Likely /8 Scenario - Carriers will TAKE what they want ?
Likely /8 Scenario - Carriers will TAKE what they want ? As /8s are needed by Carriers (not ISPs) they will likely be able to just take them. Who will stop them. They have the Imperial Walker Routers & Gear. http://www.iana.org/assignments/ipv4-address-space/ipv4-address-space.txt http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walker_%28Star_Wars%29
Might want to save the we're-all-going-to-die for nanog-lounge or whatever was created and leave the more likely operational scenarios here. Just sayin' </kanye> -J On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 2:53 PM, IPv3.com <ipv3.com@gmail.com> wrote:
Likely /8 Scenario - Carriers will TAKE what they want ?
As /8s are needed by Carriers (not ISPs) they will likely be able to just take them. Who will stop them. They have the Imperial Walker Routers & Gear.
http://www.iana.org/assignments/ipv4-address-space/ipv4-address-space.txt
On 4/8/10 1:07 PM, Jack Carrozzo wrote:
Might want to save the we're-all-going-to-die for nanog-lounge or whatever was created and leave the more likely operational scenarios here.
Just sayin'</kanye>
Guillaume Fortaine v2.0, IMHO. :-) -- Brielle Bruns The Summit Open Source Development Group http://www.sosdg.org / http://www.ahbl.org
and what makes you think that there is anyone looking after the mailing lists any more. There have been few network operational threads in recent months, and the Jim Fleming IPv3 bot is given free rein on the NANOG lists. Go look at the traffic for nanaog-futures this month. 100% of the postings are from Fleming. Soon he will be telling us about how IPv16 is one better than IPv6 or that the average domain name should only be four letters long. In fact, although the postings seem loony, I think they are really an attempt to drive traffic to his various sites in order to earn money from Google AdSense and similar schemes. On 8 April 2010 20:07, Jack Carrozzo <jack@crepinc.com> wrote:
Might want to save the we're-all-going-to-die for nanog-lounge or whatever was created and leave the more likely operational scenarios here.
Just sayin' </kanye>
-J
On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 2:53 PM, IPv3.com <ipv3.com@gmail.com> wrote:
Likely /8 Scenario - Carriers will TAKE what they want ?
As /8s are needed by Carriers (not ISPs) they will likely be able to just take them. Who will stop them. They have the Imperial Walker Routers & Gear.
http://www.iana.org/assignments/ipv4-address-space/ipv4-address-space.txt
On Apr 8, 2010, at 5:03 PM, Michael Dillon wrote:
and what makes you think that there is anyone looking after the mailing lists any more. There have been few network operational threads in recent months, and the Jim Fleming IPv3 bot is given free rein on the NANOG lists.
[snip] I guarantee you the Communications Committee is on the job. What's more, they are doing a GREAT job - for no money and apparently no gratitude. It is worse than thankless, no matter what they do they will be derided. Filter someone and they get flamed. Leave someone allowed to post and they get reamed. I'm shocked anyone would actually want the job. So, I propose a new rule: To flame the CC, you MUST have volunteered to be on the CC. IOW: Put up or shut up. Since I have not volunteered to be on the CC, and would not serve if asked, I will only thank them profusely and beg them not to give up amid the criticism they constantly receive. Thank you Communications Committee Members! -- TTFN, patrick
I guarantee you the Communications Committee is on the job. What's more, they are doing a GREAT job - for no money and apparently no gratitude. It is worse than thankless, no matter what they do they will be derided. Filter someone and they get flamed. Leave someone allowed to post and they get reamed. I'm shocked anyone would actually want the job.
So why can't the Communications Committee do a little communicating. Sure it's thankless work if you do it in secret and in silence. But the occasional message to the list wouldn't hurt. People WOULD feel thankful if they see that the CC is making an attempt.
So, I propose a new rule: To flame the CC, you MUST have volunteered to be on the CC.
Right, so you are an unvolunteer on the CC. Why do we only hear from unvolunteers? --Michael Dillon
On Apr 8, 2010, at 6:39 45PM, Michael Dillon wrote:
I guarantee you the Communications Committee is on the job. What's more, they are doing a GREAT job - for no money and apparently no gratitude. It is worse than thankless, no matter what they do they will be derided. Filter someone and they get flamed. Leave someone allowed to post and they get reamed. I'm shocked anyone would actually want the job.
So why can't the Communications Committee do a little communicating. Sure it's thankless work if you do it in secret and in silence. But the occasional message to the list wouldn't hurt. People WOULD feel thankful if they see that the CC is making an attempt.
So, I propose a new rule: To flame the CC, you MUST have volunteered to be on the CC.
Right, so you are an unvolunteer on the CC. Why do we only hear from unvolunteers?
There are some benefits to them not acting too quickly -- I finally had enough motivation to figure out what the bugs were in my "plonk" script... --Steve Bellovin, http://www.cs.columbia.edu/~smb
[Reply-to set.] On Apr 8, 2010, at 6:39 PM, Michael Dillon wrote:
I guarantee you the Communications Committee is on the job. What's more, they are doing a GREAT job - for no money and apparently no gratitude. It is worse than thankless, no matter what they do they will be derided. Filter someone and they get flamed. Leave someone allowed to post and they get reamed. I'm shocked anyone would actually want the job.
So why can't the Communications Committee do a little communicating.
What would you have them say? I am not at all certain commenting publicly on individual posters is a good idea. So should they say "yeah, we've read the blather too, and we're .. uh .. " what? Also, the CC is required to at least skim every post. So believe me, they know what is happening - more than most since they can't plonk the k00ks. Oh, and feeding the trolls only makes their job harder. Perhaps you could pitch in by resisting temptation? Perhaps ALL of you could pitch in? :) -- TTFN, patrick
-----Original Message----- From: Michael Dillon [mailto:wavetossed@googlemail.com] Sent: Thursday, April 08, 2010 3:40 PM To: NANOG list Subject: Re: Cheers to the Communication Committee [was: Likely /8 Scenario - Carriers will TAKE what they want ?]
I guarantee you the Communications Committee is on the job. What's more, they are doing a GREAT job - for no money and apparently no gratitude. It is worse than thankless, no matter what they do they will be derided. Filter someone and they get flamed. Leave someone allowed to post and they get reamed. I'm shocked anyone would actually want the job.
So why can't the Communications Committee do a little communicating. Sure it's thankless work if you do it in secret and in silence. But the occasional message to the list wouldn't hurt. People WOULD feel thankful if they see that the CC is making an attempt.
So, I propose a new rule: To flame the CC, you MUST have volunteered to be on the CC.
Right, so you are an unvolunteer on the CC. Why do we only hear from unvolunteers?
Hello: The Communications Committee follows a published procedure for handling violations of the AUP, found at http://www.nanog.org/governance/communications/warningpolicy.php. The process is not instantaneous, but is designed to insure we are not acting with undue haste when taking action against a particular list participant. We are always open to suggestions and comments regarding the process and the best forum for that is nanog-futures. This is also an appropriate venue for discussing the idea of more formal and/or frequent notifications from the Communications Committee regarding actions we have taken. Kind Regards, Michael Smith On behalf of the Communications Committee
participants (7)
-
Brielle Bruns -
IPv3.com -
Jack Carrozzo -
Michael Dillon -
Michael K. Smith - Adhost -
Patrick W. Gilmore -
Steven Bellovin