On Fri, 20 Aug 2004 21:04:57 +0100, Per Gregers Bilse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Aug 20, 1:07pm, Joshua Brady <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > been a core part of the network? I am all for Matt talking about the > > litigation of this case, its a quite common thing now in the wonderful > > world of the internet, so does that now not fall under rules? > > The point is that NANOG is supposed to focus on network operational issues > (and by implication also issues of architecture and engineering); issues > of a tangential or personal interest water down the contents, whether or > not they are important for the Internet and/or your business. Including > cashflow, litigation, world peace, and falling asteroids.
Sure understood there, however...NANOG is a discussion list which I believe needs to focus on more than just the strict network operational issues. (a user on AS12345 is announcing my IP's can someone purdy please go smack him and make him stop), such as we do at the NANOG confrences, discuss everything in and around the network operations field, which deals with cashflow, litigation, world peace if your an ISP in say iraq or afghanistan right now, and falling asteroids headed to your satellites or your datacenters or god forbid your CEO's Porsche. > > The reason for trying to maintain focus is simple: few people deeply > involved in core Internet issues have the time to sift through heaps of > "interesting" discussion that has no relevance for their work. In the > end, everybody who might make a difference will have written NANOG off > and simply not take part. This has to a large extent already happened, > but it would be good not to make the situation worse. Then I guess the solution is simple...don't sift through it. Everything eventually evolves from the original reason it was created and we can't just sit around and not conform to that. > There used to be a mailing list called com-priv, the original purpose > being discussion about commercialisation and privatisation of the > Internet. Maybe NANOG/Merit as a group/organisation should revive > it, and discuss non-technical matters on that? Business Associated > NANOG (BANANOG) discussion would be much happier on a separate list. > Could even sit on a Merit server I guess, it would simply shift traffic > from one list to another. I suppose, but then we get the complaints of "Grrr *grumble* I have to sign up for another mailing list just to discuss issues which can easily be discussed in one location?" but if you can get Merit to create a BANANOG I guess we can see how it goes. > In the meantime, a tried and tested relevance test for NANOG is very > simple: How do I configure my router for that? Step 1: Kick the router out of the rack. Step 2: Bring in big lumberjacks to beat the router until it conforms, if it conforms skip to step 5, if not go on to step 3. Step 3: Hire someone who didn't have to ask that question. Step 4: Get a roll of duct tape and gently slide the router back into place. Step 5: Plug router in and enjoy! > Best, > > -- Per > > -- Joshua Brady
