adding a limit to the number of Directors who may work for the same organisation.

>>> We need to decide whether or not to add a limit, and what the limit should be.

> We need to keep refreshing the board with independence, expertise and skills so a better managed succession process is a must.  I propose with the exclusion of the CEO that we have

> -  Max 1 per org/company
> -  Max 1 per country
> - Max 2  per region

 > - Not more than one Director may have employment, consultancy or advisory relationships with the same Company or Organization and/or with one of its Related Companies or Organizations established or not in the > same country.

> - not more than one Director may be domiciled in the same country. Should a candidate for a position on the Board of Directors have more than one domicile, one of which involves a presumed incompatibility, in order > to analyze his/her case for usual country of residence, the country where the company or organization he/she is a part of or works for is established, and/or any other relevant data shall be considered;

> - not more than two Directors may be domiciled in the same region.
I do not support this at all and would vote against any such change.  I believe that the members are free to nominate who they want, and the vote at the ballot box should be the deciding factor.  If the community wishes to elect a number of people from the same <insert criteria> that is the communities choice, and I don?t think we should be attempting to code in limitations to this.  There is however one except, I would support an amendment that says no more than two directors from the same organization (on a 9 man board, I don?t believe this is a number high enough that 2 people could have any meaningful sway).  With regards to the regional and who is domiciled where, I strongly oppose.  I point out at under the current bylaws a director may be domiciled in a particular place when he stands and may relocate during his term (including off the continent) ? under this proposal a director who moved to a country where another director was domiciled during his term would have to forfeit his duly elected seat.  Sorry, can?t support that.


>>>6- Regional representation: Consider modifying 13.5 to state that Directors must act in the interests of AFRINIC as a whole,regardless of their regional affiliation.

> Supported
Supported
>>>7.  Conflict of interest: Consider adding a requirement for Directors to disclose any conflict of interest, and to recuse themselves from voting on any matter where they have a conflict of interest.

> Supported.  In addition, the Board must have a Conflict of Interest Policy and enforce it.
Strongly supported and would go so far as to say that a director should sign a conflict of interest register when they accept the position, that clearly states any affiliations they have where such conflict could arise (Basically any additional board seats, any companies  they are renumerated by, and any companies they hold in excess of 5% shareholding in)
>>> 8- Separation of powers: Consider adding a requirement that no more than one key position (Board Chair, Vice Chair, Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer) may be occupied by the same person.

> Supported

Supported


>>> 9- Replacement of Directors: The bylaws sections 13.1, 13.8, 13.10, and 13.14 give  different methods of replacing Directors for  different reasons. Consider  harmonising this.

> Harmonisation supported but the preferred option should be replacement through election at the next AGMM.

Supported ? though I would add SGM as a possibility for replacement.  In the event of losing multiple directors at a single time through some unforeseen event it may become necessary to call an SGM for this purpose and the bylaws need to allow for it.  The risk of tying this to an AGMM is that the board could be down to a skeleton for close to a year if we don?t allow for SGM?s.


>>> 10- Board approval of nominations: The Board can approve or disapprove  nominations for Board elections in terms of the Bylaws section 12.14(i). Consider requiring a supermajority of two thirds of the Board to disapprove any nomination

> We should remove this approval and strengthen NOMCOM.  NOMCOM composition and operation should be reviewed and improved.   We can have the legal advisor and past NOMCOM chair as non-voting
> members and make the appointment of the other members by the board more transparent, fair and unbiased.

I agree with the original proposal that states a super majority.  I believe that the board should have the right to reject candidates if certain situations.

>>>11-  Modification to the Bylaws or Constitution: The Bylaws say how the AFRINIC Members may change the Bylaws, but the Companies Act say that the  Registered Members can change it. Consider requiring that the  Bylaws/Constitution may be changed only after a Special Resolution by all AFRINIC Members in terms of Bylaws 7.6(vi),so that the Registered Members (the same nine people as the Directors) cannot act without broader approval.

> Registered members only MUST never amend  the bylaws.  Amendment of Bylaws beyond regulatory compliance must require general membership notice and consultation.

>The proposed amendment should be published not less than 60 days and not more than 90 days before with provisions for members to comment online and in any meeting held during the consultation
Am not sure we can legally override the companies act in this regard and would like to see legal opinion on this.  In principle I agree that the board should never change the bylaws without a super majority special resolution of the community at either an SGM or AGMM, I am just not sure we can have the bylaws match the companies act in this regard.

>>>12- Policies introduced by the Board: In terms of the Bylaws section 11.4, the Board may adopt policy changes that did not go through the normal PDP. Consider giving the community the right to reject such policy changes introduced by the Board.

> Section 11.5 seems to give this right to the community but endorsement may be open to misinterpretation so we shall just remove this.  In case of emergency, section 8 of PDP on varying the policy process applies.

11.5:  Any policy adopted by the Board under the provisions of Article 11.4 shall be submitted to the community for endorsement at the next public policy meeting.

Agree with the original proposal, the community should have the right to reject policy adopted by the board.  I still believe that the board needs the right to adopt emergency policy to protect the organization if it deems necessary, and have the community reject it at the next meeting if they feel it necessary.

Thanks

Andrew

_______________________________________________
Community-Discuss mailing list
Community-Discuss at afrinic.net<mailto:Community-Discuss at afrinic.net>
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss

_______________________________________________
Community-Discuss mailing list
Community-Discuss at afrinic.net<mailto:Community-Discuss at afrinic.net>
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20160629/21a8a3c8/attachment.html>

From noah at neo.co.tz  Wed Jun 29 18:36:14 2016
From: noah at neo.co.tz (Noah)
Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2016 21:36:14 +0300
Subject: [Community-Discuss] Resolution 201604.274 about Set-Up fees
In-Reply-To: <HE1PR0801MB1577B5CB44FBFE74CEAFFCB4E6220@HE1PR0801MB1577.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com>
References: <DUB119-W44FB800BC35A476D27252EB9200@phx.gbl>
 <57727625.5040506@skannet.com>
 <HE1PR0801MB1577B5CB44FBFE74CEAFFCB4E6220@HE1PR0801MB1577.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com>
Message-ID: <CAEqgTWaqKYSRy51eUQgEAebEuEGjWQC+L0hO0p=H86hRD_UDOA@mail.gmail.com>

+1 Nadan,

Waiting for the AFRINIC Chairs response..................

On Tue, Jun 28, 2016 at 7:12 PM, Keshwarsingh Nadan <kn at millenium.net.mu>
wrote:

> Dear Chair,
>
>
>
> 1. The Board has always been responsible for setting the fees. ?Review? includes the right to change the fees.
>
>
>
> Agree on this one.
>
>
>
> 2. The problem being addressed is that every allocation or assignment event requires effort from staff, and it is not fair for that effort to sometimes be undertaken free of charge.
>
>
>
> The staff has always been and is presently remunerated for that effort, so how come that remunerated effort is sometimes undertaken free of charge ? Underpaid staff ?
>
>
>
> 3. AFRINIC requires more revenue, not less.
>
>
>
> Why does AFRINIC requires more revenue ? For what purpose ?
>
>
>
> 4. If the proposed charging scheme had been in place during 2015, then income from allocation and assignment fees would have been about USD 550k.  Actual income from allocation and assignment fees in 2015 was about USD 350k. Therefore, the clarification that allocation or assignment fees are once per allocation or assignment, not once per member, is expected to raise about USD 200k per year.
>
>
>
> Motive behind an expected US $200k/yr?
>
>
>
> 5. Since it is being introduced in the middle of 2016, the impact on the 2016 revenue is expected to be an additional USD 100k.
>
>
>
> Motive behind an expected additional US $100k for 2016?
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> K
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>
>


-- 
*./noah*
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20160629/867f578e/attachment.html>

From randy at psg.com  Thu Jun 30 04:00:54 2016
From: randy at psg.com (Randy Bush)
Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2016 13:00:54 +0900
Subject: [Community-Discuss] Resolution 201604.274 about Set-Up fees
In-Reply-To: <CAB=5e9Ly4q0NaHC+-_AAuotZ_8=W0rTxGRQcv_D5JgUSuXteBA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <DUB119-W44FB800BC35A476D27252EB9200@phx.gbl>
 <57727625.5040506@skannet.com>
 <HE1PR0801MB1577B5CB44FBFE74CEAFFCB4E6220@HE1PR0801MB1577.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com>
 <CAB=5e9Ly4q0NaHC+-_AAuotZ_8=W0rTxGRQcv_D5JgUSuXteBA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <m2ziq3gwax.wl%randy@psg.com>

> I think it will be very good if the membership maintenance price be
> lowered.  Please let the board look into this.

<sarcasm>
i strongly agree.  afrninc should pay us to take address space from
them.  this would make my business a bit easier.
</sarcasm>

fwiw, i believe fees are set by the boards (or equivalents) of all the
other rirs.  the board, and execs, are responsible that income meets
expenses.  and with responsibility must go authority.

has no one noticed the british insanity in which the country eats its
children?  i am hoping that the states does not follow.  there is no
need for the afrinic community to do so.

randy



From jrhountomey at gmail.com  Thu Jun 30 06:33:18 2016
From: jrhountomey at gmail.com (Jean-Robert Hountomey)
Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2016 23:33:18 -0700
Subject: [Community-Discuss] post ipv4 depletion frauds, brokers activities
In-Reply-To: <6.2.5.6.2.20160627114130.0ca1c670@elandnews.com>
References: <CA+O0tSn=L1KGPz0-VDRxAxEOtaB+WUZhpmUpNd6orYzFx56e+g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAGTm15=sQCsihm267wpTghORAM8r5uwqXRwoherymSsMFhG18Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <e9daca4c-193e-0427-9a81-a2ccb32f40ff@gmail.com>
 <CAHm7s1RB2OYEYMHhniFYy_L8PjqnZT97VxCO0tnKxCx=RmN=gg@mail.gmail.com>
 <803D3537-57FB-4B90-918F-05B8E3149EF0@controlfreak.co.za>
 <CAEqgTWafqKmGR7YqDDWxTmJKY8RxR77bPs5YjfkDCD-dcdhdwg@mail.gmail.com>
 <AMSPR03MB534E014428C8878F6340771EE2F0@AMSPR03MB534.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
 <CAEqgTWYoSD_=fp50i-acnOmbEFBcQXWaMrrw43xMX7cRw3-+RQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <BF16758858CA16EF.07CD9C22-6306-4215-972A-C68BEC6A81B3@mail.outlook.com>
 <CAEqgTWYFA207o6ZmPsKJyqtTcsiHHZiXP-XQBWu6o61B35O4Mg@mail.gmail.com>
 <73F0E732-080B-4474-9233-770958C005BA@liquidtelecom.com>
 <CAEqgTWbdV_xzu17vtn5kOVj8ALdauLBw_FxNsymw3ghRo6x3dw@mail.gmail.com>
 <6.2.5.6.2.20160627094342.0c64cc28@resistor.net>
 <CACRw5znw-jKp-U+=tnOR2cbnLdDDW+tdRD_vUYKSbmrhgo7eUw@mail.gmail.com>
 <6.2.5.6.2.20160627114130.0ca1c670@elandnews.com>
Message-ID: <69f28c1c-b7bd-1cec-49a1-1d071531488c@gmail.com>

Thanks. Everyone. I haven't received any response from AfriNIC as an
organization but I have enough information.

Thanks.

