Re: meeting network

2011-10-11 Thread Randy Bush
 The hotel IT department is the guy who runs the as400 that gets
 reservations from corprate, and runs the POS terminals.
 
 the room-net is by-in-large run by a third party such as lodgenet.

here at the lovely and reasonably priced loews, the dhcp disaster in the
rooms killed the front desk

randy



Re: meeting network

2011-10-11 Thread JC Dill

On 10/10/11 3:41 PM, Frank Bulk wrote:

Holding the last 10% of the meeting room payment seems like a good start for
any venue.
It's worthless.  It's like being single-homed on a line with an SLA that 
refunds some small percent of your service provider fee for extended 
outages - fat lot of good that does you when your line Goes Down.  The 
hotel's IT department will assure them (and you) that they have the 
situation covered, and then when it goes down you get a whole whopping 
10% discount, but in the meantime you Have No Network.


To get their attention, to make sure they are really ready to provision 
the network capacity correctly (with adequate hardware, software, 
bandwidth, appropriate configs, etc.) the penalty needs to be something 
closer to 50% of all fees paid by the organization AND our attendees, 
for meeting rooms, food service, AND for lodging.  Then when the 
network dies everyone gets 50% refunded.  That will get the hotel 
management's attention and *possibly* help ensure that their IT 
department really DOES have the situation properly spec'd and 
provisioned to handle the traffic.


jc





Re: meeting network

2011-10-11 Thread Owen DeLong

On Oct 10, 2011, at 10:32 PM, Joel jaeggli wrote:

 On 10/10/11 07:00 , Owen DeLong wrote:
 
 It would be wise for NANOG to approach future venues and specifically
 discuss these things with the hotel IT departments in question ahead
 of time so that they have some remote chance of being prepared.
 
 The hotel IT department is the guy who runs the as400 that gets
 reservations from corprate, and runs the POS terminals.
 
 the room-net is by-in-large run by a third party such as lodgenet.
 
 Owen
 
 
 

In my experience, you start with the hotel IT department and they at least know 
who to talk to at LodgeNet/whoever in order to reach someone that can provide a 
useful response.

Owen




Re: meeting network

2011-10-11 Thread John Curran
On Oct 11, 2011, at 8:22 AM, Owen DeLong wrote:
 On Oct 10, 2011, at 10:32 PM, Joel jaeggli wrote:
 On 10/10/11 07:00 , Owen DeLong wrote:
 
 It would be wise for NANOG to approach future venues and specifically
 discuss these things with the hotel IT departments in question ahead
 of time so that they have some remote chance of being prepared.
 
 The hotel IT department is the guy who runs the as400 that gets
 reservations from corprate, and runs the POS terminals.
 
 the room-net is by-in-large run by a third party such as lodgenet.
 
 In my experience, you start with the hotel IT department and they at least 
 know who to talk to at LodgeNet/whoever in order to reach someone that can 
 provide a useful response.

To be perfectly clear, the hotel IT department is a fine escalation point
once you're close the actual event, and that they will bring in others 
as needed.  This even works if you need to pull fiber into a facility for 
additional bandwidth, with the hotel IT/telecom team often getting 
involved months in advance.

At the time of _contracting_ (more than 1 year in advance in many cases),
the ability to pierce the sales veil of Yes, we can do anything you need
and It's no problem can be quite difficult, even if one does an on-site
visit and meets with the hotel IT team. They are trained to avoid raising
any issues in the sales process, and prioritize any actual technical level
engagement with their partners until well past contract. They often do not
even have the ability to engage their partners except during an actual 
performance problem, so expecting them to get someone on the phone a year
in advance of an event to commit to an unusual configuration may be quite
limited (or even absent in the case of hotel chains whose wireless partner 
relationship is held by the hotel chain parent corporation.)

I'm not saying that it is not worth trying; I just want folks to have a
realistic understanding of how these arrangements are actually made.  It
is far better today then in the past, as there have been many conferences
over the years where step 1 was pulling the coax or fiber through the 
hotel to establish their first-ever network infrastructure...  :-)

FYI,
/John




Re: meeting network

2011-10-11 Thread Nick Hilliard
On 11/10/2011 14:12, John Curran wrote:
 is far better today then in the past, as there have been many conferences
 over the years where step 1 was pulling the coax or fiber through the 
 hotel to establish their first-ever network infrastructure...  :-)

There is nothing more dispiriting than yeah sure, you can pull in that
fibre cable, but only on condition that you remove it immediately after the
[conference|meeting|whatever] is over.  We already have the Internet.

Then they point at the 2Mb DSL wifi AP and expect you to be impressed at
their technology.

Nick




Re: meeting network

2011-10-11 Thread Dorn Hetzel
Maybe instead of upgrading the network of cities, we could convince Google
to practice by upgrading the networks of a variety of hotels
in locations that NANOG might find appealing :)

On Tue, Oct 11, 2011 at 10:48 AM, Nick Hilliard n...@foobar.org wrote:

 On 11/10/2011 14:12, John Curran wrote:
  is far better today then in the past, as there have been many conferences
  over the years where step 1 was pulling the coax or fiber through the
  hotel to establish their first-ever network infrastructure...  :-)

 There is nothing more dispiriting than yeah sure, you can pull in that
 fibre cable, but only on condition that you remove it immediately after the
 [conference|meeting|whatever] is over.  We already have internet
 Then they point at the 2Mb DSL wifi AP and expect you to be impressed at
 their technology.

