North American Network Operators Group|
Date Prev | Date Next |
Date Index |
Thread Index |
Author Index |
Re: Beer and Gear surprise
- From: Daniel L. Golding
- Date: Fri Feb 23 00:06:51 2001
It's a Boxer Short Rebellion :)
Seriously, though - you through around terms like "membership". Who is
- Daniel Golding
On Thu, 22 Feb 2001, Ukyo Kuonji wrote:
> Why would someone need to buy Merit? Nanog doesn't belong to Merit, does
> it? Funny, I though it was the North American Network Operators' Group.
> Doesn't that imply that it collectively belongs to those of use that
> consider ourselves operators?
> I don't think people are getting it. It's not about the vendorwear that was
> eliminated. My point is that someone made a decision about the meeting
> without even informing the people that were going to attend the meeting
> beforehand. There was no discussion about it beforehand, no information
> afterwards, and no mention of it when we signed up for the meeting. The
> only notification that I saw was a addendum to the charter dated November
> 2000 which was as long as the original charter.
> My question, I guess, is this:
> 1) What does Merit do for Nanog?
> Looks to me like they help organize the meetings (Which are funded entirely
> by registration fees and vendor donations, and are supposed to be organized
> by the hosting organization), host the web site (which has little content on
> it) and host the mailing list. Am I missing anything else?
> 2) What gives Merit the right to make decisions about the group without
> consulting the membership?
> (Hint: It's not in the charter, or anywhere else I could find)
> 3) If Merit is not listening to it's membership, and is only providing the
> web page and mailing list, is there a reason why they are still hosting
> (Hint: It's not in the charter.)
> I would propose one of the following:
> 1) The NANOG Charter needs to be revised into a more inclusive charter
> which includes the resolution of conflicts within the membership, review of
> the officials actions by the membership and removal of officials by the
> membership in the event that the actions are in conflict with the membership
> or charter. There should also be included, in the charter, how to revise
> and amend the charter. In this option, Merit would still be the ruling
> 2) Remove Merit from the ruling body. There is no reason, today, that the
> web site and mailing list could not be hosted by someone else. I do not
> believe that Merit is doing a bad job, but there isn't that much work
> involved in providing this service. The charter states that meetings are to
> be organized by the hosting company. I don't see a reason why this could
> not continue. The charter will still need to be resizes, however to include
> the items from option 1
> 3) Continue to live under the rule of a ruling body that does not consult
> of inform it's membership or decisions that affect the membership and
> Merit is under no obligation, at this point, to continue to offer services
> to NANOG, and the membership has no recourse of action under the current
> I don't want to play politics, but I think something needs to be done.
> Opinions in this email are the personal opinions of the author and are not
> associated with author's employer. This email account is a not the regular
> email account of the author and is being used for the protection of the
> Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com