Jean-Robert


On 6/27/16 11:56 AM, sm+afrinic at elandsys.com wrote:
> Hi Amresh,
> At 11:36 27-06-2016, Amreesh Phokeer wrote:
>> I am pretty sure there is something wrong with the "Dutch" RPKI
>> dashboard. I'd recommend the NIST dashboard rather:
>
> Thank you for the URL.
>
> I was verifying some information about IPv4 addresses and I noticed
> some valid ROAs for IPv4 addresses from Afrinic.  The information
> currently on the dashboard doesn't seem correct.
>
> Regards,
> S. Moonesamy
>
> _______________________________________________
> RPD mailing list
> RPD at afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd




From noah at neo.co.tz  Thu Jun 30 06:52:15 2016
From: noah at neo.co.tz (Noah)
Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2016 09:52:15 +0300
Subject: [Community-Discuss] [members-discuss] Accountability assessment
In-Reply-To: <F6A04D7B-DD18-44BE-A6C4-7C799AE22C3A@trstech.net>
References: <CAG1eoi3eWuJYmbZa+s2nMnGMHHTRyDLQ9L0NakR5y8ZMwShpiw@mail.gmail.com>
 <F6A04D7B-DD18-44BE-A6C4-7C799AE22C3A@trstech.net>
Message-ID: <CAEqgTWY3OfBe20Q2JM51ttNwP6rMVSC2RGbJrmANh-uHqbbhQQ@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Jun 29, 2016 at 3:04 PM, ALAIN AINA <aalain at trstech.net> wrote:

>
> Hello,
>
> Hi Alain,



> Other points we may want to consider. See below:
>
> 1- Amend 4.2 to add membership consultation and community notification for
> at least 6 months before applying adopted new fees schedule.
>
>
Yes this would give the membership base enough time to have a consensus on
such changes. 6 Months is good.



> 5- Amend 12.11 to set  minimum number of votes. For all vote, a minimum of
> votes from 10% of the total eligible voters required.
>
>

My suggestion would be to actually set the minimum % of votes to be 20%.
The same should apply for the quorum. We also perhaps consider 20%.




>
> Cheers
>
> ?Alain
>
>
Noah
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20160630/770e5f38/attachment.html>

From sfolayan at gmail.com  Thu Jun 30 07:09:26 2016
From: sfolayan at gmail.com (Sunday Folayan)
Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2016 08:09:26 +0100
Subject: [Community-Discuss] Resolution 201604.274 about Set-Up fees
In-Reply-To: <CAEqgTWaqKYSRy51eUQgEAebEuEGjWQC+L0hO0p=H86hRD_UDOA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <DUB119-W44FB800BC35A476D27252EB9200@phx.gbl>
 <57727625.5040506@skannet.com>
 <HE1PR0801MB1577B5CB44FBFE74CEAFFCB4E6220@HE1PR0801MB1577.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com>
 <CAEqgTWaqKYSRy51eUQgEAebEuEGjWQC+L0hO0p=H86hRD_UDOA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <5774C5A6.8000307@gmail.com>

Dear Resource Members and the Community,

The Board has taken note of the comments on the process around the 
proposed Fees and will deliberate on them at the meeting coming up next 
week. I will thereafter share some ideas with the community.

Thank you very much for the varied depth of the various feedbacks.

Sincerely,

Sunday Folayan.
Chair, AFRINIC Board

On 29/06/2016 19:36, Noah wrote:
> +1 Nadan,
>
> Waiting for the AFRINIC Chairs response..................
>
> On Tue, Jun 28, 2016 at 7:12 PM, Keshwarsingh Nadan 
> <kn at millenium.net.mu <mailto:kn at millenium.net.mu>> wrote:
>
>     DearChair,
>
>       
>
>     1. The Board has always been responsible for setting the fees. ?Review? includes the right to change the fees.
>
>     Agree on this one.
>
>     2. The problem being addressed is that every allocation or assignment event requires effort from staff, and it is not fair for that effort to sometimes be undertaken free of charge.
>
>     The staff has always been and is presently remunerated for that
>     effort, so how come that remunerated effort is sometimes
>     undertaken free of charge ? Underpaid staff ?
>
>     3. AFRINIC requires more revenue, not less.
>
>     Why does AFRINIC requires more revenue ? For what purpose ?
>
>     4. If the proposed charging scheme had been in place during 2015, then income from allocation and assignment fees would have been about USD 550k.  Actual income from allocation and assignment fees in 2015 was about USD 350k. Therefore, the clarification that allocation or assignment fees are once per allocation or assignment, not once per member, is expected to raise about USD 200k per year.
>
>     Motive behind an expected US $200k/yr?
>
>     5. Since it is being introduced in the middle of 2016, the impact on the 2016 revenue is expected to be an additional USD 100k.
>
>     Motive behind an expected additional US $100k for 2016?
>
>       
>
>     Regards,
>
>     K
>
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     Community-Discuss mailing list
>     Community-Discuss at afrinic.net <mailto:Community-Discuss at afrinic.net>
>     https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>
>
>
>
> -- 
> *./noah*
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20160630/bd3ceb5e/attachment.html>

From noah at neo.co.tz  Thu Jun 30 07:33:36 2016
From: noah at neo.co.tz (Noah)
Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2016 10:33:36 +0300
Subject: [Community-Discuss] AFRINIC Strategic Plan - Post 2016
In-Reply-To: <CAEqgTWayodveEk_orQ5GrKLfbZCVFsJFE6Krs0WPXEo+TQ_sVg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAEqgTWayodveEk_orQ5GrKLfbZCVFsJFE6Krs0WPXEo+TQ_sVg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAEqgTWb576PimugpubBt6jOU6_hAmhvXwPVLWBM8i9b=8F-2Yw@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, Jun 24, 2016 at 2:25 PM, Noah <noah at neo.co.tz> wrote:

> On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 11:05 PM, serge ilunga <sergekbk at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> BoD Chair, can you please share with the community the new Strategic Plan?
>
> I couldn't find anything on the AFRINIC website.
>
>


Dear Chairman AFRINIC BoD,

I am not sure if this email was received. So as a reminder, could anyone
from the Board please point some of us to the document or place we can read
about the *Strategic Plan for the organisation* that was announced at
Gaborone Meeting?



>
>> Is there any activity plan for the current year?
>>
>
> I think for the above, AFRINIC is best positioned to share the 2016
> Activity Plan which obviously should be based on this new SP.
>
>

We we also have the *Activity Plan* for this year and how we expect to see
the organisation continue to grow based on the *New Strategic Plan?*



> Noah
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20160630/805bbbf6/attachment.html>

From boubakarbarry at gmail.com  Thu Jun 30 08:29:41 2016
From: boubakarbarry at gmail.com (Boubakar Barry)
Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2016 08:29:41 +0000
Subject: [Community-Discuss] [members-discuss] Accountability assessment
In-Reply-To: <F6A04D7B-DD18-44BE-A6C4-7C799AE22C3A@trstech.net>
References: <CAG1eoi3eWuJYmbZa+s2nMnGMHHTRyDLQ9L0NakR5y8ZMwShpiw@mail.gmail.com>
 <F6A04D7B-DD18-44BE-A6C4-7C799AE22C3A@trstech.net>
Message-ID: <CAGrBSSj=WAN7Suz9M_TO-Fe1V5iouxzj2E2g2BrEzNgNB+rmhA@mail.gmail.com>

I think these amendments are reasonable and would contribute to the
improvement of AfriNIC's governance. I support them.

Boubakar


On Wed, Jun 29, 2016 at 12:04 PM, ALAIN AINA <aalain at trstech.net> wrote:

>
> Hello,
>
> Other points we may want to consider. See below:
>
> 1- Amend 4.2 to add membership consultation and community notification for
> at least 6 months before applying adopted new fees schedule.
>
> "Fees review must be done in consultation with the members and community
> must be notified at least six(6) months before new adopted fees schedule
> takes effect."
>
> ++++++ current
> 4.2 The fees mentioned in Article 4.1 above shall be subject to review
> from time to time by the Board.
> ++++++
>
>
> 2- Amend 13.4 to clarify that all directors are elected upon
> recommendations by NOMCOM, while keep the competency requirements for the
> non regional.
>
> +++++ current
> 13.4 The Board shall comprise of nine (9) Directors appointed as follows:
>
> (i) Six Directors elected by the Annual General Member Meeting called
> under Article 11.1 of this Constitution to represent each of the regions
> listed in Article 13.5; (Seats 1 to 6)
>
> (ii) Two Directors elected by the Annual General Member Meeting called
> under Article 11.1 upon the recommendation of the NomCom based on their
> competencies and not their regional representation; and (Seats 7 and 8)
>
> (iii) The Chief Executive Officer. (Seat 9)
> +++++
>
> 3-   Amend  14 to add provisions for director recall by the membership :
>
> - Process starts by petition of minimum 10% of the total membership
> - Challenged director given opportunity to address the community
> - Recall approved by 75% of the votes
>
> ++++ current
> 14 REMOVAL OF DIRECTORS
>
> 14.1 A Director shall hold office until:
>
> (i) his term of office expires, without prejudice to Article 13;
>
> (ii) he/she signs a written notice of resignation and delivers it to the
> address for service on the Company, which notice shall be effective when it
> is received at that address or at such later time as may be specified in
> the notice;
>
> (iii) he/she is removed by the affirmative vote of two-thirds of all other
> Directors;
>
> (iv) he/she otherwise ceases to be a Director pursuant to Section 139 of
> the Act; or
>
> (v) the Director being the Chief Executive Officer, on the Board
> terminating his employment as Chief Executive Officer.
> +++++
>
>
> 4-  Amend 12.10 (ii)   to set the quorum at 10% of the total membership
> either present physically or remotely
>
>
> +++++++ current
> 12.10 Quorum.
>
> (ii) The quorum for an Annual General Member meeting shall be composed of
> minimum of ten (10) members in person comprising:
>
> a) Four (4) Directors elected to represent a region;
>
> b) One (1) Director elected on a non-regional criterion; and
>
> c) Five (5) Resource Members.
> +++++++
>
>
> 5- Amend 12.11 to set  minimum number of votes. For all vote, a minimum of
> votes from 10% of the total eligible voters required.
>
>
> Cheers
>
> ?Alain
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Jun 28, 2016, at 5:20 PM, Omo Oaiya <Omo.Oaiya at wacren.net> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 10 June 2016 at 11:18, Alan Barrett <alan.barrett at afrinic.net> wrote:
>
>> Arising from a review of AFRINIC?s Bylaws and other documents, several
>> potential areas for improvement were identified.
>>
>> The attached document was presented to the AFRINIC Membership and the
>> community during the AGMM in Gaborone, Botswana, on 9 June 2016.
>>
>> I invite the community and the membership to comment on these
>> suggestions, or any other areas where the Bylaws could be improved.
>> Comments should be sent to the community-discuss at afrinic.net mailing
>> list.  In due course, Bylaws changes will be drafted to implement the
>> suggestions (and additional points that might be identified).
>>
>> Alan Barrett
>> CEO, AFRINIC
>>
>>
>
> Thanks Alan.  Comments below
>
>
> >>>1 ......  but there is a conflict between 7.2(i) and 13.7(i) on whether
>> or not Associate Members may vote in elections forDirectors. This conflict
>> must be resolved one way or another.
>> We need to decide whether or not Associate Members should vote, and
>> modify the Bylaws to give effect to that decision
>
>
> Just a matter of ambiguity in the statement in 7.2(i) to straighten out.
> The bylaws are consistent.  Registered and Resource members vote. Associate
> members observe.
>
>
> >>>2.  Interchangeable use of the terms ?Bylaw? or ?Bylaws? and
>> ?Constitution?:...... Suggest adding a clause 1.3 to clarify that this
>> document may be referred to by the term ?Bylaws? or ?Constitution?, and is
>> intended to serve the function of the Constitution in terms of the
>> Companies Act of Mauritius.
>
>
> Supported
>
>
> >>3- Clarification that all Registered Members in terms of Bylaws 6.3, and
>> only such Registered Members, must be registered in terms of the Companies
>> Act as members of the company.
>
>
> Supported but we shall seriously consider moving from this Private company
> model to a more community oriented model, where all members are considered.
>
>
>> >>4 - Term limits: Consider adding a term limit for elected Board members.
>> >> We need to decide whether or not to add a limit, and what the limit
>> should be.
>
>
> Proposal :  One term and at least an election before another nomination
>
>
>> >>> 5- Independence of Directors: Consider adding a limit to the number
>> of Directors who may work for the same organisation.
>>
>> >>> We need to decide whether or not to add a limit, and what the limit
>> should be.
>
>
> We need to keep refreshing the board with independence, expertise and
> skills so a better managed succession process is a must.  I propose with
> the exclusion of the CEO that we have
>
> -  Max 1 per org/company
> -  Max 1 per country
>  - Max 2  per region
>
>  - Not more than one Director may have employment, consultancy or advisory
> relationships with the same Company or Organization and/or with one of its
> Related Companies or Organizations established or not in the same country.
>
> - not more than one Director may be domiciled in the same country. Should
> a candidate for a position on the Board of Directors have more than one
> domicile, one of which involves a presumed incompatibility, in order to
> analyze his/her case for usual country of residence, the country where the
> company or organization he/she is a part of or works for is established,
> and/or any other relevant data shall be considered;
>
>  - not more than two Directors may be domiciled in the same region.
>
>
>> >>>6- Regional representation: Consider modifying 13.5 to state that
>> Directors must act in the interests of AFRINIC as a whole,regardless of
>> their regional affiliation.
>
>
> Supported
>
> >>>7.  Conflict of interest: Consider adding a requirement for Directors
>> to disclose any conflict of interest, and to recuse themselves from voting
>> on any matter where they have a conflict of interest.
>
>
> Supported.  In addition, the Board must have a Conflict of Interest Policy
> and enforce it.
>
> >>> 8- Separation of powers: Consider adding a requirement that no more
>> than one key position (Board Chair, Vice Chair, Chief Executive Officer,
>> Chief Financial Officer) may be occupied by the same person.
>
>
> Supported
>
>
>> >>> 9- Replacement of Directors: The bylaws sections 13.1, 13.8, 13.10,
>> and 13.14 give  different methods of replacing Directors for  different
>> reasons. Consider  harmonising this.
>
>
> Harmonisation supported but the preferred option should be replacement
> through election at the next AGMM.
>
>
>> >>> 10- Board approval of nominations: The Board can approve or
>> disapprove  nominations for Board elections in terms of the Bylaws section
>> 12.14(i). Consider requiring a supermajority of two thirds of the Board to
>> disapprove any nomination
>
>
> We should remove this approval and strengthen NOMCOM.  NOMCOM composition
> and operation should be reviewed and improved.   We can have the legal
> advisor and past NOMCOM chair as non-voting members and make the
> appointment of the other members by the board more transparent, fair and
> unbiased.
>
> The election timeline also needs to be revisited to allow enough time for
> proper NOMCOM operation.
>
>
> >>>11-  Modification to the Bylaws or Constitution: The Bylaws say how the
>> AFRINIC Members may change the Bylaws, but the Companies Act say that the
>>  Registered Members can change it. Consider requiring that the
>>  Bylaws/Constitution may be changed only after a Special Resolution by all
>> AFRINIC Members in terms of Bylaws 7.6(vi),so that the Registered
>> Members (the same nine people as the Directors) cannot act without broader
>> approval.
>
>
> Registered members only MUST never amend  the bylaws.  Amendment of Bylaws
> beyond regulatory compliance must require general membership notice and
> consultation.
>
> The proposed amendment should be published not less than 60 days and not
> more than 90 days before with provisions for members to comment online and
> in any meeting held during the consultation
>
>
>> >>>12- Policies introduced by the Board: In terms of the Bylaws section
>> 11.4, the Board may adopt policy changes that did not go through the normal
>> PDP. Consider giving the community the right to reject such policy changes
>> introduced by the Board.
>
>
> Section 11.5 seems to give this right to the community but endorsement may
> be open to misinterpretation so we shall just remove this.  In case of
> emergency, section 8 of PDP on varying the policy process applies.
>
> 11.5:  Any policy adopted by the Board under the provisions of Article
>> 11.4 shall be submitted to the community for endorsement at the next public
>> policy meeting.
>
>
>
> Best wishes
>
> --
> Omo Oaiya
> CTO/Directeur Technique, WACREN
> Mobile: +234 808 888 1571 , +221 784 305 224
> Skype: kodion <http:/>
> http://www.wacren.net
>
> <http:/>
> _______________________________________________
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20160630/557d9931/attachment.html>

From Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com  Thu Jun 30 08:48:14 2016
From: Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com (Andrew Alston)
Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2016 08:48:14 +0000
Subject: [Community-Discuss] [members-discuss] Accountability assessment
In-Reply-To: <F6A04D7B-DD18-44BE-A6C4-7C799AE22C3A@trstech.net>
References: <CAG1eoi3eWuJYmbZa+s2nMnGMHHTRyDLQ9L0NakR5y8ZMwShpiw@mail.gmail.com>
 <F6A04D7B-DD18-44BE-A6C4-7C799AE22C3A@trstech.net>
Message-ID: <AMSPR03MB534891A9A03FAEBB46F950FEE240@AMSPR03MB534.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>

See comments inline (once again, speaking here as a resource member)

1- Amend 4.2 to add membership consultation and community notification for at least 6 months before applying adopted new fees schedule.

"Fees review must be done in consultation with the members and community must be notified at least six(6) months before new adopted fees schedule takes effect."

++++++ current
4.2 The fees mentioned in Article 4.1 above shall be subject to review from time to time by the Board.
++++++

I have no problem with the 6 month notification, I have a major problem with consultation outside of the member base and including the wider community in what is a commercial discussion between the company and the members.  I?m even very much on the fence about making the fees subject to a negotiation like this, because at the end of the day there is a fiduciary duty on the directors to ensure that the company is sustainable.  If the directors have to raise fees to do that, and the community disagrees with the fee increases, this creates a legally untenable situation.  That being said, before I make up my mind which way I?d go on this, I?d need to see exact wording of what was proposed.

2- Amend 13.4 to clarify that all directors are elected upon recommendations by NOMCOM, while keep the competency requirements for the non regional.

+++++ current
13.4 The Board shall comprise of nine (9) Directors appointed as follows:

(i) Six Directors elected by the Annual General Member Meeting called under Article 11.1 of this Constitution to represent each of the regions listed in Article 13.5; (Seats 1 to 6)

(ii) Two Directors elected by the Annual General Member Meeting called under Article 11.1 upon the recommendation of the NomCom based on their competencies and not their regional representation; and (Seats 7 and 8)

(iii) The Chief Executive Officer. (Seat 9)
+++++

I understand the sentiment but I disagree with the wording of the proposed amendment.  Directors are not elected based on a recommendation of NomCom, NomCom controls the slate to ensure that nominations meet criteria.  They do not recommend the election of any particular party, and the use of the word recommend compromises the neutrality of the NomCom.

3-   Amend  14 to add provisions for director recall by the membership :

- Process starts by petition of minimum 10% of the total membership
- Challenged director given opportunity to address the community
- Recall approved by 75% of the votes


++++ current
14 REMOVAL OF DIRECTORS

14.1 A Director shall hold office until:

(i) his term of office expires, without prejudice to Article 13;

(ii) he/she signs a written notice of resignation and delivers it to the address for service on the Company, which notice shall be effective when it is received at that address or at such later time as may be specified in the notice;

(iii) he/she is removed by the affirmative vote of two-thirds of all other Directors;

(iv) he/she otherwise ceases to be a Director pursuant to Section 139 of the Act; or

(v) the Director being the Chief Executive Officer, on the Board terminating his employment as Chief Executive Officer.
+++++

Again, I have no objection to the proposal, though I would like to see an exact wording proposal.

4-  Amend 12.10 (ii)   to set the quorum at 10% of the total membership either present physically or remotely


+++++++ current
12.10 Quorum.

(ii) The quorum for an Annual General Member meeting shall be composed of minimum of ten (10) members in person comprising:

a) Four (4) Directors elected to represent a region;

b) One (1) Director elected on a non-regional criterion; and

c) Five (5) Resource Members.
+++++++

No real issue with this and it closes a fairly major loophole.  I would however extend this to SGM?s as well as AGMM?s.

5- Amend 12.11 to set  minimum number of votes. For all vote, a minimum of votes from 10% of the total eligible voters required.

On this I need more clarity.  I would have a problem setting a vote quorum at 10% of the total membership base on every vote purely because if I examine voting trends both in our region and in other regions, this is an extremely high bar to meet.  In Tunis I believe we came close, in Gaborone, to my knowledge we set the highest percentage of membership voting in RIR history, hitting in excess of 20%, but if you examine the RIPE region and other regions, you?re looking at voting percentages that are well sub 10%.  There is no guarantee that we can sustain a 10% vote and I think the figure is far to high.  I?d support a 5% quorum on votes.

Cheers

?Alain






On Jun 28, 2016, at 5:20 PM, Omo Oaiya <Omo.Oaiya at wacren.net<mailto:Omo.Oaiya at wacren.net>> wrote:



On 10 June 2016 at 11:18, Alan Barrett <alan.barrett at afrinic.net<mailto:alan.barrett at afrinic.net>> wrote:
Arising from a review of AFRINIC?s Bylaws and other documents, several potential areas for improvement were identified.

The attached document was presented to the AFRINIC Membership and the community during the AGMM in Gaborone, Botswana, on 9 June 2016.

I invite the community and the membership to comment on these suggestions, or any other areas where the Bylaws could be improved.  Comments should be sent to the community-discuss at afrinic.net<mailto:community-discuss at afrinic.net> mailing list.  In due course, Bylaws changes will be drafted to implement the suggestions (and additional points that might be identified).

Alan Barrett
CEO, AFRINIC


Thanks Alan.  Comments below

>>>1 ......  but there is a conflict between 7.2(i) and 13.7(i) on whether or not Associate Members may vote in elections forDirectors. This conflict must be resolved one way or another.
We need to decide whether or not Associate Members should vote, and modify the Bylaws to give effect to that decision

Just a matter of ambiguity in the statement in 7.2(i) to straighten out. The bylaws are consistent.  Registered and Resource members vote. Associate members observe.


>>>2.  Interchangeable use of the terms ?Bylaw? or ?Bylaws? and ?Constitution?:...... Suggest adding a clause 1.3 to clarify that this document may be referred to by the term ?Bylaws? or ?Constitution?, and is intended to serve the function of the Constitution in terms of the Companies Act of Mauritius.

Supported

>>3- Clarification that all Registered Members in terms of Bylaws 6.3, and only such Registered Members, must be registered in terms of the Companies Act as members of the company.

Supported but we shall seriously consider moving from this Private company model to a more community oriented model, where all members are considered.

>>4 - Term limits: Consider adding a term limit for elected Board members.
>> We need to decide whether or not to add a limit, and what the limit should be.

Proposal :  One term and at least an election before another nomination

>>> 5- Independence of Directors: Consider adding a limit to the number of Directors who may work for the same organisation.

>>> We need to decide whether or not to add a limit, and what the limit should be.

We need to keep refreshing the board with independence, expertise and skills so a better managed succession process is a must.  I propose with the exclusion of the CEO that we have

-  Max 1 per org/company
-  Max 1 per country
 - Max 2  per region

 - Not more than one Director may have employment, consultancy or advisory relationships with the same Company or Organization and/or with one of its Related Companies or Organizations established or not in the same country.

- not more than one Director may be domiciled in the same country. Should a candidate for a position on the Board of Directors have more than one domicile, one of which involves a presumed incompatibility, in order to analyze his/her case for usual country of residence, the country where the company or organization he/she is a part of or works for is established, and/or any other relevant data shall be considered;

 - not more than two Directors may be domiciled in the same region.

>>>6- Regional representation: Consider modifying 13.5 to state that Directors must act in the interests of AFRINIC as a whole,regardless of their regional affiliation.

Supported
>>>7.  Conflict of interest: Consider adding a requirement for Directors to disclose any conflict of interest, and to recuse themselves from voting on any matter where they have a conflict of interest.

Supported.  In addition, the Board must have a Conflict of Interest Policy and enforce it.
>>> 8- Separation of powers: Consider adding a requirement that no more than one key position (Board Chair, Vice Chair, Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer) may be occupied by the same person.

Supported


>>> 9- Replacement of Directors: The bylaws sections 13.1, 13.8, 13.10, and 13.14 give  different methods of replacing Directors for  different reasons. Consider  harmonising this.