 Nick





Re: meeting network

2011-10-11 Thread Owen DeLong


Sent from my iPad

On Oct 11, 2011, at 10:48, Nick Hilliard n...@foobar.org wrote:

 On 11/10/2011 14:12, John Curran wrote:
 is far better today then in the past, as there have been many conferences
 over the years where step 1 was pulling the coax or fiber through the 
 hotel to establish their first-ever network infrastructure...  :-)
 
 There is nothing more dispiriting than yeah sure, you can pull in that
 fibre cable, but only on condition that you remove it immediately after the
 [conference|meeting|whatever] is over.  We already have the Internet.
 
 Then they point at the 2Mb DSL wifi AP and expect you to be impressed at
 their technology.
 
 Nick
 

Yes there is... There's the time when they say No, you can't pull in that 
fiber. Just use the internet and set up a VPN then point to the 1Mbps DSL wifi 
AP...

Owen




RE: meeting network

2011-10-11 Thread Frank Bulk
The hotel will never refund at that level.  The only thing that works is not
to pay them in the first place.  

No hotel is that desperate enough to fill rooms that they're willing to
return 50% of everything if the connectivity is poor or fails.  They'll let
their competitors have that business.

Frank

-Original Message-
From: JC Dill [mailto:jcdill.li...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2011 3:26 AM
To: NANOG list
Subject: Re: meeting network

On 10/10/11 3:41 PM, Frank Bulk wrote:
 Holding the last 10% of the meeting room payment seems like a good start
for
 any venue.
It's worthless.  It's like being single-homed on a line with an SLA that 
refunds some small percent of your service provider fee for extended 
outages - fat lot of good that does you when your line Goes Down.  The 
hotel's IT department will assure them (and you) that they have the 
situation covered, and then when it goes down you get a whole whopping 
10% discount, but in the meantime you Have No Network.

To get their attention, to make sure they are really ready to provision 
the network capacity correctly (with adequate hardware, software, 
bandwidth, appropriate configs, etc.) the penalty needs to be something 
closer to 50% of all fees paid by the organization AND our attendees, 
for meeting rooms, food service, AND for lodging.  Then when the 
network dies everyone gets 50% refunded.  That will get the hotel 
management's attention and *possibly* help ensure that their IT 
department really DOES have the situation properly spec'd and 
provisioned to handle the traffic.

jc








Re: meeting network

2011-10-11 Thread Chris Adams
Once upon a time, Nick Hilliard n...@foobar.org said:
 There is nothing more dispiriting than yeah sure, you can pull in that
 fibre cable, but only on condition that you remove it immediately after the
 [conference|meeting|whatever] is over.  We already have the Internet.

I would say the situation depends on the hotel and which person you talk
to.  I volunteer for one of the largest science fiction conventions, and
we take over 5 convention hotels for the con.  I set up networking for
our staff department's operations last year in one hotel, and initially
we couldn't get anywhere because it was iBAHN and demanding an auth code
on a captive web portal.  When we got somebody from the hotel to look,
he went into a closet around the corner and moved the wire, and we were
then on the hotel's direct network.

He then noticed I was running Linux, and we chatted about different
distributions, and while I was setting up my (probably not allowed)
wireless router, he showed back up with a box of cat5 and some ends (he
was going to run some additional wires around the room for us, but saw I
was running an AP and said you're good, aren't you and went on).

We also have fiber pulled between the 5 hotels for our video feed, and
that stays in place from year to year.
-- 
Chris Adams cmad...@hiwaay.net
Systems and Network Administrator - HiWAAY Internet Services
I don't speak for anybody but myself - that's enough trouble.



Re: meeting network

2011-10-11 Thread Michael K. Smith - Adhost
Just an FYI - even though you approved the wireless charge, it's actually free. 
 They pull the per-diem/week charge off your bill.  That applies to all NANOG 
attendees.

Mike

On Oct 10, 2011, at 11:36 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:

 I don't think it is. I think that you can negotiate and I will point out that 
 the hotel
 here has wanted our business enough that they have now scrambled to make
 life significantly better. You can also bet I'll be demanding that they 
 credit my
 $54 that I put on the in-room access be credited to my bill even though ARIN 
 would
 pay it.
 
 I routinely do this when the conference network (or the in-room network) 
 sucks and it's provided by the hotel. I have yet to have one refuse my refund 
 request.
 
 Owen
 
 On Oct 10, 2011, at 3:41 PM, Frank Bulk wrote:
 
 Holding the last 10% of the meeting room payment seems like a good start for
 any venue.
 
 But as others have indicated, the market may be too small for free-market
 principles to be fully effective.
 
