After recent events, may I propose the ultimate NANOG thread.. NANOG User: Message Richard A Steenbergen: Can we keep this off-topic crap off NANOG? Gadi Evron: That message is deeply relevant to us all. I can't understand what your porblme is. Sean Donelan: Fascinating, User. I suppose ISSUE would be different if you were running a NETWORK and using ROUTER. Christopher L. Morrow: I think you have a point, Sean, but can you try not to engage with this? ISSUE is definitely off topic. RAS: Only Auntie Jane on a crappy Windows box would have ISSUE anyway. Donelan/Evron/Morrow in chorus: But Jane is our customer. RAS/Bill Manning together: Get a clue! Valdis Kletnieks: NANOG User said: <<<<<< <<<<< <<<< <<<< <<< <<< << <snip> We had ISSUE on a DEVICE in our FACILITY back in 2004. Have you got the DATA?

...

...

. ... .>>>

Of course all this wouldn't be a problem if STANDARDS BODY had got a clue and decided to implement PROPOSAL. NANOG User: *pastes 86 hop tracert, last week's BGP update log and half the CIDR report* Valdis/RAS/Evron/Bill/Morrow: Couldn't you have sent that offlist? Get a clue! NANOG User: I'm sorry if I offended your refined sensibilities. Who do you think you are? Random Lurker desperately seeking status: Bill is right. This is the Network Operators' list. RAS: Anyway, PROPOSAL would have been a good idea, but nobody was ever going to deploy it. We ought to go straight to IPVersionX. All: IP Version X?? Get a clue! Valdis: Only someone who thinks we ought to go back to ATM would support that Bellhead POS. From a network architecture perspective, it's plain stupid. Evron: You obviously have no idea of how the botnets would exploit that. Bill: Gadi, that's off topic. Morrow: No, it's not. Third-world ISP operator: Hello, I've got SERIOUS PROBLEM on my network in POOR COUNTRY and no money. Can anyone advise on how we can fix it? Thanks Randy Bush: I can't read your message. It's got capital letters in it. Anyway, I think we need to get back to some operational content. Fergie: Hey guys, this looks interesting - <a href="http://link.to.newsstory">Chinese scientists teach monkey to write technical manual</a> Randy Bush: I can't read your message. It's got HTML in it. Valdis: RFCx says you can have capital letters AND links in your e-mail. Randy: I don't care. Evron: Major security alert! Morrow: Bullshit. RAS: No, that is on topic. Donelan: Probably more suited to LIST, but it certainly has consequences for support costs. NANOG User: Why does Sean always take RAS's side like this? Peter Dambier: It's because of the 2004 Olympics that all e-mail has to be routed to the European Commission so the SS7 signalling can be screened for correct geopolitical routing. I can see this because my traceroute is broken! << <<< <<,<< ,<< <<< <, User, I think your ISSUE could be resolved by WILDLY IMPRACTICAL SOLUTION, as long as you use an alternate root server. Valdis: Peter, you're insane. Peter Dambier: The psychiatric-industrial complex denounces all victims of ICANN mind control as "mentally ill"! Resist the empire now! NANOG User: Is that on topic for NANOG? All: That is on topic/That is off topic! Bill: Well, I think he's got a point about ICANN. RAS: They're nowhere near as bad as ARIN, though. I only wanted another /8 and it took me three whole weeks! All: Swine! Donelan: ARIN's never been a problem for me. Another NANOG User: STUPID REMARK about evil state bureaucracies forcing their eurosexual communism on us. Buy guns! Evron: So who should assign IPs? AT&T? Get a clue! Randy Bush: You would say that. Anyway, I think WILDLY IMPRACTICAL SOLUTION is actually quite a good idea, except for the alternate root bit. Back at RESEARCH CENTRE in the 1970s, Vint Cerf and I tried something similar. Bill: Namedropper! Moderator@mitre.edu: I think this thread should be moved to NANOG-FUTURES. RAS: Why isn't there a NANOG-CRAP? Moderator@mitre.edu: Are you sure there isn't? Morrow: Anyone else seeing high latency to TELCO in CITY? Crickets: chirping Random Lurker, still hoping one of the silverbacks will show him some love: So, what about IPVersion Y? All: That's not operational! *thread peters out in howling clue vacuum*