Harmonisation supported but the preferred option should be replacement through election at the next AGMM.


>>> 10- Board approval of nominations: The Board can approve or disapprove  nominations for Board elections in terms of the Bylaws section 12.14(i). Consider requiring a supermajority of two thirds of the Board to disapprove any nomination

We should remove this approval and strengthen NOMCOM.  NOMCOM composition and operation should be reviewed and improved.   We can have the legal advisor and past NOMCOM chair as non-voting members and make the appointment of the other members by the board more transparent, fair and unbiased.

The election timeline also needs to be revisited to allow enough time for proper NOMCOM operation.

>>>11-  Modification to the Bylaws or Constitution: The Bylaws say how the AFRINIC Members may change the Bylaws, but the Companies Act say that the  Registered Members can change it. Consider requiring that the  Bylaws/Constitution may be changed only after a Special Resolution by all AFRINIC Members in terms of Bylaws 7.6(vi),so that the Registered Members (the same nine people as the Directors) cannot act without broader approval.

Registered members only MUST never amend  the bylaws.  Amendment of Bylaws beyond regulatory compliance must require general membership notice and consultation.

The proposed amendment should be published not less than 60 days and not more than 90 days before with provisions for members to comment online and in any meeting held during the consultation

>>>12- Policies introduced by the Board: In terms of the Bylaws section 11.4, the Board may adopt policy changes that did not go through the normal PDP. Consider giving the community the right to reject such policy changes introduced by the Board.

Section 11.5 seems to give this right to the community but endorsement may be open to misinterpretation so we shall just remove this.  In case of emergency, section 8 of PDP on varying the policy process applies.

11.5:  Any policy adopted by the Board under the provisions of Article 11.4 shall be submitted to the community for endorsement at the next public policy meeting.


Best wishes

--
Omo Oaiya
CTO/Directeur Technique, WACREN
Mobile: +234 808 888 1571 , +221 784 305 224
Skype: kodion
http://www.wacren.net<http://www.wacren.net/>

_______________________________________________
Community-Discuss mailing list
Community-Discuss at afrinic.net<mailto:Community-Discuss at afrinic.net>
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20160630/d26bdca3/attachment.html>

From audekileo at rocketmail.com  Thu Jun 30 09:27:37 2016
From: audekileo at rocketmail.com (Aude Kileo)
Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2016 09:27:37 +0000 (UTC)
Subject: [Community-Discuss] Community-Discuss Digest, Vol 18, Issue 1
In-Reply-To: <mailman.1274.1467276526.29690.community-discuss@afrinic.net>
References: <mailman.1274.1467276526.29690.community-discuss@afrinic.net>
Message-ID: <1585129156.4454241.1467278857953.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com>

------------------------------

Message: 8
Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2016 13:00:54 +0900
From: Randy Bush <randy at psg.com>
To: Diana Ikwuagwu <diana.ikwuagwu at unn.edu.ng>
Cc: General Discussions of AFRINIC <community-discuss at afrinic.net>
Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] Resolution 201604.274 about Set-Up
??? fees
Message-ID: <m2ziq3gwax.wl%randy at psg.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII

> I think it will be very good if the membership maintenance price be
> lowered.? Please let the board look into this.

<sarcasm>
i strongly agree.? afrninc should pay us to take address space from
them.? this would make my business a bit easier.
</sarcasm>

Hi Community,
I don't think SARCASM is good for us new ones on the mailing list. We are here to follow and learn even if our opinion may not count. 

Please allow us to also share our voice.

Regards,

Aude...


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20160630/eba6f8af/attachment.html>

From honest1989 at gmail.com  Thu Jun 30 09:48:56 2016
From: honest1989 at gmail.com (Honest Ornella GANKPA)
Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2016 10:48:56 +0100
Subject: [Community-Discuss] Community-Discuss Digest, Vol 18, Issue 1
In-Reply-To: <1585129156.4454241.1467278857953.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com>
References: <mailman.1274.1467276526.29690.community-discuss@afrinic.net>
 <1585129156.4454241.1467278857953.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <CAKZY-5bWJhhcMngGTWstu+GuEf=XMQ_rgcnT_b8FD=M37U6HcA@mail.gmail.com>

+1 Aude.

I may also add that I do not see how Randy's comment relates to Diana's
suggestion. Indeed raising the fees might be beneficial to Afrinic (The
organization needs money to run after all). However this could be a barrier
for potential new members and we do want new members.

Best Regards

2016-06-30 10:27 GMT+01:00 Aude Kileo <audekileo at rocketmail.com>:

> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 8
> Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2016 13:00:54 +0900
> From: Randy Bush <randy at psg.com>
> To: Diana Ikwuagwu <diana.ikwuagwu at unn.edu.ng>
> Cc: General Discussions of AFRINIC <community-discuss at afrinic.net>
> Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] Resolution 201604.274 about Set-Up
>     fees
> Message-ID: <m2ziq3gwax.wl%randy at psg.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
>
> > I think it will be very good if the membership maintenance price be
> > lowered.  Please let the board look into this.
>
> <sarcasm>
> i strongly agree.  afrninc should pay us to take address space from
> them.  this would make my business a bit easier.
> </sarcasm>
>
>
> Hi Community,
>
> I don't think SARCASM is good for us new ones on the mailing list. We are
> here to follow and learn even if our opinion may not count.
>
> Please allow us to also share our voice.
>
> Regards,
>
> Aude...
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>
>


-- 
Honest Ornella GANKPA
Network engineer
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20160630/8a8c0165/attachment.html>

From Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com  Thu Jun 30 10:02:51 2016
From: Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com (Andrew Alston)
Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2016 10:02:51 +0000
Subject: [Community-Discuss] Community-Discuss Digest, Vol 18, Issue 1
In-Reply-To: <CAKZY-5bWJhhcMngGTWstu+GuEf=XMQ_rgcnT_b8FD=M37U6HcA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <mailman.1274.1467276526.29690.community-discuss@afrinic.net>
 <1585129156.4454241.1467278857953.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com>
 <CAKZY-5bWJhhcMngGTWstu+GuEf=XMQ_rgcnT_b8FD=M37U6HcA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AMSPR03MB534102F32DE68634C695B9EEE240@AMSPR03MB534.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>

Speaking as a resource member here again.

Let?s stop and analyse for a second.

The community wants more v6 outreach and training ? this costs money
The community wants (I hope) wants AfriNIC to be part of the global community ? this costs money
The community wants a push for RPKI ? this costs money
Segments of the community want an audit proposal that will put severe pressure on the hostmasters and need to a resource crunch meaning more people ? This costs money
The community wants (and has) 2 meetings a year ? these cost money

I can keep listing?.

The community has seen the financials clearly presented in the last few years and the financials clearly indicate that AfriNIC has very little financial reserve and has in fact for years been running on a very close to breakeven (and in many cases at a loss, especially if you discount FOREX gains, which cannot be relied on)

The community has questioned why AfriNIC?s financial reserve is as low as it is (particularly in Tunis).

Now?.

Members of the same community are proposing a fee decrease and as a result a cut in revenue?.

Pray tell, how do you propose AfriNIC funds all the points listed above?  Money doesn?t grow on trees, it can?t be picked like fruit, there are no lotteries AfriNIC can win, and without huge scope creep and going into some kinda commercial trading outside of IP addressing, other sources of revenue are significantly limited.

Hence, as a paying resource member, I for one have ZERO problem with a fairly dramatic rise in the fees.  Both to build reserve and to fund the very things the community is asking for.

That?s my opinion *as a resource member*

Andrew


From: Honest Ornella GANKPA [mailto:honest1989 at gmail.com]
Sent: 30 June 2016 12:49
To: Aude Kileo <audekileo at rocketmail.com>; General Discussions of AFRINIC <community-discuss at afrinic.net>
Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] Community-Discuss Digest, Vol 18, Issue 1

+1 Aude.

I may also add that I do not see how Randy's comment relates to Diana's suggestion. Indeed raising the fees might be beneficial to Afrinic (The organization needs money to run after all). However this could be a barrier for potential new members and we do want new members.

Best Regards

2016-06-30 10:27 GMT+01:00 Aude Kileo <audekileo at rocketmail.com<mailto:audekileo at rocketmail.com>>:
------------------------------

Message: 8
Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2016 13:00:54 +0900
From: Randy Bush <randy at psg.com<mailto:randy at psg.com>>
To: Diana Ikwuagwu <diana.ikwuagwu at unn.edu.ng<mailto:diana.ikwuagwu at unn.edu.ng>>
Cc: General Discussions of AFRINIC <community-discuss at afrinic.net<mailto:community-discuss at afrinic.net>>
Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] Resolution 201604.274 about Set-Up
    fees
Message-ID: <m2ziq3gwax.wl%randy at psg.com<mailto:randy at psg.com>>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII

> I think it will be very good if the membership maintenance price be
> lowered.  Please let the board look into this.

<sarcasm>
i strongly agree.  afrninc should pay us to take address space from
them.  this would make my business a bit easier.
</sarcasm>


Hi Community,

I don't think SARCASM is good for us new ones on the mailing list. We are here to follow and learn even if our opinion may not count.

Please allow us to also share our voice.

Regards,

Aude...



_______________________________________________
Community-Discuss mailing list
Community-Discuss at afrinic.net<mailto:Community-Discuss at afrinic.net>
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss



--
Honest Ornella GANKPA
Network engineer

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20160630/7d846a61/attachment.html>

From honest1989 at gmail.com  Thu Jun 30 10:30:26 2016
From: honest1989 at gmail.com (Honest Ornella GANKPA)
Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2016 11:30:26 +0100
Subject: [Community-Discuss] Resolution 201604.274 about Set-Up fees
In-Reply-To: <5774C5A6.8000307@gmail.com>
References: <DUB119-W44FB800BC35A476D27252EB9200@phx.gbl>
 <57727625.5040506@skannet.com>
 <HE1PR0801MB1577B5CB44FBFE74CEAFFCB4E6220@HE1PR0801MB1577.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com>
 <CAEqgTWaqKYSRy51eUQgEAebEuEGjWQC+L0hO0p=H86hRD_UDOA@mail.gmail.com>
 <5774C5A6.8000307@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAKZY-5YaCFr_6PK=nTe+D3sC_VvHTCoR6cS-CqhS7GYDrp506w@mail.gmail.com>

Hi Sunday,

As a follow up from our previous discussions and we are hearing Afrinic
needs more revenue, we shall consider making legacy members pay maintenance
fees per prefixes and maybe as courtesy return unused space to afrinic

-- 
Honest Ornella GANKPA
Network engineer


2016-06-30 8:09 GMT+01:00 Sunday Folayan <sfolayan at gmail.com>:

> Dear Resource Members and the Community,
>
> The Board has taken note of the comments on the process around the
> proposed Fees and will deliberate on them at the meeting coming up next
> week. I will thereafter share some ideas with the community.
>
> Thank you very much for the varied depth of the various feedbacks.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Sunday Folayan.
> Chair, AFRINIC Board
>
> On 29/06/2016 19:36, Noah wrote:
>
> +1 Nadan,
>
> Waiting for the AFRINIC Chairs response..................
>
> On Tue, Jun 28, 2016 at 7:12 PM, Keshwarsingh Nadan <
> <kn at millenium.net.mu>kn at millenium.net.mu> wrote:
>
>> Dear Chair,
>>
>>
>>
>> 1. The Board has always been responsible for setting the fees. ?Review? includes the right to change the fees.
>>
>>
>>
>> Agree on this one.
>>
>>
>>
>> 2. The problem being addressed is that every allocation or assignment event requires effort from staff, and it is not fair for that effort to sometimes be undertaken free of charge.
>>
>>
>>
>> The staff has always been and is presently remunerated for that effort, so how come that remunerated effort is sometimes undertaken free of charge ? Underpaid staff ?
>>
>>
>>
>> 3. AFRINIC requires more revenue, not less.
>>
>>
>>
>> Why does AFRINIC requires more revenue ? For what purpose ?
>>
>>
>>
>> 4. If the proposed charging scheme had been in place during 2015, then income from allocation and assignment fees would have been about USD 550k.  Actual income from allocation and assignment fees in 2015 was about USD 350k. Therefore, the clarification that allocation or assignment fees are once per allocation or assignment, not once per member, is expected to raise about USD 200k per year.
>>
>>
>>
>> Motive behind an expected US $200k/yr?
>>
>>
>>
>> 5. Since it is being introduced in the middle of 2016, the impact on the 2016 revenue is expected to be an additional USD 100k.
>>
>>
>>
>> Motive behind an expected additional US $100k for 2016?
>>
>>
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> K
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Community-Discuss mailing list
>> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net
>> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> *./noah*
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Community-Discuss mailing listCommunity-Discuss at afrinic.nethttps://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20160630/234bc5f7/attachment.html>