 Frank
 
 -Original Message-
 From: JC Dill [mailto:jcdill.li...@gmail.com] 
 Sent: Monday, October 10, 2011 1:36 PM
 Cc: North American Network Operators' Group
 Subject: Re: meeting network
 
 On 10/10/11 7:00 AM, Owen DeLong wrote:
 It would be wise for NANOG to approach future venues and specifically
 discuss these things with the hotel IT departments in question ahead of time
 so that they have some remote chance of being prepared.
 
 I tried this approach many years ago, for a Blogher conference.  The 
 hotel's IT people were uncooperative, and incompetent, and they lied 
 both about their network design and their equipment capabilities.  I 
 have since learned that this is par for the course.  IMHO the only way 
 to solve this problem is with big $$$ penalties in the contract, big 
 enough that the incompetent IT people realize their jobs are on the line 
 and relinquish control so experts can get access and set-up things properly.
 
 Also note - the conference or hotel's IT people will always claim they 
 have done this before with no problems even when they haven't.
 
 jc
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

--
Michael K. Smith - CISSP, GSEC, GISP
Chief Technical Officer - Adhost Internet LLC mksm...@adhost.com
w: +1 (206) 404-9500 f: +1 (206) 404-9050
PGP: B49A DDF5 8611 27F3  08B9 84BB E61E 38C0 (Key ID: 0x9A96777D)




Re: meeting network

2011-10-11 Thread Randy Bush
 The hotel will never refund at that level.

ietf maastricht gave 100% refunds

never say never



meeting network

2011-10-10 Thread Randy Bush
perhaps as an educational exercise in network troubleshooting whoever is
operating the meeting network could explain what the frack is wrong with
the meeting network, how it is being debugged, and what they have
learned about the cause of the suckage.

randy



Re: meeting network

2011-10-10 Thread Nick Hilliard
On 10/10/2011 13:28, Randy Bush wrote:
 perhaps as an educational exercise in network troubleshooting whoever is
 operating the meeting network could explain what the frack is wrong with
 the meeting network, how it is being debugged, and what they have
 learned about the cause of the suckage.

if it's wifi that's causing the trouble, the usual causes are:

- insufficient density of APs for the number of clients
- APs configured with TX too high (should be set as low as possible)
- APs configured to accept dot11b = 9 megs
- APs configured to use auto channel selection
- stupid broken clients screaming at high volume across the room to APs
which are impossibly far away

There is a more fundamental problem, though:  wifi was not designed with
crazyass density in mind.

Bring back UTP?

Nick



Re: meeting network

2011-10-10 Thread Dobbins, Roland
On Oct 10, 2011, at 7:46 PM, Nick Hilliard wrote:

 if it's wifi that's causing the trouble, the usual causes are:

Don't forget RFI and various forms of spoofing used for MITM.

;

---
Roland Dobbins rdobb...@arbor.net // http://www.arbornetworks.com

The basis of optimism is sheer terror.

  -- Oscar Wilde




Re: meeting network

2011-10-10 Thread Christopher Morrow
On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 9:01 AM, Dobbins, Roland rdobb...@arbor.net wrote:
 On Oct 10, 2011, at 7:46 PM, Nick Hilliard wrote:

 if it's wifi that's causing the trouble, the usual causes are:

is the complaint the hotel ROOM wireless? or the meeting-room? I
noticed the nanog-a-secure bounce me 2x, so I moved back to
ipsec-tunnel on nanog-a.. in the past nanog (plain) has been more
'stable' for me in general (and all you mac users can happily fight
over -a!)

As to the hotel room wifi... apparently when you have 490 rooms in the
hotel (full) and only provision your internal NAT space as a /23 ...
things work 'fine' most days. When a networking conference comes to
visit with 3+ devices requiring IP in each room... the whole hotel
network stops :( Last night the display systems in the lobby and the
hotel registration machines were all broken :( The hotel's network
people (in NYC) are supposedly 'on a fix', who knows... (is expanding
the nat subnet THAT hard?)

-chris



Re: meeting network

2011-10-10 Thread Randy Bush
 if it's wifi that's causing the trouble, the usual causes are:
 is the complaint the hotel ROOM wireless? or the meeting-room?

meeting net, a-secure and a.  really bad during the night, but still
bouncing up until 08:30 when i turned laptop off to participate in
breakfast.

and conjecturbation as to what the problem was is amusing at best.  i
asked for actual diagnosis from whover is running the net.

randy



Re: meeting network

2011-10-10 Thread Richard Barnes
Problem for me at least has not been the MAC layer (either hotel room
or meeting room), it was that the DHCP server was not responding.
Ironically, I could still see everyone's Bonjour and SMB service
advertisements.
--Richard



On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 8:46 AM, Nick Hilliard n...@foobar.org wrote:
 On 10/10/2011 13:28, Randy Bush wrote:
 perhaps as an educational exercise in network troubleshooting whoever is
 operating the meeting network could explain what the frack is wrong with
 the meeting network, how it is being debugged, and what they have
 learned about the cause of the suckage.

 if it's wifi that's causing the trouble, the usual causes are:

 - insufficient density of APs for the number of clients
 - APs configured with TX too high (should be set as low as possible)
 - APs configured to accept dot11b = 9 megs
 - APs configured to use auto channel selection
 - stupid broken clients screaming at high volume across the room to APs
 which are impossibly far away

 There is a more fundamental problem, though:  wifi was not designed with
 crazyass density in mind.

