On Mon, 13 Oct 2003, Richard A Steenbergen wrote:
Is it just me, or could nanog really benefit from being moderated, or at least nanog-post being access controlled? God knows why I've kept skimming it even after the majority of actual clueful network operators have long
Are you volunteering to be the moderator? Moderation is alot of work, and/or would slow the list down to a crawl. Perhaps limiting who can post would be somewhat useful though. Perhaps only people actually operating "real networks", where "real networks" are somehow defined by their size or their participation in BGP.
From here, shazad@eservers.biz looks like a relatively small colo customer. What's he looking at big switches for? More importantly, does anyone care?
As long as I'm ranting, what about all the recent "could someone with clue from Network X please contact me privately?" posts? If I was that person at Network X, I'd want to know what your issue was before I bothered contacting you (very few of these posts have included any problem description)...both so that I could look at the problem (if there was one) before contacting you, so that I could have the appropriate person contact you (if I'm not it), and so I could not waste the time if you're trying to contact me about an issue (or non-issue) you have no business wasting my time with. network:Class-Name:network network:ID:332.209.51.128.0/19 network:Auth-Area:209.51.128.0/19 network:Network-Name:eservers-00037-01 network:IP-Network:209.51.159.224/29 network:Organization;I:eServers dot biz network:Tech-Contact;I:engineering@gnax.net network:Admin-Contact;I:664.dv2.net network:Created:20020906 network:Updated:20020906 network:Updated-By:engineering@gnax.net ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Jon Lewis *jlewis@lewis.org*| I route Senior Network Engineer | therefore you are Atlantic Net | _________ http://www.lewis.org/~jlewis/pgp for PGP public key_________