Search RPD Archives
Limit search to: Subject & Body Subject Author
Sort by:

[AfriNIC-rpd] Definitions of LIR versus End User

Janvier NGNOULAYE jnoulaye at
Wed Jul 25 19:25:02 UTC 2012

@Sunday ++1

Warm Regards,


----- Mail Original -----
De: "Sunday Folayan" <sfolayan at>
À: "Andrew Alston" <alston.networks at>
Cc: "AfriNIC Resource Policy Discussion List" <rpd at>
Envoyé: Lundi 23 Juillet 2012 21h49:49 GMT +01:00 Afrique centrale - Ouest
Objet: Re: [AfriNIC-rpd] Definitions of LIR versus End User


The Board does not meet on the Policy mailing list :) 

I would be surprised if Board members comment as Board members. We have read from Mark and Badru, but these were constructive comments made by them as themselves, not as Board members. 

I believe the proper procedure is that the Staff would make a summary of what the issues are, and present to the Board at their next f2f or teleconference, which ever comes first. The Staff have been responsive on queries that you raised, and I trust they will do the needful. 



On 23/07/2012 18:17, Andrew Alston wrote: 

Hi Nii, 

Oh believe me, I am doing that, but fixing that will still not fix the root cause, the root cause is that there seems to be, from this list, a clear indication from the community that the fee structure needs review, and at current, there is still no voice from the board indicating that such will be done, or how it will be reviewed (I am not looking for final numbers here, nor am I trying to set them). Therefore, I figure that analyzing the figures and the financials and giving the community a chance to take a constructive look at where their money is going and how things are proportioned out is a good thing to do. Even if this is only discussed at the AGM, the discussion here will feed into that discussion, and considering the time frames at an AGM where we have only a few hours to look at what are complex financials, since they are not typically posted well in advance of the meeting, can only be useful 


On 23 Jul 2012, at 3:29 PM, Nii Narku Quaynor wrote: 


Why not focus on agreeing on LIR and end-user? 


On Jul 23, 2012, at 13:12, Andrew Alston < alston.networks at > wrote: 

No, the attempt was not necessarily to set fees, the attempt was to analyse the gap between PIR and LIR fees and see if they are disproportionate in the communities view, so that we can request the board to look at this and make an adjustment with a well thought out motivation for the request for review. 

I believe that if we are going to ask the board for a fee adjustment we need to tell them as a community how we view this, and give them solid reasons for it, and we cannot do that without discussion and information, The final numbers are the boards to decide, but direction from the community is just as important. 


On 23 Jul 2012, at 2:59 PM, Nii Narku Quaynor wrote: 

Board sets fees; we discuss policy. The note was an attempt to set fees? 

On Jul 23, 2012, at 12:48, Jackson Muthili < jacksonmuthi at > wrote: 

On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 3:04 PM, Nii Narku Quaynor < quaynor at > wrote: 

Perhaps the board has heard loud and clearly. We might at this point leave the board to do their job ? 

What is the board job in context of this discussion? 


On Jul 23, 2012, at 11:40, Andrew Alston < alston.networks at > wrote: 

Hi Guys, 

Let me just state, that I do not think there would be any problem to potentially raising the fees for an end user on an annual basis. For example, if you went from $100/$200 a year to even $1000 a year, its still in the reasonable range. I would argue that the difference between LIR and End User though is currently excessive. If we raised the end user fees and dropped the LIR fees to perhaps make a more inclusive fee structure, maybe thats the answer. 

That is one of the reasons why I have asked AfriNIC for the statistics in a previous email, so that we can do a proper analysis of where the revenue that is required is being generated from, and then perhaps can discuss how this could be moved around to a way that the community is happy with. 


On 23 Jul 2012, at 1:21 PM, Seun Ojedeji wrote: 

Hello SF, 

On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 11:21 AM, Sunday Folayan < sfolayan at > wrote: 

Perhaps you just focused on the setup costs. My statement (Annual fee) stands. 

Yes you are right i did looked at something different as i assumed there was really no issue with the current pricing for the end-user. So i was looking at the pricing that Institutions will be paying if they were now categorized as an LIR. 

>From the structure you reference, /24 PI should pay $100 annually. /16 is also expected to pay $100. It is >/16 to /14 that progresses to $200. 

I think $100/$200 annual payment is not the biggest and unbearable part of the end-user's current pricing :-) 


Seun Ojedeji, 
Federal University Oye-Ekiti 
Mobile: +2348035233535 
alt email: seun.ojedeji at 

rpd mailing list 
rpd at 

rpd mailing list 
rpd at 

rpd mailing list 
rpd at 

rpd mailing list rpd at 

Sunday Adekunle Folayan
    blog: email: sfolayan at , sfolayan at phone: +234-802-291-2202
   skype: sfolayan
    fcbk: tweet: sfolayan
linkedin: sfolayan
rpd mailing list
rpd at

More information about the RPD mailing list