 Bring back UTP?

 Nick





Re: meeting network

2011-10-10 Thread Jared Mauch

On Oct 10, 2011, at 8:46 AM, Nick Hilliard wrote:

 On 10/10/2011 13:28, Randy Bush wrote:
 perhaps as an educational exercise in network troubleshooting whoever is
 operating the meeting network could explain what the frack is wrong with
 the meeting network, how it is being debugged, and what they have
 learned about the cause of the suckage.
 
 if it's wifi that's causing the trouble, the usual causes are:
 
 - insufficient density of APs for the number of clients
 - APs configured with TX too high (should be set as low as possible)
 - APs configured to accept dot11b = 9 megs
 - APs configured to use auto channel selection
 - stupid broken clients screaming at high volume across the room to APs
 which are impossibly far away
 
 There is a more fundamental problem, though:  wifi was not designed with
 crazyass density in mind.

I'm not seeing the problem, but have heard one other person say they are having 
trouble.

Perhaps some details of the problem you are seeing would help diagnose the 
troubles as there are many of us who are not seeing it.  I am using the 
'NANOG-a' network without trouble.

- Jared


Re: meeting network

2011-10-10 Thread Nick Hilliard
On 10/10/2011 14:50, Christopher Morrow wrote:
 hotel registration machines were all broken :( The hotel's network
 people (in NYC) are supposedly 'on a fix', who knows... (is expanding
 the nat subnet THAT hard?)

Sigh, if only there were people somewhere near the hotel who knew how to
configure this sort of stuff...

Nick




Re: meeting network

2011-10-10 Thread Owen DeLong

On Oct 10, 2011, at 6:50 AM, Christopher Morrow wrote:

 On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 9:01 AM, Dobbins, Roland rdobb...@arbor.net wrote:
 On Oct 10, 2011, at 7:46 PM, Nick Hilliard wrote:
 
 if it's wifi that's causing the trouble, the usual causes are:
 
 is the complaint the hotel ROOM wireless? or the meeting-room? I
 noticed the nanog-a-secure bounce me 2x, so I moved back to
 ipsec-tunnel on nanog-a.. in the past nanog (plain) has been more
 'stable' for me in general (and all you mac users can happily fight
 over -a!)
 
 As to the hotel room wifi... apparently when you have 490 rooms in the
 hotel (full) and only provision your internal NAT space as a /23 ...
 things work 'fine' most days. When a networking conference comes to
 visit with 3+ devices requiring IP in each room... the whole hotel
 network stops :( Last night the display systems in the lobby and the
 hotel registration machines were all broken :( The hotel's network
 people (in NYC) are supposedly 'on a fix', who knows... (is expanding
 the nat subnet THAT hard?)
 
 -chris

It would be wise for NANOG to approach future venues and specifically discuss 
these things with the hotel IT departments in question ahead of time so that 
they have some remote chance of being prepared.

Owen




Re: meeting network

2011-10-10 Thread Randy Carpenter
On the hotel network, I have also seen some issues beyond getting an address. I 
can usually trace just fine, but applications, specifically web is extremely 
slow, or non responsive. The hotel appears to be shoving all traffic through a 
squid proxy, which does not appear to be big enough to handle the traffic. I 
have gotten various error messages from squid.

I would think that the contract with the hotel for the conference would include 
the specific requirements for the network. Is that not the case?

-Randy

On Oct 10, 2011, at 10:01, Owen DeLong o...@delong.com wrote:

 
 On Oct 10, 2011, at 6:50 AM, Christopher Morrow wrote:
 
 On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 9:01 AM, Dobbins, Roland rdobb...@arbor.net wrote:
 On Oct 10, 2011, at 7:46 PM, Nick Hilliard wrote:
 
 if it's wifi that's causing the trouble, the usual causes are:
 
 is the complaint the hotel ROOM wireless? or the meeting-room? I
 noticed the nanog-a-secure bounce me 2x, so I moved back to
 ipsec-tunnel on nanog-a.. in the past nanog (plain) has been more
 'stable' for me in general (and all you mac users can happily fight
 over -a!)
 
 As to the hotel room wifi... apparently when you have 490 rooms in the
 hotel (full) and only provision your internal NAT space as a /23 ...
 things work 'fine' most days. When a networking conference comes to
 visit with 3+ devices requiring IP in each room... the whole hotel
 network stops :( Last night the display systems in the lobby and the
 hotel registration machines were all broken :( The hotel's network
 people (in NYC) are supposedly 'on a fix', who knows... (is expanding
 the nat subnet THAT hard?)
 
 -chris
 
 It would be wise for NANOG to approach future venues and specifically discuss 
 these things with the hotel IT departments in question ahead of time so that 
 they have some remote chance of being prepared.
 
