North American Network Operators Group

Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical

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
that, exactly?

- 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 
> body.
> 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 
> meetings.
> 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 
> charter.
> I don't want to play politics, but I think something needs to be done.
> UK
> ---
> 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 
> employer.
> _________________________________________________________________
> Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at