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

[rpd] [Community-Discuss] Larus foundation fellowship

Taiwo Oyewande taiwo.oyewande88 at
Wed Jul 3 19:21:54 UTC 2019


Thank you for you insight. Please can you attach a copy of the summary given to you to help new intakes get up to speed. - this is what I encourage and hope AFRINIC can give to new comers and hopefully distribute in the new comers session- .

@ caleb

Sent from my iPhone

> On 3 Jul 2019, at 19:35, hkariuki at wrote:


> Taiwo,

> I am a first time Afrinic 30 fellow and attended the last AIS meeting in Kampala and therefore by extension an Afrinic Alumni. I can confirm that we were given summary and links to the policies before the meeting. We also had a webinar before the meeting and materials emailed to us and onsite discussions and after we join the mailing lists to continue learning and contributing to policy discussions.

> Regards,

> Hellen



>> On 2019-07-02 16:25, Taiwo Oyewande wrote:

>> Hi all,

>> Taking a good look at this resource, it is obviously a summary of the

>> policies to be discussed.

>> Larus fellowship tends towards promoting the youth - students

>> included-. I think this summary will be a good starting point for new

>> members who are fresh in the policy development process.

>> On this note, i will like to encourage Afrinic to emulate the

>> foundation and come up with an official summary like this before every

>> meeting to enable new and interested members get up to speed quickly.

>> Cheers.

>> Taiwo O

>>> On Tue, 2 Jul 2019 at 20:36, Andrew Alston

>>> <Andrew.Alston at> wrote:

>>>> Wafa,

>>>> So – let me say this. I see a document here – which lays out

>>>> the policies – and provides a perspective of problems, it also

>>>> lists the pros and cons. Yes, Lazarus may have used the

>>>> foundation to lobby for its position, but – one of the things

>>>> that I have long accepted in my life is – if you believe in

>>>> something – you have to lobby for it – and to be frank – the

>>>> summary that I see in this document – is something that by and

>>>> large – should have been done long before they got around to it.

>>>> If I, as an individual, feel strongly about something, I am

>>>> entirely free to go and advocate for my position. I am also

>>>> entirely free to sponsor people to come to a public meeting –

>>>> and I am entirely free to choose those people as I so wish, if I

>>>> choose the people who agree with me, well, that’s life – but

>>>> it certainly aint against the rules, it is the political nature of

>>>> internet policy development. Do you think that similar does not

>>>> happen elsewhere? People lobby for the positions that they care

>>>> about. It happens in politics, it happens in life, and yet now we

>>>> want to cry when someone else does the same thing.

>>>> Let me also say – it’s not like this hasn’t been happening

>>>> before – and I want to quote from the OIF website: _IOF



>>>> Yet – this is an organization that for years has spent money

>>>> filling the room with people – and that statement does not say

>>>> – is of benefit to Africa – it does not say is of benefit to

>>>> the African continent – it does not say is to the benefit of the

>>>> continent – it singles out a single demographic on the continent

>>>> and says – we do what we do for their benefit. Now, let me be

>>>> very clear, if they wish to do that – I’m actually ok with it

>>>> – though I admit I have waivered on this stance – however, we

>>>> cannot say – because it’s a government political organization

>>>> – it’s ok – but when a member chooses to have a foundation

>>>> – and sponsor people to the meetings – and then lobby for the

>>>> positions that member is passionate about – suddenly its wrong.

>>>> That is called hypocrisy.

>>>> In Point Noire, I watched people walk to the microphone – with

>>>> slips of paper and read a comment on a policy – and then go and

>>>> sit down – and the same happened in Botswana. Except, what I

>>>> found was, when queried on the position that was taken at the

>>>> microphone, the individual reading what they had off the paper,

>>>> had patently obviously never read the policy and didn’t

>>>> understand the position they were taking themselves. So who was

>>>> behind that? And all of that – is on video for the world to see

>>>> – but – it was ok then – suddenly it changes now because we

>>>> don’t like the individual doing it?

>>>> Sorry – this isn’t the way it works – and let me be clear

>>>> – Lu Heng is not a friend of mine, and in fact in Mauritius I

>>>> had some pretty strong things to say to him to his face, in front

>>>> of others who will testify to what I said to him – however – I

>>>> respect his rights as a member to participate in what is

>>>> essentially a democratic process, that means – I respect his

>>>> right to lobby for his views, I respect his right to put boots on

>>>> the ground, and I respect his right to have his say. In the same

>>>> way – I respect the right of any member to do that – and I

>>>> respect the right of the members to then rebut what is said if

>>>> they do not agree with it. It is through this lobbying position

>>>> and through the back and forth that accompanies it, that great

>>>> policy is born – it is not through acquiescence, nor is it

>>>> through the silencing of the rights of others.

>>>> My view – if anyone wants to come into the room and have their

>>>> say – so be it – that is bottom up. If people want to lobby

>>>> their positions – so be it – that is bottom up. If people

>>>> want to spend money running tv adverts about their positions for

>>>> all I care – so be it – that is the nature of the democratic

>>>> position. If people want to bus a thousand people who share their

>>>> views – again – so be it – that is the democratic process.