 Owen
 
 
 



Re: meeting network

2011-10-10 Thread Randy Bush
 I would think that the contract with the hotel for the conference
 would include the specific requirements for the network. Is that not
 the case?

underlying problems

  o no hotel believe that we'll actually be significantly high use.  
they simply can not conceive of it.  ietf, apricot, ... have
seen this time and time again

  o the hotel does not manage the network, so you have two comms hops
to anyone who can do anything.  and anyway, they are not going to
provision more bandwidth

but the problems of which i spoke were the meeting network.  which we
do supposedly control.

randy



Re: meeting network

2011-10-10 Thread Michael Sinatra

On Mon, 10 Oct 2011, Randy Bush wrote:


if it's wifi that's causing the trouble, the usual causes are:

is the complaint the hotel ROOM wireless? or the meeting-room?


meeting net, a-secure and a.  really bad during the night, but still
bouncing up until 08:30 when i turned laptop off to participate in
breakfast.

and conjecturbation as to what the problem was is amusing at best.  i
asked for actual diagnosis from whover is running the net.


I am noticing far worse performance and reliability with IPv6 as opposed 
to IPv4.  For a good 10 minutes until just now there was *no* IPv6 routing 
even to the first hop, but IPv4 was still working.  Now things are 
merely slow, not broken.


I also got bounced a few times from -secure and -a and when I got back I 
couldn't get an address (IPv4 or IPv6) for some time.


Conjecturbation: They're using an old proteon router and someone is 
exhausting its arp and ndp caches.


michael




Re: meeting network

2011-10-10 Thread Randy Bush
 Conjecturbation: They're using an old proteon router and someone is 
 exhausting its arp and ndp caches.

i wanna picture!



Re: meeting network

2011-10-10 Thread Richard Barnes
VPN traffic was also slow / bursty. So I guess there's some capacity issues
as well as layer 7 cruft.

On Oct 10, 2011 10:20 AM, Randy Carpenter rcar...@network1.net wrote:

On the hotel network, I have also seen some issues beyond getting an
address. I can usually trace just fine, but applications, specifically web
is extremely slow, or non responsive. The hotel appears to be shoving all
traffic through a squid proxy, which does not appear to be big enough to
handle the traffic. I have gotten various error messages from squid.

I would think that the contract with the hotel for the conference would
include the specific requirements for the network. Is that not the case?

-Randy


On Oct 10, 2011, at 10:01, Owen DeLong o...@delong.com wrote:


 On Oct 10, 2011, at 6:50 AM, ...


RE: meeting network

2011-10-10 Thread George, Wes
  o no hotel believe that we'll actually be significantly high use.
they simply can not conceive of it.  ietf, apricot, ... have
seen this time and time again

WEG] this is a problem that is quite solvable via the careful application of 
real data from past events
I assume most of these conferences can track number of unique devices seen (by 
MAC address) peak and total, show peak and average network usage BW graphs, etc.

Wes George

This E-mail and any of its attachments may contain Time Warner Cable 
proprietary information, which is privileged, confidential, or subject to 
copyright belonging to Time Warner Cable. This E-mail is intended solely for 
the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed. If you are not 
the intended recipient of this E-mail, you are hereby notified that any 
dissemination, distribution, copying, or action taken in relation to the 
contents of and attachments to this E-mail is strictly prohibited and may be 
unlawful. If you have received this E-mail in error, please notify the sender 
immediately and permanently delete the original and any copy of this E-mail and 
any printout.



Re: meeting network

2011-10-10 Thread Valdis . Kletnieks
On Mon, 10 Oct 2011 10:44:12 EDT, Randy Bush said:

   o no hotel believe that we'll actually be significantly high use.  
 they simply can not conceive of it.  ietf, apricot, ... have
 seen this time and time again

To be fair, that's not a hotel-only problem.  We've seen that problem within
the IT industry.  Actual discussion with a vendor who wanted to analyze our
logs so they could size a solution:

Send us a day's worth of logs OK
...
We said a *day's* worth, not a *week*. That *was* a day
Wow, that logfile was huge, we didn't think anybody actually did that much 
traffic a day...

The sad part was that the vendor in question *really* should have known better,
we're pretty sure they targeted their solution at many sites bigger than us.

Or maybe the other sites are bigger, but we pound the bejeebers out of stuff. I 
dunno.


pgpSORw53Efjh.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Re: meeting network

2011-10-10 Thread Matt Ryanczak

On 10/10/11 10:20 AM, Randy Carpenter wrote:

I would think that the contract with the hotel for the conference would include 
the specific requirements for the network. Is that not the case?


My experiences planning and operating ARIN meeting networks taught me 
that it is difficult if not impossible to get a hotel make any changes 
to in room based wireless or wired networking. Often times they have 
contracts with third parties and don't actually have any control over 
how the network operates or issues such as capacity. This can also 
include an inability to disable access points or otherwise limit the 
ability of the contracted service provider to provide access to rooms.


In room access is always something that we looked at when judging 
potential venues but the poor state of most in room Internet access 
infrastructure and the realities of existing business relationships made 
this a nice to have rather than a hard requirement.