From madomey at hotmail.com  Thu Jun 30 10:49:06 2016
From: madomey at hotmail.com (Marcus K. G. Adomey)
Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2016 10:49:06 +0000
Subject: [Community-Discuss] Resolution 201604.274 about Set-Up fees
In-Reply-To: <m2ziq3gwax.wl%randy@psg.com>
References: <DUB119-W44FB800BC35A476D27252EB9200@phx.gbl>,
 <57727625.5040506@skannet.com>,
 <HE1PR0801MB1577B5CB44FBFE74CEAFFCB4E6220@HE1PR0801MB1577.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com>,
 <CAB=5e9Ly4q0NaHC+-_AAuotZ_8=W0rTxGRQcv_D5JgUSuXteBA@mail.gmail.com>,
 <m2ziq3gwax.wl%randy@psg.com>
Message-ID: <DUB119-W1FFEFE007242123EB67A3B9240@phx.gbl>

Dear Mr. Randy Bush,

At this stage when the community is contributing and discussing objectively to issues in AfriNIC, why this inappropriate sarcasm and disruptions? This is an insult to the community and under normal circumstances we don?t let this kind of recklessness go scot free. Bear in mind that Africa also has fountains of harsh sarcasm. Don?t let the fountain flow, PLEASE.

Thank you,

Marcus



> Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2016 13:00:54 +0900
> From: randy at psg.com
> To: diana.ikwuagwu at unn.edu.ng
> CC: community-discuss at afrinic.net
> Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] Resolution 201604.274 about Set-Up fees
> 
> > I think it will be very good if the membership maintenance price be
> > lowered.  Please let the board look into this.
> 
> <sarcasm>
> i strongly agree.  afrninc should pay us to take address space from
> them.  this would make my business a bit easier.
> </sarcasm>
> 
> fwiw, i believe fees are set by the boards (or equivalents) of all the
> other rirs.  the board, and execs, are responsible that income meets
> expenses.  and with responsibility must go authority.
> 
> has no one noticed the british insanity in which the country eats its
> children?  i am hoping that the states does not follow.  there is no
> need for the afrinic community to do so.
> 
> randy
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
 		 	   		  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20160630/664014ef/attachment.html>

From sergekbk at gmail.com  Thu Jun 30 10:53:13 2016
From: sergekbk at gmail.com (sergekbk)
Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2016 11:53:13 +0100
Subject: [Community-Discuss] Resolution 201604.274 about Set-Up fees
Message-ID: <p8x94chk4twdufk7b29uasc3.1467283993431@email.android.com>

Hello Diana,
Actually each RIR set the fees model which fit it's region and its community needs. So nothing wrong with your suggestion at all.

For the case of our region, AFRINIC already gives 50% discount? to NREN's and also waives fees for critical infrastructures like IXP's.

In fact, other RIR like APNIC treat? members in least developped countries differently.? See link below.

https://www.apnic.net/about-APNIC/corporate-documents/documents/membership/member-fee-schedule

BOD and Executive will have to see if this can fit our AFRINIC region needs and report to the community.

Kind Regards.

Serge IlungaCell: +243814443160Skype: sergekbkR.D.Congo-------- Original message --------From: Randy Bush <randy at psg.com> Date: 06/30/2016  05:00  (GMT+01:00) To: Diana Ikwuagwu <diana.ikwuagwu at unn.edu.ng> Cc: General Discussions of AFRINIC <community-discuss at afrinic.net> Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] Resolution 201604.274 about Set-Up fees 
> I think it will be very good if the membership maintenance price be
> lowered.? Please let the board look into this.

<sarcasm>
i strongly agree.? afrninc should pay us to take address space from
them.? this would make my business a bit easier.
</sarcasm>

fwiw, i believe fees are set by the boards (or equivalents) of all the
other rirs.? the board, and execs, are responsible that income meets
expenses.? and with responsibility must go authority.

has no one noticed the british insanity in which the country eats its
children?? i am hoping that the states does not follow.? there is no
need for the afrinic community to do so.

randy

_______________________________________________
Community-Discuss mailing list
Community-Discuss at afrinic.net
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20160630/3446674d/attachment.html>

From akin.akinfenwa at uniosun.edu.ng  Thu Jun 30 11:01:17 2016
From: akin.akinfenwa at uniosun.edu.ng (Timothy Ola Akinfenwa)
Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2016 12:01:17 +0100
Subject: [Community-Discuss] Community-Discuss Digest, Vol 18, Issue 1
In-Reply-To: <AMSPR03MB534102F32DE68634C695B9EEE240@AMSPR03MB534.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
References: <mailman.1274.1467276526.29690.community-discuss@afrinic.net>
 <1585129156.4454241.1467278857953.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com>
 <CAKZY-5bWJhhcMngGTWstu+GuEf=XMQ_rgcnT_b8FD=M37U6HcA@mail.gmail.com>
 <AMSPR03MB534102F32DE68634C695B9EEE240@AMSPR03MB534.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
Message-ID: <CAL1GxKRgECNxoozV-+TaQc8j58UupvkLXcZyUzdbE8DtMr8m4g@mail.gmail.com>

I'm with Andrew on this one. Yes, AFRINIC has a list of insatiable needs
with limited resources. Even the global economy has been relatively
unstable over the last few years, at least I can say for 3 to 4 countries
in Africa. I think there is no harm in trying to raise additional revenues
for AFRINIC if need be.

However, the main concern I have like many others is in the manner by which
this "fairly dramatic rise in fees" (in Andrew's words) were considered and
approved before being communicated to the community. The Internet community
is global but we also should know that not all our fingers are equal.

Timothy

Speaking as a resource member here again.



Let?s stop and analyse for a second.



The community wants more v6 outreach and training ? this costs money

The community wants (I hope) wants AfriNIC to be part of the global
community ? this costs money

The community wants a push for RPKI ? this costs money

Segments of the community want an audit proposal that will put severe
pressure on the hostmasters and need to a resource crunch meaning more
people ? This costs money

The community wants (and has) 2 meetings a year ? these cost money



I can keep listing?.



The community has seen the financials clearly presented in the last few
years and the financials clearly indicate that AfriNIC has very little
financial reserve and has in fact for years been running on a very close to
breakeven (and in many cases at a loss, especially if you discount FOREX
gains, which cannot be relied on)



The community has questioned why AfriNIC?s financial reserve is as low as
it is (particularly in Tunis).



Now?.



Members of the same community are proposing a fee decrease and as a result
a cut in revenue?.



Pray tell, how do you propose AfriNIC funds all the points listed above?
Money doesn?t grow on trees, it can?t be picked like fruit, there are no
lotteries AfriNIC can win, and without huge scope creep and going into some
kinda commercial trading outside of IP addressing, other sources of revenue
are significantly limited.



Hence, as a paying resource member, I for one have ZERO problem with a
fairly dramatic rise in the fees.  Both to build reserve and to fund the
very things the community is asking for.



That?s my opinion **as a resource member**



Andrew





*From:* Honest Ornella GANKPA [mailto:honest1989 at gmail.com]
*Sent:* 30 June 2016 12:49
*To:* Aude Kileo <audekileo at rocketmail.com>; General Discussions of AFRINIC
<community-discuss at afrinic.net>
*Subject:* Re: [Community-Discuss] Community-Discuss Digest, Vol 18, Issue 1



+1 Aude.



I may also add that I do not see how Randy's comment relates to Diana's
suggestion. Indeed raising the fees might be beneficial to Afrinic (The
organization needs money to run after all). However this could be a barrier
for potential new members and we do want new members.



Best Regards



2016-06-30 10:27 GMT+01:00 Aude Kileo <audekileo at rocketmail.com>:

------------------------------

Message: 8
Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2016 13:00:54 +0900
From: Randy Bush <randy at psg.com>
To: Diana Ikwuagwu <diana.ikwuagwu at unn.edu.ng>
Cc: General Discussions of AFRINIC <community-discuss at afrinic.net>
Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] Resolution 201604.274 about Set-Up
    fees
Message-ID: <m2ziq3gwax.wl%randy at psg.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII

> I think it will be very good if the membership maintenance price be
> lowered.  Please let the board look into this.

<sarcasm>
i strongly agree.  afrninc should pay us to take address space from
them.  this would make my business a bit easier.

</sarcasm>





Hi Community,



I don't think SARCASM is good for us new ones on the mailing list. We are
here to follow and learn even if our opinion may not count.



Please allow us to also share our voice.



Regards,



Aude...






_______________________________________________
Community-Discuss mailing list
Community-Discuss at afrinic.net
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss





-- 

Honest Ornella GANKPA

Network engineer



_______________________________________________
Community-Discuss mailing list
Community-Discuss at afrinic.net
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20160630/98b4f71d/attachment.html>

From aalain at trstech.net  Thu Jun 30 11:17:06 2016
From: aalain at trstech.net (ALAIN AINA)
Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2016 15:17:06 +0400
Subject: [Community-Discuss] Community-Discuss Digest, Vol 18, Issue 1
In-Reply-To: <AMSPR03MB534102F32DE68634C695B9EEE240@AMSPR03MB534.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
References: <mailman.1274.1467276526.29690.community-discuss@afrinic.net>
 <1585129156.4454241.1467278857953.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com>
 <CAKZY-5bWJhhcMngGTWstu+GuEf=XMQ_rgcnT_b8FD=M37U6HcA@mail.gmail.com>
 <AMSPR03MB534102F32DE68634C695B9EEE240@AMSPR03MB534.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
Message-ID: <D3B7BBD2-C58E-4E60-ABC5-D62D1B511BEC@trstech.net>

Hello,

Any responsible board and Executive staff should be able to present issues and solutions from an analytical standpoint to the community and hence help the community adheres To a workable option.
This is all the community is asking for and is expecting. We all care for our AFRINIC and the community is ready to participate in making sure AFRINIC IS SUBSTAiNABLE.


