Interesting social phenomenon...
Why are so many people (who should know better!) posting "why is the Internet broken" messages to NANOG? I mean, it's not like the mail is going to get delivered until AFTER the problem is fixed! Kinda reminds me of the individuals who show up in the IETF terminal room unable to configure TCP/IP on their Win95 laptop. Come on people, THINK. E-mail is not an efficient way of discussing an outage in progress! ---Rob
I find it interesting that every time there is discussion on NANOG that actually is pertinent to network operations, someone feels the need to point out that it is somehow inappropriate for this list. By the time I saw messages related to as7007 I had already diagnosed the problem, but I don't see anything inappropriate about discussing it here. Jim
Why are so many people (who should know better!) posting "why is the Internet broken" messages to NANOG? I mean, it's not like the mail is going to get delivered until AFTER the problem is fixed!
Kinda reminds me of the individuals who show up in the IETF terminal room unable to configure TCP/IP on their Win95 laptop.
Come on people, THINK. E-mail is not an efficient way of discussing an outage in progress!
---Rob
From: Jim Van Baalen <vansax@atmnet.net> By the time I saw messages related to as7007 I had already diagnosed the problem By definition. My point precisely. but I don't see anything inappropriate about discussing it here. There's a difference between discussing how to keep it from happening again (routing registries and filters have been alluded to in the past and maybe they'll get additional consideration from certain entities this time), and concluding that since you haven't seen any mail related to the outage you must be the first person to notice it and immediately sending off mail so you'll impress your fellow NANOG readers with your razor-sharp network debugging skills (no this is obviously not directed at you, but if you took a guess on targets you just might be right). Note that I didn't pass any judgement on appropriateness in my message. What I intended to convey is that maybe, just maybe, the reason that you haven't seen any mail about the network being broken is, in some way, attributable to the fact that the network is broken. And people should cogitate on that one before composing an email message. That's all. ---Rob
Kinda reminds me of the individuals who show up in the IETF terminal room unable to configure TCP/IP on their Win95 laptop.
a guy sat down next to at the last one, looked at the screen and said 'we have to use unix?'. I directed him to the peecees. gaak
Come on people, THINK. E-mail is not an efficient way of discussing an outage in progress!
true, but it makes for interesting post-mortem reading... what other means do we have? Let's see there's the telephone, but it's unicast. How about teevee, that's broadcast :) Humourously, Joel (who's in a good mood 'cause he used the downtime to install junkbuster)
But it is great if you need to explain stuff to connected clients. Just forward a message from nanog... Dirk On Fri, 25 Apr 1997, Robert E. Seastrom wrote:
Why are so many people (who should know better!) posting "why is the Internet broken" messages to NANOG? I mean, it's not like the mail is going to get delivered until AFTER the problem is fixed!
Kinda reminds me of the individuals who show up in the IETF terminal room unable to configure TCP/IP on their Win95 laptop.
Come on people, THINK. E-mail is not an efficient way of discussing an outage in progress!
---Rob
On Fri, 25 Apr 1997, Robert E. Seastrom wrote:
Why are so many people (who should know better!) posting "why is the Internet broken" messages to NANOG? I mean, it's not like the mail is going to get delivered until AFTER the problem is fixed!
It's not so important when the FYI type messages get delivered ? Because they are just that, FYI.
Kinda reminds me of the individuals who show up in the IETF terminal room unable to configure TCP/IP on their Win95 laptop.
Come on people, THINK. E-mail is not an efficient way of discussing an outage in progress!
---Rob
Ismat.
participants (5)
-
Dirk Harms-Merbitz -
ipashaï¼ teleglobe.net -
Jim Van Baalen -
Joel Gallun -
Robert E. Seastrom