Creation of working groups within NANOG
Dave O'Leary and I were discussing how large the attendance at the Ann Arbor NANOG had become and musing on how a single forum for NANOG was becoming somewhat unwieldy, if not less effective. What is the feeling of the NANOG participants (and the Merit folks) of modifying the NANOG meeting format, and creating different working groups? This would accomplish various goals: o Allow smaller, more focused groups; o Allow discussion/debate/presentations on more topics; o Cater to specialized interests & disciplines; o Reduce the number of humans in a single room at any one given time. ;-) One of the downsides to this approach is that it would require meeting sites to have facilities with more than just a large auditorium (ie. real conference rooms, or something resembling them anyway). Although I hesitate to mention this, it has been suggested that some/most of the work being conducted in the Operations Area of the IETF should be conducted in regional forums such as NANOG, APRICOT, RIPE, etc. I'm not really sure how this would all work out, but I thought it was certainly worth mentioning & worthy of discussion. - paul
What is the feeling of the NANOG participants (and the Merit folks) of modifying the NANOG meeting format, and creating different working groups?
I think it would be a win. I was lucky enough to attend both RIPE and NANOG this last round, and I thought that RIPE was much more productive. ...arun --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Arun Welch 5000 Arlington Centre Blvd Lead Engineer, Internet R&D Columbus, OH 43220 CompuServe awelch@compuserve.net
participants (2)
-
Arun Welch
-
Paul Ferguson