(I dislike meta-discussion, but since it /is/ applicable to the list...) Thus spake Sean Donelan (sean@donelan.com) [09/10/03 21:32]:
Susan did not say it wasn't an operational issue. She said there are other lists which focus on that issue.
Agreed.
There are many subjects of interest to operators which occasionally flare up on NANOG, but then move to other lists. BIND issues concern network operations, but a namedroppers list exists for the topic. Peering is of operational interest, but the model-peer mailing list exists for the topic. Network time synchronization if of interest to operators but then the ntp newsgroup exists for the topic. Network security is of interest to operators, but then nsp security mailing lists exists for the topic. Address hijacking is of interest to operators, but then the hijack mailing list exists for the topic.
So if there's a more specific list for every operational issue, should we just shift discussion off to those lists? Should NANOG exist simply as a live resource for 'What mailing list should I consult for ...'?