Re: [Nanog-futures] level of fail

2008-02-26 Thread Gregory Hicks
> Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2008 10:03:15 +0900 > From: Adrian Chadd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > On Tue, Feb 26, 2008, Christian Nielsen wrote: > > >From personal experience, it is easier to attend Nanog 1000 miles > > >away than 10 miles away. Work/Family pull me away when close to > > >home. > > I think P

Re: [Nanog-futures] level of fail [was: The Peering BOF and the Fallout?]

2008-02-26 Thread Adrian Chadd
On Tue, Feb 26, 2008, Christian Nielsen wrote: > >From personal experience, it is easier to attend Nanog 1000 miles away than > >10 miles away. Work/Family pull me away when close to home. I think Perth, Western Australia is about as far from anywhere else in the Western World you can get. I'd be

Re: [Nanog-futures] level of fail [was: The Peering BOF and the Fallout?]

2008-02-26 Thread Scott Weeks
--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 26-Feb-2008, at 15:53, Joel Jaeggli wrote: >> Hey, I thought we were all about counting remote attendees as real >> people? :-) > > It's slightly harder with bofs that aren't broadcast or recorded. Oh, true. :-) --

Re: [Nanog-futures] level of fail [was: The Peering BOF and the Fallout?]

2008-02-26 Thread Joe Abley
On 26-Feb-2008, at 15:53, Joel Jaeggli wrote: > Joe Abley wrote: >> On 26-Feb-2008, at 08:57, Todd Underwood wrote: >>> hrm. just a quick reality check. that reason is now stated :-) and >>> you *didn't* attend this past nanog when it was <10 miles away from >>> where you live. right? >> Hey,

Re: [Nanog-futures] level of fail [was: The Peering BOF and the Fallout?]

2008-02-26 Thread Joel Jaeggli
Joe Abley wrote: > On 26-Feb-2008, at 08:57, Todd Underwood wrote: > >> hrm. just a quick reality check. that reason is now stated :-) and >> you *didn't* attend this past nanog when it was <10 miles away from >> where you live. right? > > Hey, I thought we were all about counting remote atten

Re: [Nanog-futures] level of fail [was: The Peering BOF and the Fallout?]

2008-02-26 Thread Joe Abley
On 26-Feb-2008, at 08:57, Todd Underwood wrote: > hrm. just a quick reality check. that reason is now stated :-) and > you *didn't* attend this past nanog when it was <10 miles away from > where you live. right? Hey, I thought we were all about counting remote attendees as real people? :-)

Re: [Nanog-futures] level of fail [was: The Peering BOF and the Fallout?]

2008-02-26 Thread Christian Nielsen
>From personal experience, it is easier to attend Nanog 1000 miles away than 10 >miles away. Work/Family pull me away when close to home. Chrisitan From: Todd Underwood [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2008 5:57 AM To: vijay gill Cc: Nanog Fu

Re: [Nanog-futures] level of fail [was: The Peering BOF and the Fallout?]

2008-02-26 Thread Todd Underwood
vijay, On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 08:08:54PM -0800, vijay gill wrote: > >The peering bof is a great medium for facilitating intercommunication in a >semi structured environment, interactivity is high, and frankly, the >peering bof is one of the large unstated reason I come to NANOG > at