RE: meeting network

2011-10-10 Thread Frank Bulk
Then the RFP for the meeting needs to be more specific with some basic SLAs
that result in a smaller bill if not met.

Frank

-Original Message-
From: Randy Bush [mailto:ra...@psg.com] 
Sent: Monday, October 10, 2011 9:44 AM
To: Randy Carpenter
Cc: North American Network Operators' Group
Subject: Re: meeting network

 I would think that the contract with the hotel for the conference
 would include the specific requirements for the network. Is that not
 the case?

underlying problems

  o no hotel believe that we'll actually be significantly high use.  
they simply can not conceive of it.  ietf, apricot, ... have
seen this time and time again

  o the hotel does not manage the network, so you have two comms hops
to anyone who can do anything.  and anyway, they are not going to
provision more bandwidth

but the problems of which i spoke were the meeting network.  which we
do supposedly control.

randy






Re: meeting network

2011-10-10 Thread Jared Mauch
In my historical knowledge of this: there are only so many venues that can have 
500-650 people and fit. 

Jared Mauch

On Oct 10, 2011, at 1:12 PM, Frank Bulk frnk...@iname.com wrote:

 Then the RFP for the meeting needs to be more specific with some basic SLAs
 that result in a smaller bill if not met.
 
 Frank
 
 -Original Message-
 From: Randy Bush [mailto:ra...@psg.com] 
 Sent: Monday, October 10, 2011 9:44 AM
 To: Randy Carpenter
 Cc: North American Network Operators' Group
 Subject: Re: meeting network
 
 I would think that the contract with the hotel for the conference
 would include the specific requirements for the network. Is that not
 the case?
 
 underlying problems
 
  o no hotel believe that we'll actually be significantly high use.  
they simply can not conceive of it.  ietf, apricot, ... have
seen this time and time again
 
  o the hotel does not manage the network, so you have two comms hops
to anyone who can do anything.  and anyway, they are not going to
provision more bandwidth
 
 but the problems of which i spoke were the meeting network.  which we
 do supposedly control.
 
 randy
 
 
 



Re: meeting network

2011-10-10 Thread Randy Carpenter

I have been at other conference that have triple or more participants, and it 
has never been anything close to the issues we are having at this hotel. 
Slightly slower performance is expected. Completely not working is not.

-Randy

- Original Message -
 In my historical knowledge of this: there are only so many venues
 that can have 500-650 people and fit.
 
 Jared Mauch
 
 On Oct 10, 2011, at 1:12 PM, Frank Bulk frnk...@iname.com wrote:
 
  Then the RFP for the meeting needs to be more specific with some
  basic SLAs
  that result in a smaller bill if not met.
  
  Frank
  
  -Original Message-
  From: Randy Bush [mailto:ra...@psg.com]
  Sent: Monday, October 10, 2011 9:44 AM
  To: Randy Carpenter
  Cc: North American Network Operators' Group
  Subject: Re: meeting network
  
  I would think that the contract with the hotel for the conference
  would include the specific requirements for the network. Is that
  not
  the case?
  
  underlying problems
  
   o no hotel believe that we'll actually be significantly high use.
 they simply can not conceive of it.  ietf, apricot, ... have
 seen this time and time again
  
   o the hotel does not manage the network, so you have two comms
   hops
 to anyone who can do anything.  and anyway, they are not going
 to
 provision more bandwidth
  
  but the problems of which i spoke were the meeting network.  which
  we
  do supposedly control.
  
  randy
  
  
  
 
 



Re: meeting network

2011-10-10 Thread Christopher Morrow
On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 1:29 PM, Randy Carpenter rcar...@network1.net wrote:

 I have been at other conference that have triple or more participants, and it 
 has never been anything close to the issues we are having at this hotel. 
 Slightly slower performance is expected. Completely not working is not.

hotel or meeting ? (which network are we talking about now?)



Re: meeting network

2011-10-10 Thread Owen DeLong
+1


On Oct 10, 2011, at 10:29 AM, Randy Carpenter wrote:

 
 I have been at other conference that have triple or more participants, and it 
 has never been anything close to the issues we are having at this hotel. 
 Slightly slower performance is expected. Completely not working is not.
 
 -Randy
 
 - Original Message -
 In my historical knowledge of this: there are only so many venues
 that can have 500-650 people and fit.
 
 Jared Mauch
 
 On Oct 10, 2011, at 1:12 PM, Frank Bulk frnk...@iname.com wrote:
 
 Then the RFP for the meeting needs to be more specific with some
 basic SLAs
 that result in a smaller bill if not met.
 
