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

[rpd] Accountability assessment

sm+afrinic at sm+afrinic at
Thu Jul 7 20:13:30 UTC 2016

Hi Badru,
At 06:00 07-07-2016, Badru Ntege wrote:
>My point exactly.
>What you are saying above is that community have 
>no stake in AfriNIC so we should just kill the "bottom up illusion".

I commented about a similar topic at

The short explanation is that the requirements for setting policies are:

   - clearly document defined procedures for the development of
     resource management policies

   - procedures must be open and transparent, be accessible to all
     interested parties, and ensure fair representation of all
     constituencies within the region

>When it came to registration in different 
>Jurisdiction we had to make changes because we 
>were forced to conform to a particular legal 
>framework in a particular country.
>What I'm saying now is AfriNIC has matured and 
>its value is very clear.  We can now Ask for 
>what we want as per community based governance 
>and then find a Nation that will allow us to 
>have an organisation built on the true all 
>inclusive spirit of the internet that the original visionaries had.

The above is about a legal structure for the 
members.  It would be up to the members to 
discuss and see which structure would be appropriate.

>The internet belongs to everyone.  Why then do 
>the same people want to create an elite grouping 
>that do not think they need to listen nor consult the community ???

I recall reading a message on the Afnog mailing 
list in which the person asked who is responsible 
for the internet as the person had a problem.  I 
am sometimes asked a similar question at the 
local level.  Isn't it better to have someone who 
can understand the problem and help to solve it?

 From the messages which I have read I understand 
that there is a concern about consultation.  I 
would have suggested a solution if I could find one.

>I think if we keep ourselves open minded we will 
>find a solution that works to serve the users of today and tomorrow.

The problem which may affect the users is IPv4 
exhaustion.  When I chaired this group I put in 
some effort so that there was agreement on the 
soft-landing proposal.  This region has been 
lagging behind in terms of connectivity.  I put 
in a lot of effort for the last /8 IPv4 proposal 
so that the new users in the region can get an IPv4 address from their ISP.

S. Moonesamy 

More information about the RPD mailing list