>>>> However, it is the community who then need to rebut – but –

>>>> the rebuttal should be on the policy itself. What I see here

>>>> however, is a rebuttal of policy and a lobbying position taken on

>>>> the *CONTENT* of the policy – unlike what I have seen time and

>>>> again in the meetings where the lobbying position has NOTHING to

>>>> do with the content or the policy.

>>>> So rather than malign Lazarus for their actions here – quite

>>>> frankly, reading this document, and as much as as I have said, Lu

>>>> and I have some serious differences, I applaud Lazarus for the

>>>> comprehensive work – and I applaud them for taking a stance that

>>>> was based on the policy and I embrace their right to lobby for

>>>> their position in any way shape or form. That is not to say I

>>>> agree with the positions taken in this document – I will reserve

>>>> my policy comments for the policies and based on my own

>>>> interpretation of such – but – I embrace the fact that at

>>>> least, it was done based on what was written, and not on personal

>>>> relationships, personal attacks, demographics, or anything else.

>>>> So – to Lazarus – thank you for a job well done in the fact

>>>> that you lobbied your position based on the policies – and left

>>>> the other garbage behind, which is what we so often see.

>>>> Finally – again – I respect the right to do what they did –

>>>> and


>>>> Thanks

>>>> Andrew

>>>> FROM: wafa DAHMANI <wafa at>

>>>> SENT: Tuesday, 2 July 2019 12:30

>>>> TO: community-discuss at

>>>> CC: rpd at

>>>> SUBJECT: [Community-Discuss] Larus foundation fellowship

>>>> Hi

>>>> It fell under public domain, that those who benefited from Larus

>>>> foundation fellowship to attend the last afrinic meeting in

>>>> Kampala, were given a confidential Education package on AFRINIC

>>>> Number Resources Policy proposals detailed in the following link:


>>>> The document lists the proposals to be discussed, Larus Foundation

>>>> views of Pros and Cons on each of them, selective PDWG

>>>> participants interventions on the proposals.

>>>> The education package so proposed intends to condition these

>>>> participants views on the proposals and their contributions at

>>>> the PPM and after....

>>>> I like to remind us that the PDP is open for any individual

>>>> willing to participate. Views expressed are personal. No need to

>>>> know who is behind each source email address... only opinions

>>>> expressed in the context of the PDP matter. The substance of

>>>> contribution really matter. Diversity of views are encouraged.

>>>> Lack of disagreement is more important than of agreement. Also

>>>> PDP is not a matter of volume, repetition or persistence.

>>>> RFC 7282 section 6 and 7 are clear on these aspects of the rough

>>>> consensus process.

>>>> Section 6

>>>> One hundred people for and five people against might not be rough

>>>> consensus.

>>>> Section 7

>>>> Five people for and one hundred people against might still be

>>>> rough consensus

>>>> My African fellows,

>>>> Your desire to participate to AFRINIC policy development Process

>>>> is legitimate and must be encouraged. I hope the last meeting was

>>>> useful to you and allow you to identify the issues, understand

>>>> what is going on and what Africa needs... I hope you’ve made

>>>> your minds and now able to speak on your personal capacity..

>>>> The real education package is as below:

>>>> =====

>>>> Proposal to establish AFRINIC


>>>> IANA report on AFRINIC (Accreditation)


>>>> AFRINIC constitution


>>>> Registration Service Agreement


>>>> AFRINIC policy manual


>>>> AFRINIC policies before the adoption of the CPM




>>>> Rough Consensus


>>>> AFRINIC current policy proposals


>>>> RiRs PDPs


>>>> RIR comparative policy overview


>>>> ==============

>>>> Please read and process them, ask questions and find your way.

>>>> Come build African Internet by Africans.

>>>> As for Larus Foundation, your relationship to cloud innovation,

>>>> afrinic member with suspicious activities, holding 6 millions of

>>>> IPv4 is long established and discussed many times on this list. I

>>>> hope the fellows would find these discussions in the archives.

>>>> I call the attention of the board on the repetitive attempts of

>>>> this resource member to hijack the PDP for its sordid

>>>> intentions... the provisions of the bylaws and RSA must

>>>> carefully be applied to recall members to acceptable code of

>>>> conduct.

>>>> The African Internet community as well as the global Internet

>>>> community must pay close attention and protect the RIRs Policy

>>>> development process and operations.

>>>> -Wafa _______________________________________________

>>>> Community-Discuss mailing list

>>>> Community-Discuss at


>>> --



>>> p:+852 29888918

>>> f:+852 29888368

>>> e:a.v.p at

>>> [1]

>>> a:B5,11/F,TML Tower,No.3 Hoi Shing Road,Tsuen Wan,HKSAR

>>> _______________________________________________

>>> Community-Discuss mailing list

>>> Community-Discuss at


>> Links:

>> ------

>> [1]

>> _______________________________________________

>> Community-Discuss mailing list

>> Community-Discuss at








> b

More information about the RPD mailing list