On Wed, 15 Feb 2006 16:56:51 +0000 (GMT), "Edward B. DREGER" <eddy+public+spam@noc.everquick.net> said: [snip]
Per, I'd like to take exception with your "exclude small companies" remark. This thread is about tighter engineering and ops involvement, so why shoot down those who have the two tightly coupled? Why eschew people who work both sides of the fence?
Sorry, the following sentence came out all wrong due to last minute cutnpaste: Most nanog'ers, with the exception of those representing small companies which don't separate engineering from operations, belong in the engineering category anyway. ...quite the opposite of what I ment to say. Most nanog'ers work in engineering. The problem is a lack of ops-people turning these xOG-groups ito xEG-groups instead. PS! I prefer tight integration of operations and engineering. I'd say it's good for engineering-staff to do ops-work from time to time (eat their own dog food;). Organisations that practise job-rotation generally have the better solutions. //per -- Per Heldal http://heldal.eml.cc/