Thanks

?Alain

> On Jun 30, 2016, at 2:02 PM, Andrew Alston <Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com> wrote:
> 
> Speaking as a resource member here again.
>  
> Let?s stop and analyse for a second.
>  
> The community wants more v6 outreach and training ? this costs money
> The community wants (I hope) wants AfriNIC to be part of the global community ? this costs money
> The community wants a push for RPKI ? this costs money
> Segments of the community want an audit proposal that will put severe pressure on the hostmasters and need to a resource crunch meaning more people ? This costs money
> The community wants (and has) 2 meetings a year ? these cost money
>  
> I can keep listing?.
>  
> The community has seen the financials clearly presented in the last few years and the financials clearly indicate that AfriNIC has very little financial reserve and has in fact for years been running on a very close to breakeven (and in many cases at a loss, especially if you discount FOREX gains, which cannot be relied on)
>  
> The community has questioned why AfriNIC?s financial reserve is as low as it is (particularly in Tunis).
>  
> Now?.
>  
> Members of the same community are proposing a fee decrease and as a result a cut in revenue?.
>  
> Pray tell, how do you propose AfriNIC funds all the points listed above?  Money doesn?t grow on trees, it can?t be picked like fruit, there are no lotteries AfriNIC can win, and without huge scope creep and going into some kinda commercial trading outside of IP addressing, other sources of revenue are significantly limited.
>  
> Hence, as a paying resource member, I for one have ZERO problem with a fairly dramatic rise in the fees.  Both to build reserve and to fund the very things the community is asking for.
>  
> That?s my opinion *as a resource member*
>  
> Andrew
>  
>  
> From: Honest Ornella GANKPA [mailto:honest1989 at gmail.com] 
> Sent: 30 June 2016 12:49
> To: Aude Kileo <audekileo at rocketmail.com>; General Discussions of AFRINIC <community-discuss at afrinic.net>
> Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] Community-Discuss Digest, Vol 18, Issue 1
>  
> +1 Aude.
>  
> I may also add that I do not see how Randy's comment relates to Diana's suggestion. Indeed raising the fees might be beneficial to Afrinic (The organization needs money to run after all). However this could be a barrier for potential new members and we do want new members.
>  
> Best Regards
>  
> 2016-06-30 10:27 GMT+01:00 Aude Kileo <audekileo at rocketmail.com <mailto:audekileo at rocketmail.com>>:
> ------------------------------
> 
> Message: 8
> Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2016 13:00:54 +0900
> From: Randy Bush <randy at psg.com <mailto:randy at psg.com>>
> To: Diana Ikwuagwu <diana.ikwuagwu at unn.edu.ng <mailto:diana.ikwuagwu at unn.edu.ng>>
> Cc: General Discussions of AFRINIC <community-discuss at afrinic.net <mailto:community-discuss at afrinic.net>>
> Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] Resolution 201604.274 about Set-Up
>     fees
> Message-ID: <m2ziq3gwax.wl%randy at psg.com <mailto:randy at psg.com>>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
> 
> > I think it will be very good if the membership maintenance price be
> > lowered.  Please let the board look into this.
> 
> <sarcasm>
> i strongly agree.  afrninc should pay us to take address space from
> them.  this would make my business a bit easier.
> </sarcasm>
>  
>  
> Hi Community,
>  
> I don't think SARCASM is good for us new ones on the mailing list. We are here to follow and learn even if our opinion may not count.
>  
> Please allow us to also share our voice.
>  
> Regards,
>  
> Aude...
>  
>  
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net <mailto:Community-Discuss at afrinic.net>
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss <https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss>
> 
> 
>  
> --
> Honest Ornella GANKPA
> Network engineer 
>  
> _______________________________________________
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20160630/88c96947/attachment.html>

From kmw.elitcha at gmail.com  Thu Jun 30 11:24:51 2016
From: kmw.elitcha at gmail.com (abel ELITCHA)
Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2016 11:24:51 +0000
Subject: [Community-Discuss] Community-Discuss Digest, Vol 18, Issue 1
In-Reply-To: <CAL1GxKRgECNxoozV-+TaQc8j58UupvkLXcZyUzdbE8DtMr8m4g@mail.gmail.com>
References: <mailman.1274.1467276526.29690.community-discuss@afrinic.net>
 <1585129156.4454241.1467278857953.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com>
 <CAKZY-5bWJhhcMngGTWstu+GuEf=XMQ_rgcnT_b8FD=M37U6HcA@mail.gmail.com>
 <AMSPR03MB534102F32DE68634C695B9EEE240@AMSPR03MB534.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
 <CAL1GxKRgECNxoozV-+TaQc8j58UupvkLXcZyUzdbE8DtMr8m4g@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAN0q0kHoo5rdF_3cCjSTkQhv7jUREJ=4PhDoC++j=vF2nr+K+w@mail.gmail.com>

Hi Timothy,

Challenges in the Global economy affect all countries and for that matter,
AFRINIC "Members" as well notwithstanding other specific challenges we have
within Africa.
Thank.

2016-06-30 11:01 GMT+00:00 Timothy Ola Akinfenwa <
akin.akinfenwa at uniosun.edu.ng>:

> I'm with Andrew on this one. Yes, AFRINIC has a list of insatiable needs
> with limited resources. Even the global economy has been relatively
> unstable over the last few years, at least I can say for 3 to 4 countries
> in Africa. I think there is no harm in trying to raise additional revenues
> for AFRINIC if need be.
>
> However, the main concern I have like many others is in the manner by
> which this "fairly dramatic rise in fees" (in Andrew's words) were
> considered and approved before being communicated to the community. The
> Internet community is global but we also should know that not all our
> fingers are equal.
>
> Timothy
>
> Speaking as a resource member here again.
>
>
>
> Let?s stop and analyse for a second.
>
>
>
> The community wants more v6 outreach and training ? this costs money
>
> The community wants (I hope) wants AfriNIC to be part of the global
> community ? this costs money
>
> The community wants a push for RPKI ? this costs money
>
> Segments of the community want an audit proposal that will put severe
> pressure on the hostmasters and need to a resource crunch meaning more
> people ? This costs money
>
> The community wants (and has) 2 meetings a year ? these cost money
>
>
>
> I can keep listing?.
>
>
>
> The community has seen the financials clearly presented in the last few
> years and the financials clearly indicate that AfriNIC has very little
> financial reserve and has in fact for years been running on a very close to
> breakeven (and in many cases at a loss, especially if you discount FOREX
> gains, which cannot be relied on)
>
>
>
> The community has questioned why AfriNIC?s financial reserve is as low as
> it is (particularly in Tunis).
>
>
>
> Now?.
>
>
>
> Members of the same community are proposing a fee decrease and as a result
> a cut in revenue?.
>
>
>
> Pray tell, how do you propose AfriNIC funds all the points listed above?
> Money doesn?t grow on trees, it can?t be picked like fruit, there are no
> lotteries AfriNIC can win, and without huge scope creep and going into some
> kinda commercial trading outside of IP addressing, other sources of revenue
> are significantly limited.
>
>
>
> Hence, as a paying resource member, I for one have ZERO problem with a
> fairly dramatic rise in the fees.  Both to build reserve and to fund the
> very things the community is asking for.
>
>
>
> That?s my opinion **as a resource member**
>
>
>
> Andrew
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Honest Ornella GANKPA [mailto:honest1989 at gmail.com]
> *Sent:* 30 June 2016 12:49
> *To:* Aude Kileo <audekileo at rocketmail.com>; General Discussions of
> AFRINIC <community-discuss at afrinic.net>
> *Subject:* Re: [Community-Discuss] Community-Discuss Digest, Vol 18,
> Issue 1
>
>
>
> +1 Aude.
>
>
>
> I may also add that I do not see how Randy's comment relates to Diana's
> suggestion. Indeed raising the fees might be beneficial to Afrinic (The
> organization needs money to run after all). However this could be a barrier
> for potential new members and we do want new members.
>
>
>
> Best Regards
>
>
>
> 2016-06-30 10:27 GMT+01:00 Aude Kileo <audekileo at rocketmail.com>:
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 8
> Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2016 13:00:54 +0900
> From: Randy Bush <randy at psg.com>
> To: Diana Ikwuagwu <diana.ikwuagwu at unn.edu.ng>
> Cc: General Discussions of AFRINIC <community-discuss at afrinic.net>
> Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] Resolution 201604.274 about Set-Up
>     fees
> Message-ID: <m2ziq3gwax.wl%randy at psg.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
>
> > I think it will be very good if the membership maintenance price be
> > lowered.  Please let the board look into this.
>
> <sarcasm>
> i strongly agree.  afrninc should pay us to take address space from
> them.  this would make my business a bit easier.
>
> </sarcasm>
>
>
>
>
>
> Hi Community,
>
>
>
> I don't think SARCASM is good for us new ones on the mailing list. We are
> here to follow and learn even if our opinion may not count.
>
>
>
> Please allow us to also share our voice.
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
>
>
> Aude...
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Honest Ornella GANKPA
>
> Network engineer
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>
>


-- 
Best regards,

--Komi A. Elitcha
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20160630/589a703b/attachment.html>

From Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com  Thu Jun 30 11:54:42 2016
From: Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com (Andrew Alston)
Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2016 11:54:42 +0000
Subject: [Community-Discuss] Community-Discuss Digest, Vol 18, Issue 1
In-Reply-To: <CAL1GxKRgECNxoozV-+TaQc8j58UupvkLXcZyUzdbE8DtMr8m4g@mail.gmail.com>
References: <mailman.1274.1467276526.29690.community-discuss@afrinic.net>
 <1585129156.4454241.1467278857953.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com>
 <CAKZY-5bWJhhcMngGTWstu+GuEf=XMQ_rgcnT_b8FD=M37U6HcA@mail.gmail.com>
 <AMSPR03MB534102F32DE68634C695B9EEE240@AMSPR03MB534.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
 <CAL1GxKRgECNxoozV-+TaQc8j58UupvkLXcZyUzdbE8DtMr8m4g@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AMSPR03MB534F4D8BEBCEFA0A636DA01EE240@AMSPR03MB534.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>

Timothy,

Let me clarify.  I said I would support a hypothetical dramatic rise in fees.  I never said there had already been one.  Please let us not confuse the two issues.  The allocation fee issue is an entirely separate issue and unrelated to my comments (though I support that as well!)

Andrew


From: Timothy Ola Akinfenwa [mailto:akin.akinfenwa at uniosun.edu.ng]
Sent: 30 June 2016 14:01
To: General Discussions of AFRINIC <community-discuss at afrinic.net>
Cc: Aude Kileo <audekileo at rocketmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] Community-Discuss Digest, Vol 18, Issue 1


I'm with Andrew on this one. Yes, AFRINIC has a list of insatiable needs with limited resources. Even the global economy has been relatively unstable over the last few years, at least I can say for 3 to 4 countries in Africa. I think there is no harm in trying to raise additional revenues for AFRINIC if need be.

However, the main concern I have like many others is in the manner by which this "fairly dramatic rise in fees" (in Andrew's words) were considered and approved before being communicated to the community. The Internet community is global but we also should know that not all our fingers are equal.

Timothy
Speaking as a resource member here again.

Let?s stop and analyse for a second.

The community wants more v6 outreach and training ? this costs money
The community wants (I hope) wants AfriNIC to be part of the global community ? this costs money
The community wants a push for RPKI ? this costs money
Segments of the community want an audit proposal that will put severe pressure on the hostmasters and need to a resource crunch meaning more people ? This costs money
The community wants (and has) 2 meetings a year ? these cost money

I can keep listing?.

The community has seen the financials clearly presented in the last few years and the financials clearly indicate that AfriNIC has very little financial reserve and has in fact for years been running on a very close to breakeven (and in many cases at a loss, especially if you discount FOREX gains, which cannot be relied on)

The community has questioned why AfriNIC?s financial reserve is as low as it is (particularly in Tunis).

Now?.

Members of the same community are proposing a fee decrease and as a result a cut in revenue?.

Pray tell, how do you propose AfriNIC funds all the points listed above?  Money doesn?t grow on trees, it can?t be picked like fruit, there are no lotteries AfriNIC can win, and without huge scope creep and going into some kinda commercial trading outside of IP addressing, other sources of revenue are significantly limited.

Hence, as a paying resource member, I for one have ZERO problem with a fairly dramatic rise in the fees.  Both to build reserve and to fund the very things the community is asking for.

That?s my opinion *as a resource member*

Andrew


From: Honest Ornella GANKPA [mailto:honest1989 at gmail.com<mailto:honest1989 at gmail.com>]
Sent: 30 June 2016 12:49
To: Aude Kileo <audekileo at rocketmail.com<mailto:audekileo at rocketmail.com>>; General Discussions of AFRINIC <community-discuss at afrinic.net<mailto:community-discuss at afrinic.net>>
Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] Community-Discuss Digest, Vol 18, Issue 1

+1 Aude.

I may also add that I do not see how Randy's comment relates to Diana's suggestion. Indeed raising the fees might be beneficial to Afrinic (The organization needs money to run after all). However this could be a barrier for potential new members and we do want new members.

