On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 6:18 AM, Rich Kulawiec <rsk@gsp.org> wrote:
On Sun, Apr 13, 2008 at 03:55:13PM -0500, Ross wrote:
Again I disagree with the principle that this list should be used for mail operation issues but maybe I'm just in the wrong here.
I don't think you're getting what I'm saying, although perhaps I'm not saying it very well.
What I'm saying is that operational staff should be *listening* to relevant lists (of which this is one) and that operational staff should be *talking* on lists relevant to their particular issue(s).
Completely agree.
Clearly, NANOG is probably not the best place for most SMTP or HTTP issues, but some of the time, when those issues appear related to topics appropriate for NANOG, it might be. The rest of the time, the mailop list is probably more appropriate.
While I prefer to see topics discussed in the "best place" (where there is considerable debate over what that might be) I think that things have gotten so bad that I'm willing to settle for, in the short term, "a place", because it's easier to redirect a converation once it's underway that it seems to be to start one.
For example: the silence from Yahoo on this very thread is deafening.
I think if you check historically, you'll find that Yahoo network operations team members are doing exactly as you indicate, and are "*talking* on lists relevant to their particular issue(s)" that is to say, here on NANOG, when it comes to networking issues, deafening silence has not been the modus operandus. The mistaken notion that a *network operations* list should have people on it to address mail server response code complaints is where I disagree with you. Ask about a BGP leakage, it'll get fixed. Enquire about how to engage in peering with Yahoo, you'll get flooded with answers; those are items the folks who read the list are empowered to deal with. Asking about topics not related to the list that they aren't empowered to deal with are going to be met with silence, because you're trying to talk to the wrong people in the wrong forum.
---Rsk
Matt --always speaking for himself--his employer is more likely to pay him to shut up.