 Frank
 
 -Original Message-
 From: Randy Bush [mailto:ra...@psg.com]
 Sent: Monday, October 10, 2011 9:44 AM
 To: Randy Carpenter
 Cc: North American Network Operators' Group
 Subject: Re: meeting network
 
 I would think that the contract with the hotel for the conference
 would include the specific requirements for the network. Is that
 not
 the case?
 
 underlying problems
 
 o no hotel believe that we'll actually be significantly high use.
   they simply can not conceive of it.  ietf, apricot, ... have
   seen this time and time again
 
 o the hotel does not manage the network, so you have two comms
 hops
   to anyone who can do anything.  and anyway, they are not going
   to
   provision more bandwidth
 
 but the problems of which i spoke were the meeting network.  which
 we
 do supposedly control.
 
 randy
 
 
 
 
 




Re: meeting network

2011-10-10 Thread JC Dill

On 10/10/11 7:00 AM, Owen DeLong wrote:

It would be wise for NANOG to approach future venues and specifically discuss 
these things with the hotel IT departments in question ahead of time so that 
they have some remote chance of being prepared.


I tried this approach many years ago, for a Blogher conference.  The 
hotel's IT people were uncooperative, and incompetent, and they lied 
both about their network design and their equipment capabilities.  I 
have since learned that this is par for the course.  IMHO the only way 
to solve this problem is with big $$$ penalties in the contract, big 
enough that the incompetent IT people realize their jobs are on the line 
and relinquish control so experts can get access and set-up things properly.


Also note - the conference or hotel's IT people will always claim they 
have done this before with no problems even when they haven't.


jc






RE: meeting network

2011-10-10 Thread Menerick, John

Also note - the conference or hotel's IT people will always claim they
have done this before with no problems even when they haven't.

Sounds like a true sales person :)


- John Menerick


From: JC Dill [jcdill.li...@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, October 10, 2011 11:36 AM
Cc: North American Network Operators' Group
Subject: Re: meeting network

On 10/10/11 7:00 AM, Owen DeLong wrote:
 It would be wise for NANOG to approach future venues and specifically discuss 
 these things with the hotel IT departments in question ahead of time so that 
 they have some remote chance of being prepared.

I tried this approach many years ago, for a Blogher conference.  The
hotel's IT people were uncooperative, and incompetent, and they lied
both about their network design and their equipment capabilities.  I
have since learned that this is par for the course.  IMHO the only way
to solve this problem is with big $$$ penalties in the contract, big
enough that the incompetent IT people realize their jobs are on the line
and relinquish control so experts can get access and set-up things properly.

Also note - the conference or hotel's IT people will always claim they
have done this before with no problems even when they haven't.

jc




NOTICE: This email and any attachments may contain confidential and proprietary 
information of NetSuite Inc. and is for the sole use of the intended recipient 
for the stated purpose.  Any improper use or distribution is prohibited.  If 
you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender; do not review, 
copy or distribute; and promptly delete or destroy all transmitted information. 
 Please note that all communications and information transmitted through this 
email system may be monitored by NetSuite or its agents and that all incoming 
email is automatically scanned by a third party spam and filtering service.


RE: meeting network

2011-10-10 Thread Frank Bulk
Holding the last 10% of the meeting room payment seems like a good start for
any venue.

But as others have indicated, the market may be too small for free-market
principles to be fully effective.

Frank

-Original Message-
From: JC Dill [mailto:jcdill.li...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Monday, October 10, 2011 1:36 PM
Cc: North American Network Operators' Group
Subject: Re: meeting network

On 10/10/11 7:00 AM, Owen DeLong wrote:
 It would be wise for NANOG to approach future venues and specifically
discuss these things with the hotel IT departments in question ahead of time
so that they have some remote chance of being prepared.

I tried this approach many years ago, for a Blogher conference.  The 
hotel's IT people were uncooperative, and incompetent, and they lied 
both about their network design and their equipment capabilities.  I 
have since learned that this is par for the course.  IMHO the only way 
to solve this problem is with big $$$ penalties in the contract, big 
enough that the incompetent IT people realize their jobs are on the line 
and relinquish control so experts can get access and set-up things properly.

Also note - the conference or hotel's IT people will always claim they 
have done this before with no problems even when they haven't.

jc









RE: meeting network

2011-10-10 Thread Alex Rubenstein
Years ago, on my own, when I used to attend, I used to call the venue about a 
month in advance and explain to them what was about to happen. Sort of a 
warning, per say. I explained, in detail, who NANOG was comprised of (I often 
would use the term operators of the internet). I explained even if they think 
they have seen this before, they haven't.

Some listened. Some didn't.

This would be something I would be willing to volunteer my time with - 
discussions with, and negotiations with, venues. It's all in the approach.




 Holding the last 10% of the meeting room payment seems like a good
 start for any venue.
 
 But as others have indicated, the market may be too small for free-
 market principles to be fully effective.
 
 
 I tried this approach many years ago, for a Blogher conference.  The
 hotel's IT people were uncooperative, and incompetent, and they lied
 both about their network design and their equipment capabilities.  I
 have since learned that this is par for the course.  IMHO the only way
 to solve this problem is with big $$$ penalties in the contract, big
 enough that the incompetent IT people realize their jobs are on the
 line
 and relinquish control so experts can get access and set-up things
 properly.
 