Best Regards

2016-06-30 10:27 GMT+01:00 Aude Kileo <audekileo at rocketmail.com<mailto:audekileo at rocketmail.com>>:
------------------------------

Message: 8
Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2016 13:00:54 +0900
From: Randy Bush <randy at psg.com<mailto:randy at psg.com>>
To: Diana Ikwuagwu <diana.ikwuagwu at unn.edu.ng<mailto:diana.ikwuagwu at unn.edu.ng>>
Cc: General Discussions of AFRINIC <community-discuss at afrinic.net<mailto:community-discuss at afrinic.net>>
Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] Resolution 201604.274 about Set-Up
    fees
Message-ID: <m2ziq3gwax.wl%randy at psg.com<mailto:randy at psg.com>>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII

> I think it will be very good if the membership maintenance price be
> lowered.  Please let the board look into this.

<sarcasm>
i strongly agree.  afrninc should pay us to take address space from
them.  this would make my business a bit easier.
</sarcasm>


Hi Community,

I don't think SARCASM is good for us new ones on the mailing list. We are here to follow and learn even if our opinion may not count.

Please allow us to also share our voice.

Regards,

Aude...



_______________________________________________
Community-Discuss mailing list
Community-Discuss at afrinic.net<mailto:Community-Discuss at afrinic.net>
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss



--
Honest Ornella GANKPA
Network engineer


_______________________________________________
Community-Discuss mailing list
Community-Discuss at afrinic.net<mailto:Community-Discuss at afrinic.net>
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20160630/a31f4ca5/attachment.html>

From honest1989 at gmail.com  Thu Jun 30 12:05:23 2016
From: honest1989 at gmail.com (Honest Ornella GANKPA)
Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2016 13:05:23 +0100
Subject: [Community-Discuss] Community-Discuss Digest, Vol 18, Issue 1
In-Reply-To: <D3B7BBD2-C58E-4E60-ABC5-D62D1B511BEC@trstech.net>
References: <mailman.1274.1467276526.29690.community-discuss@afrinic.net>
 <1585129156.4454241.1467278857953.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com>
 <CAKZY-5bWJhhcMngGTWstu+GuEf=XMQ_rgcnT_b8FD=M37U6HcA@mail.gmail.com>
 <AMSPR03MB534102F32DE68634C695B9EEE240@AMSPR03MB534.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
 <D3B7BBD2-C58E-4E60-ABC5-D62D1B511BEC@trstech.net>
Message-ID: <CAKZY-5ZJFmCkpb0-W7kzoB+n6OyO89RqHAO3w6Oh7YNrFMhoOw@mail.gmail.com>

Comments are inline

2016-06-30 12:17 GMT+01:00 ALAIN AINA <aalain at trstech.net>:

> Hello,
>
> Any responsible board and Executive staff should be able to present issues
> and solutions from an analytical standpoint to the community and hence help
> the community adheres To a workable option.
> This is all the community is asking for and is expecting. We all care for
> our AFRINIC and the community is ready to participate in making sure
> AFRINIC IS SUBSTAiNABLE.
>
>
> Thanks
>
> ?Alain
>

I agree with you Alain

> On Jun 30, 2016, at 2:02 PM, Andrew Alston <
> Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com> wrote:
>
> Speaking as a resource member here again.
>
>
> [snip]
>
>
>
> Members of the same community are proposing a fee decrease and as a result
> a cut in revenue?.
>
>
> I would also like to point out that my previous email was to show one of
the impacts a raise in fees would have on future memberships.


> Pray tell, how do you propose AfriNIC funds all the points listed above?
> Money doesn?t grow on trees, it can?t be picked like fruit, there are no
> lotteries AfriNIC can win
>
> Of course we knew the USD4M  of revenue  AFRINIC has today does not come
from tree or providence

> Andrew
>
>
>
> Honest Ornella GANKPA
Network engineer
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20160630/906140a8/attachment.html>

From afahounko at gmail.com  Thu Jun 30 14:14:56 2016
From: afahounko at gmail.com (Danny)
Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2016 16:14:56 +0200
Subject: [Community-Discuss] ICANN and RIRs signed SLA for IANA numbering
	services post transition
Message-ID: <CA+DA2xqJTaRyL7pfqCG5HtzqMkrxgE6UXQ0R9x8g56jkCt1RbQ@mail.gmail.com>

Hello all,

http://www.afrinic.net/en/library/news/1805-icann-and-regional-internet-registries-sign-sla-for-the-iana-numbering-services

Congratulations to CRISP and ICANN teams.

This is a good example.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20160630/0191db4b/attachment.html>

From noah at neo.co.tz  Thu Jun 30 17:15:13 2016
From: noah at neo.co.tz (Noah)
Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2016 20:15:13 +0300
Subject: [Community-Discuss] ICANN and RIRs signed SLA for IANA
 numbering services post transition
In-Reply-To: <CA+DA2xqJTaRyL7pfqCG5HtzqMkrxgE6UXQ0R9x8g56jkCt1RbQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CA+DA2xqJTaRyL7pfqCG5HtzqMkrxgE6UXQ0R9x8g56jkCt1RbQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAEqgTWbw8WzHBHH780B+Q67K=qpHnX78Kdo5VvxssTgN77JF5g@mail.gmail.com>

Yes this is indeed progress...

Congrats to the CRISP and ICANN teams....

Noah
On 30 Jun 2016 17:18, "Danny" <afahounko at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hello all,
>
>
> http://www.afrinic.net/en/library/news/1805-icann-and-regional-internet-registries-sign-sla-for-the-iana-numbering-services
>
> Congratulations to CRISP and ICANN teams.
>
> This is a good example.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20160630/ff656baf/attachment.html>

From Omo.Oaiya at wacren.net  Thu Jun 30 19:38:15 2016
From: Omo.Oaiya at wacren.net (Omo Oaiya)
Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2016 20:38:15 +0100
Subject: [Community-Discuss] Community-Discuss Digest, Vol 18, Issue 1
In-Reply-To: <1585129156.4454241.1467278857953.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com>
References: <mailman.1274.1467276526.29690.community-discuss@afrinic.net>
 <1585129156.4454241.1467278857953.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <CAG1eoi0Atxe6QHXk+u3rL1LqxBu-VDCKu68KTq49+43v6ZHzWg@mail.gmail.com>

+1.

Sarcasm is contemptuous and unacceptable.


On 30 Jun 2016 10:32 a.m., "Aude Kileo" <audekileo at rocketmail.com> wrote:

> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 8
> Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2016 13:00:54 +0900
> From: Randy Bush <randy at psg.com>
> To: Diana Ikwuagwu <diana.ikwuagwu at unn.edu.ng>
> Cc: General Discussions of AFRINIC <community-discuss at afrinic.net>
> Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] Resolution 201604.274 about Set-Up
>     fees
> Message-ID: <m2ziq3gwax.wl%randy at psg.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
>
> > I think it will be very good if the membership maintenance price be
> > lowered.  Please let the board look into this.
>
> <sarcasm>
> i strongly agree.  afrninc should pay us to take address space from
> them.  this would make my business a bit easier.
> </sarcasm>
>
>
> Hi Community,
>
> I don't think SARCASM is good for us new ones on the mailing list. We are
> here to follow and learn even if our opinion may not count.
>
> Please allow us to also share our voice.
>
> Regards,
>
> Aude...
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20160630/e659a731/attachment.html>

From owen at delong.com  Thu Jun 30 20:47:12 2016
From: owen at delong.com (Owen DeLong)
Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2016 13:47:12 -0700
Subject: [Community-Discuss] ICANN and RIRs signed SLA for IANA
	numbering services post transition
In-Reply-To: <CAEqgTWbw8WzHBHH780B+Q67K=qpHnX78Kdo5VvxssTgN77JF5g@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CA+DA2xqJTaRyL7pfqCG5HtzqMkrxgE6UXQ0R9x8g56jkCt1RbQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAEqgTWbw8WzHBHH780B+Q67K=qpHnX78Kdo5VvxssTgN77JF5g@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <51A92C33-84F3-4397-BA43-95EE80172974@delong.com>

Now if we can just avoid the US Congress doing something stupid (which the senate
is already trying todo through an amendment to a defense appropriations bill), we?ll
be all set.

Owen

> On Jun 30, 2016, at 10:15 , Noah <noah at neo.co.tz> wrote:
> 
> Yes this is indeed progress...
> 
> Congrats to the CRISP and ICANN teams....
> 
> Noah
> 
> On 30 Jun 2016 17:18, "Danny" <afahounko at gmail.com <mailto:afahounko at gmail.com>> wrote:
> Hello all,
> 
> http://www.afrinic.net/en/library/news/1805-icann-and-regional-internet-registries-sign-sla-for-the-iana-numbering-services <http://www.afrinic.net/en/library/news/1805-icann-and-regional-internet-registries-sign-sla-for-the-iana-numbering-services>
> 
> Congratulations to CRISP and ICANN teams.
> 
> This is a good example.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net <mailto:Community-Discuss at afrinic.net>
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss <https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss>
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20160630/56610750/attachment.html>

From badru.ntege at nftconsult.com  Tue Jun 28 21:55:57 2016
From: badru.ntege at nftconsult.com (Badru Ntege)
Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2016 00:55:57 +0300
Subject: [Community-Discuss] [members-discuss] Accountability assessment
In-Reply-To: <CAG1eoi3eWuJYmbZa+s2nMnGMHHTRyDLQ9L0NakR5y8ZMwShpiw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAG1eoi3eWuJYmbZa+s2nMnGMHHTRyDLQ9L0NakR5y8ZMwShpiw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <FDCE80FC-5515-4BE0-8794-18462BA1E9CE@nftconsult.com>


Omo 

Thank you for this I can now see the light at the end of the tunnel.  

Looking forward to wider discussion on this proposal.

+1 +1 +1  

Regards





On 6/28/16, 4:20 PM, "Omo Oaiya" <Omo.Oaiya at wacren.net> wrote:



On 10 June 2016 at 11:18, Alan Barrett <alan.barrett at afrinic.net> wrote:
Arising from a review of AFRINIC?s Bylaws and other documents, several potential areas for improvement were identified.

The attached document was presented to the AFRINIC Membership and the community during the AGMM in Gaborone, Botswana, on 9 June 2016.

I invite the community and the membership to comment on these suggestions, or any other areas where the Bylaws could be improved.  Comments should be sent to the community-discuss at afrinic.net mailing list.  In due course, Bylaws changes will be drafted to implement the suggestions (and additional points that might be identified).

Alan Barrett
CEO, AFRINIC



Thanks Alan.  Comments below


>>>1 ......  but there is a conflict between 7.2(i) and 13.7(i) on whether or not Associate Members may vote in elections forDirectors. This conflict must be resolved one way or another.
We need to decide whether or not Associate Members should vote, and modify the Bylaws to give effect to that decision

Just a matter of ambiguity in the statement in 7.2(i) to straighten out. The bylaws are consistent.  Registered and Resource members vote. Associate members observe.  


>>>2.  Interchangeable use of the terms ?Bylaw? or ?Bylaws? and ?Constitution?:...... Suggest adding a clause 1.3 to clarify that this document may be referred to by the term ?Bylaws? or ?Constitution?, and is intended to serve the function of the Constitution in terms of the Companies Act of Mauritius.

Supported


>>3- Clarification that all Registered Members in terms of Bylaws 6.3, and only such Registered Members, must be registered in terms of the Companies Act as members of the company.

Supported but we shall seriously consider moving from this Private company model to a more community oriented model, where all members are considered. 


>>4 - Term limits: Consider adding a term limit for elected Board members.
>> We need to decide whether or not to add a limit, and what the limit should be.

Proposal :  One term and at least an election before another nomination


>>> 5- Independence of Directors: Consider adding a limit to the number of Directors who may work for the same organisation.
 
>>> We need to decide whether or not to add a limit, and what the limit should be.

We need to keep refreshing the board with independence, expertise and skills so a better managed succession process is a must.  I propose with the exclusion of the CEO that we have

-  Max 1 per org/company
-  Max 1 per country
 - Max 2  per region

 - Not more than one Director may have employment, consultancy or advisory relationships with the same Company or Organization and/or with one of its Related Companies or Organizations established or not in the same country.

- not more than one Director may be domiciled in the same country. Should a candidate for a position on the Board of Directors have more than one domicile, one of which involves a presumed incompatibility, in order to analyze his/her case for usual country of residence, the country where the company or organization he/she is a part of or works for is established, and/or any other relevant data shall be considered;

 - not more than two Directors may be domiciled in the same region. 


