Gentlemen,
In the last 6 weeks I have noticed a major drop off in nanog postings. Im
not complaining as we all know how many posts we go a day. Recently I
almost miss the number of posts :). What I am a great deal concerned
about is that a request numerous times to "watch what you post" as well as
scoldings on the list have made people gunshy.
I for one would rather have someone concerned about an outage post it. It
may just be the one network such as exodus or it may be related to a large
problem and concern several backbones. I have found that the NANOG list
often has better and quicker information during an outage then many telcos.
Maybe the exodus post was or was not off topic. But I'd rather see that
then a bunch of posts discussing whether or not it was on/off-topic.
As for on-topic maybe we could now start a few threads on backbone issues.
So with the holiday spirit I say just be just a "little" kind...
David
At 5:59 PM -0500 1/3/99, Chris Mauritz wrote:
>Personally, I think it's useful to report outages with any outfit that meets
>the nebulous moniker of "Tier 1" provider as it can have far reaching
>consequences. While it's still important to contact the affected network's
>NOC, I don't see how it's out of line to post a short note about it here.
>I'd certainly value that a lot more than the Alistat circle jerkage and I
>suspect it wouldn't add a lot of traffic to the list.
>
>Chris
>
>Chris Mauritz
>Director, Systems Administration/Network Engineering
>Rare Medium, Inc.
>chrism(a)raremedium.com
>
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Derek Balling
>To: Stephen Stuart
>Cc: nanog(a)merit.edu
>Sent: 1/3/99 5:24 PM
>Subject: Re: What is NANOG used for? (Was Re: Exodus?)
>
>>In the last week, there have been discussions of telco issues (the
>>"DACS failure" thread) and tools (the "System And Network Monitoring"
>>thread) that seem to have been generally received as on-topic.
>
>But why WAS the System and Network Monitoring thread on-topic? As the
>"creator" of that topic, I'd like to think it was, but in reality, all
>it
>would really "affect" is a single provider. Asking how someone else
>monitors their internal network is very similar to asking someone how
>they
>configure their DNS server.
>
>I'm not saying that you're WRONG. My point here is that we really don't
>have any clear-cut guidelines. The old adage about "if I can't program
>it
>into my router, its not valid" would certainly flunk out the Monitoring
>topic, that's for sure, since the main thrust of the request was how to
>monitor individual servers (albeit about a thousand of them).
>
>
>>I'd MUCH prefer two meaningful messages to a dozen complaints from
>>people who don't know how to contact a NOC or configure DNS.
>
>Agreed. I'd much prefer low-volume-high-signal to the opposite.
>
>I just think we have a "charter" as it were that is a little too vague,
>and
>leaves too much up for debate as to what is on/off-topic.
>
>I mean, you can state what you did about what you think is on/off-topic,
>and I might agree with you, but the charter is much more vague, and
>leads
>itself to ambiguity.
>
>I hate rules and regulations as much as the next guy, but I think it
>needs
>to be spelled out somewhere much more clearly than it already is. That's
>all.
>
>My point wasn't to claim that the Exodus topic necessarily WAS on-topic,
>but that there's nothing that clearly states it WASN'T. Ya follow?
>
>D
Thank you,
David Diaz
Chief Technical Officer
Netrail, Inc
email: davediaz(a)netrail.net
pager: 888-576-1018
office: 888-NETRAIL
Fax: 404 522-2191
Colo facilities: Atlanta-NAP, Miami, Arlington, Chicago, San Francisco
-------------------------------------------------