 Also note - the conference or hotel's IT people will always claim they
 have done this before with no problems even when they haven't.
 
 jc



Re: meeting network

2011-10-10 Thread Jay Ashworth
- Original Message -
 From: Christopher Morrow morrowc.li...@gmail.com

 As to the hotel room wifi... apparently when you have 490 rooms in the
 hotel (full) and only provision your internal NAT space as a /23 ...
 things work 'fine' most days. When a networking conference comes to
 visit with 3+ devices requiring IP in each room... the whole hotel
 network stops :( Last night the display systems in the lobby and the
 hotel registration machines were all broken :( The hotel's network
 people (in NYC) are supposedly 'on a fix', who knows... (is expanding
 the nat subnet THAT hard?)

So who comes to a conference like this without a crossband router running WRT 
in repeater mode, with 11a on the back side?  :-)

Cheers,
-- jra
-- 
Jay R. Ashworth  Baylink   j...@baylink.com
Designer The Things I Think   RFC 2100
Ashworth  Associates http://baylink.pitas.com 2000 Land Rover DII
St Petersburg FL USA  http://photo.imageinc.us +1 727 647 1274



Re: meeting network

2011-10-10 Thread Jay Ashworth
- Original Message -
 From: Owen DeLong o...@delong.com

 It would be wise for NANOG to approach future venues and specifically
 discuss these things with the hotel IT departments in question ahead
 of time so that they have some remote chance of being prepared.

It is nearly never the hotel's IT department, in any sizable property;
they've generally farmed it out to someone who Does That, and they often 
haven't even any Bog Red Switches to push when things break.

Cheers,
-- jra
-- 
Jay R. Ashworth  Baylink   j...@baylink.com
Designer The Things I Think   RFC 2100
Ashworth  Associates http://baylink.pitas.com 2000 Land Rover DII
St Petersburg FL USA  http://photo.imageinc.us +1 727 647 1274



Re: meeting network

2011-10-10 Thread Owen DeLong
I don't think it is. I think that you can negotiate and I will point out that 
the hotel
here has wanted our business enough that they have now scrambled to make
life significantly better. You can also bet I'll be demanding that they credit 
my
$54 that I put on the in-room access be credited to my bill even though ARIN 
would
pay it.

I routinely do this when the conference network (or the in-room network) sucks 
and it's provided by the hotel. I have yet to have one refuse my refund request.

Owen

On Oct 10, 2011, at 3:41 PM, Frank Bulk wrote:

 Holding the last 10% of the meeting room payment seems like a good start for
 any venue.
 
 But as others have indicated, the market may be too small for free-market
 principles to be fully effective.
 
 Frank
 
 -Original Message-
 From: JC Dill [mailto:jcdill.li...@gmail.com] 
 Sent: Monday, October 10, 2011 1:36 PM
 Cc: North American Network Operators' Group
 Subject: Re: meeting network
 
 On 10/10/11 7:00 AM, Owen DeLong wrote:
 It would be wise for NANOG to approach future venues and specifically
 discuss these things with the hotel IT departments in question ahead of time
 so that they have some remote chance of being prepared.
 
 I tried this approach many years ago, for a Blogher conference.  The 
 hotel's IT people were uncooperative, and incompetent, and they lied 
 both about their network design and their equipment capabilities.  I 
 have since learned that this is par for the course.  IMHO the only way 
 to solve this problem is with big $$$ penalties in the contract, big 
 enough that the incompetent IT people realize their jobs are on the line 
 and relinquish control so experts can get access and set-up things properly.
 
 Also note - the conference or hotel's IT people will always claim they 
 have done this before with no problems even when they haven't.
 
 jc
 
 
 
 
 
 




Re: meeting network

2011-10-10 Thread Christopher Morrow
On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 11:36 PM, Owen DeLong o...@delong.com wrote:
 I don't think it is. I think that you can negotiate and I will point out that 
 the hotel
 here has wanted our business enough that they have now scrambled to make
 life significantly better. You can also bet I'll be demanding that they 
 credit my
 $54 that I put on the in-room access be credited to my bill even though ARIN 
 would
 pay it.


I think the in-room wireless is actually supposed to already be
creditted back at exit...



Re: meeting network

2011-10-10 Thread Joel jaeggli
On 10/10/11 21:25 , Christopher Morrow wrote:
 On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 11:36 PM, Owen DeLong o...@delong.com wrote:
 I don't think it is. I think that you can negotiate and I will point out 
 that the hotel
 here has wanted our business enough that they have now scrambled to make
 life significantly better. You can also bet I'll be demanding that they 
 credit my
 $54 that I put on the in-room access be credited to my bill even though ARIN 
 would
 pay it.

 
 I think the in-room wireless is actually supposed to already be
 creditted back at exit...

nanog generally in the past attempted to negotiate it as part of the
room block. that does not apply however to the other hotel guests. who
are just as hosed when the nomadix blows up.





Re: meeting network

2011-10-10 Thread Joel jaeggli
On 10/10/11 07:00 , Owen DeLong wrote:

 It would be wise for NANOG to approach future venues and specifically
 discuss these things with the hotel IT departments in question ahead
 of time so that they have some remote chance of being prepared.

The hotel IT department is the guy who runs the as400 that gets
reservations from corprate, and runs the POS terminals.

the room-net is by-in-large run by a third party such as lodgenet.

 Owen