>>>6- Regional representation: Consider modifying 13.5 to state that Directors must act in the interests of AFRINIC as a whole,regardless of their regional affiliation.

Supported

>>>7.  Conflict of interest: Consider adding a requirement for Directors to disclose any conflict of interest, and to recuse themselves from voting on any matter where they have a conflict of interest.

Supported.  In addition, the Board must have a Conflict of Interest Policy and enforce it. 

>>> 8- Separation of powers: Consider adding a requirement that no more than one key position (Board Chair, Vice Chair, Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer) may be occupied by the same person.

Supported


>>> 9- Replacement of Directors: The bylaws sections 13.1, 13.8, 13.10, and 13.14 give  different methods of replacing Directors for  different reasons. Consider  harmonising this.

Harmonisation supported but the preferred option should be replacement through election at the next AGMM. 


>>> 10- Board approval of nominations: The Board can approve or disapprove  nominations for Board elections in terms of the Bylaws section 12.14(i). Consider requiring a supermajority of two thirds of the Board to disapprove any nomination

We should remove this approval and strengthen NOMCOM.  NOMCOM composition and operation should be reviewed and improved.   We can have the legal advisor and past NOMCOM chair as non-voting members and make the appointment of the other members by the board more transparent, fair and unbiased.   

The election timeline also needs to be revisited to allow enough time for proper NOMCOM operation.


>>>11-  Modification to the Bylaws or Constitution: The Bylaws say how the AFRINIC Members may change the Bylaws, but the Companies Act say that the  Registered Members can change it. Consider requiring that the  Bylaws/Constitution may be changed only after a Special Resolution by all AFRINIC Members in terms of Bylaws 7.6(vi),so that the Registered Members (the same nine people as the Directors) cannot act without broader approval.

Registered members only MUST never amend  the bylaws.  Amendment of Bylaws beyond regulatory compliance must require general membership notice and consultation.  

The proposed amendment should be published not less than 60 days and not more than 90 days before with provisions for members to comment online and in any meeting held during the consultation


>>>12- Policies introduced by the Board: In terms of the Bylaws section 11.4, the Board may adopt policy changes that did not go through the normal PDP. Consider giving the community the right to reject such policy changes introduced by the Board.

Section 11.5 seems to give this right to the community but endorsement may be open to misinterpretation so we shall just remove this.  In case of emergency, section 8 of PDP on varying the policy process applies.

11.5:  Any policy adopted by the Board under the provisions of Article 11.4 shall be submitted to the community for endorsement at the next public policy meeting.
 

Best wishes

-- 
Omo Oaiya
CTO/Directeur Technique, WACREN 
Mobile: +234 808 888 1571 , +221 784 305 224
Skype: kodion
http://www.wacren.net
 
_______________________________________________ Community-Discuss mailing list Community-Discuss at afrinic.net https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20160629/2c7faf57/attachment.html>

From badru.ntege at nftconsult.com  Tue Jun 28 22:39:00 2016
From: badru.ntege at nftconsult.com (Badru Ntege)
Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2016 01:39:00 +0300
Subject: [Community-Discuss] FW: [members-discuss] Accountability assessment
In-Reply-To: <177FD5F8-7B1B-45CE-81D3-D87D5207625C@liquidtelecom.com>
References: <CAG1eoi3eWuJYmbZa+s2nMnGMHHTRyDLQ9L0NakR5y8ZMwShpiw@mail.gmail.com>
 <177FD5F8-7B1B-45CE-81D3-D87D5207625C@liquidtelecom.com>
Message-ID: <24972ACE-1FAF-44F1-B483-10784EB14924@nftconsult.com>


Posting in my capacity as a community member 

Comments bellow

On 6/28/16, 10:56 PM, "Andrew Alston" <Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com> wrote:

Comments below 

 

Please note ? I am posting here purely in my capacity as a resource member.

 

>>>1 ......  but there is a conflict between 7.2(i) and 13.7(i) on whether or not Associate Members may vote in elections forDirectors. This conflict must be resolved one way or another.
We need to decide whether or not Associate Members should vote, and modify the Bylaws to give effect to that decision

Following discussion in a separate thread if resource member includes legacy holders I think they should not vote.  They are either fully in or out.  They hold on to resources out of Afrinic and do not want to share or return and yet they want to take part in the governance by paying a measly fee.  

> Just a matter of ambiguity in the statement in 7.2(i) to straighten out. The bylaws are consistent.  Registered and Resource members vote. Associate members observe.  

 

I tend to agree here and woud be in favour of an amendment to fix the ambiguity

 

 

>>>2.  Interchangeable use of the terms ?Bylaw? or ?Bylaws? and ?Constitution?:...... Suggest adding a clause 1.3 to clarify that this document may be referred to by the term ?Bylaws? or ?Constitution?, and is intended to serve the function of the Constitution in terms of the Companies Act of Mauritius.


> Supported

Supported as well

>>4 - Term limits: Consider adding a term limit for elected Board members.
>> We need to decide whether or not to add a limit, and what the limit should be.


> Proposal :  One term and at least an election before another nomination

Agree with term limits ? would not however support a single term ? there has to be some continuity and it takes any director time to get up to speed with everything in the organization as well.  Two terms with a two term break seems far more reasonable to me, and I would support such

Fully diasgree  if it takes time I think NOMCOM then needs to be more thorough in the selection process.  The region has a wealth of highly intelligent people capable of grasping the board expectations in a very short time.   The above suggests we are presented with incapable candidates to choose from which I fully disagree with. 

The proposal of One term and at least an election before another nomination is perfect.

>>> 5- Independence of Directors: Consider adding a limit to the number of Directors who may work for the same organisation.
 
>>> We need to decide whether or not to add a limit, and what the limit should be.


> We need to keep refreshing the board with independence, expertise and skills so a better managed succession process is a must.  I propose with the exclusion of the CEO that we have

> -  Max 1 per org/company
> -  Max 1 per country
> - Max 2  per region

 > - Not more than one Director may have employment, consultancy or advisory relationships with the same Company or Organization and/or with one of its Related Companies or Organizations established or not in the > same country.

> - not more than one Director may be domiciled in the same country. Should a candidate for a position on the Board of Directors have more than one domicile, one of which involves a presumed incompatibility, in order > to analyze his/her case for usual country of residence, the country where the company or organization he/she is a part of or works for is established, and/or any other relevant data shall be considered;

> - not more than two Directors may be domiciled in the same region. 

I do not support this at all and would vote against any such change.  I believe that the members are free to nominate who they want, and the vote at the ballot box should be the deciding factor.  If the community wishes to elect a number of people from the same <insert criteria> that is the communities choice, and I don?t think we should be attempting to code in limitations to this.  There is however one except, I would support an amendment that says no more than two directors from the same organization (on a 9 man board, I don?t believe this is a number high enough that 2 people could have any meaningful sway).  With regards to the regional and who is domiciled where, I strongly oppose.  I point out at under the current bylaws a director may be domiciled in a particular place when he stands and may relocate during his term (including off the continent) ? under this proposal a director who moved to a country where another director was domiciled during his term would have to forfeit his duly elected seat.  Sorry, can?t support that.

In a region of over 1 billion people and 53 countries the above submission would seem very weak.  Lets invest in finding those people.  

To put this in context we are looking for  0.000000009 %  from a population point of view and 17% from a countries point of view.  Surely we can and should increase our outreach efforts.

 


>>>6- Regional representation: Consider modifying 13.5 to state that Directors must act in the interests of AFRINIC as a whole,regardless of their regional affiliation.


> Supported

Supported

>>>7.  Conflict of interest: Consider adding a requirement for Directors to disclose any conflict of interest, and to recuse themselves from voting on any matter where they have a conflict of interest.


> Supported.  In addition, the Board must have a Conflict of Interest Policy and enforce it. 

Strongly supported and would go so far as to say that a director should sign a conflict of interest register when they accept the position, that clearly states any affiliations they have where such conflict could arise (Basically any additional board seats, any companies  they are renumerated by, and any companies they hold in excess of 5% shareholding in)

>>> 8- Separation of powers: Consider adding a requirement that no more than one key position (Board Chair, Vice Chair, Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer) may be occupied by the same person.


> Supported 

 

Supported

 


>>> 9- Replacement of Directors: The bylaws sections 13.1, 13.8, 13.10, and 13.14 give  different methods of replacing Directors for  different reasons. Consider  harmonising this.


> Harmonisation supported but the preferred option should be replacement through election at the next AGMM. 

 

Supported ? though I would add SGM as a possibility for replacement.  In the event of losing multiple directors at a single time through some unforeseen event it may become necessary to call an SGM for this purpose and the bylaws need to allow for it.  The risk of tying this to an AGMM is that the board could be down to a skeleton for close to a year if we don?t allow for SGM?s.


Secretariat runs the organisation.  Board is just oversight.  No need for SGMM.  I think we are blowing board value out of proportion.  
 


>>> 10- Board approval of nominations: The Board can approve or disapprove  nominations for Board elections in terms of the Bylaws section 12.14(i). Consider requiring a supermajority of two thirds of the Board to disapprove any nomination


> We should remove this approval and strengthen NOMCOM.  NOMCOM composition and operation should be reviewed and improved.   We can have the legal advisor and past NOMCOM chair as non-voting 

> members and make the appointment of the other members by the board more transparent, fair and unbiased.   

 

I agree with the original proposal that states a super majority.  I believe that the board should have the right to reject candidates if certain situations. 


Problem with the above is that ?certain situations? is so subjective.  Could be used to manipulate selection pool.  Or community could read negative intentions out of the rejection and thus bring disrepute to the board.  Super majority is open to abuse.

 

>>>11-  Modification to the Bylaws or Constitution: The Bylaws say how the AFRINIC Members may change the Bylaws, but the Companies Act say that the  Registered Members can change it. Consider requiring that the  Bylaws/Constitution may be changed only after a Special Resolution by all AFRINIC Members in terms of Bylaws 7.6(vi),so that the Registered Members (the same nine people as the Directors) cannot act without broader approval.


> Registered members only MUST never amend  the bylaws.  Amendment of Bylaws beyond regulatory compliance must require general membership notice and consultation.  

 

>The proposed amendment should be published not less than 60 days and not more than 90 days before with provisions for members to comment online and in any meeting held during the consultation

Am not sure we can legally override the companies act in this regard and would like to see legal opinion on this.  In principle I agree that the board should never change the bylaws without a super majority special resolution of the community at either an SGM or AGMM, I am just not sure we can have the bylaws match the companies act in this regard. 

Companies act  should never come in the way of community.  We have 53 possible jurisdictions to consider if this becomes a major issue.  By the way we can change our registered office without moving out of Mauritius.


>>>12- Policies introduced by the Board: In terms of the Bylaws section 11.4, the Board may adopt policy changes that did not go through the normal PDP. Consider giving the community the right to reject such policy changes introduced by the Board.


> Section 11.5 seems to give this right to the community but endorsement may be open to misinterpretation so we shall just remove this.  In case of emergency, section 8 of PDP on varying the policy process applies.

 

11.5:  Any policy adopted by the Board under the provisions of Article 11.4 shall be submitted to the community for endorsement at the next public policy meeting.

 

Agree with the original proposal, the community should have the right to reject policy adopted by the board.  I still believe that the board needs the right to adopt emergency policy to protect the organization if it deems necessary, and have the community reject it at the next meeting if they feel it necessary.


In the above case board members would also be taking full responsibilty with legal repercussions should the board policy bring negative outcomes to the organization.  Lets remember the boards oversight role is to ensure that the bottom up process is maintained.  The ultimate decision for policy belongs to the community.  Board in Afrinic is not like board in any other company.  The Afrinic board role is purely oversight.  We can and should not allow board to give themselves more powers.

Regards
 
Badru

 

Thanks

 

Andrew

 
_______________________________________________ Community-Discuss mailing list Community-Discuss at afrinic.net https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20160629/b57157df/attachment.html>