Re: Phone networks struggle in Hurricane Katrina's wake
I'll file that comment where it belongs -- in file 13. If a major catastrophe, albeit more human than network-related (although lots of network-related issues here, too), isn't on-topic, than I fail to see what is. - ferg -- Richard A Steenbergen <ras@e-gerbil.net> wrote: Did I miss the memo announcing the Slashdot commentary section had been extended to the NANOG mailing list? It is one thing to expand on a story with useful insights, but this entire thread is just restating the obvious for the sake of hearing your own voice (or the digital equivalent thereof). If I wanted to read the uninformed reactions of random people to random news stories wondering why cell phone circuits fill up during natural disasters I would go to slashdot and click "Read More...". This stuff doesn't even come close to being NANOG worthy, let alone on-topic or appropriate. -- "Fergie", a.k.a. Paul Ferguson Engineering Architecture for the Internet fergdawg@netzero.net or fergdawg@sbcglobal.net ferg's tech blog: http://fergdawg.blogspot.com/
----- Original Message ----- From: "Fergie (Paul Ferguson)" <fergdawg@netzero.net> To: <ras@e-gerbil.net> Cc: <nanog@merit.edu> Sent: Tuesday, August 30, 2005 9:22 PM Subject: Re: Phone networks struggle in Hurricane Katrina's wake
I'll file that comment where it belongs -- in file 13.
If a major catastrophe, albeit more human than network-related (although lots of network-related issues here, too), isn't on-topic, than I fail to see what is.
operational material maybe? nah, i'm just a confused lurker, haven't seen any of it here for a while. -p --- paul galynin
I'll file that comment where it belongs -- in file 13.
manners, paul
If a major catastrophe, albeit more human than network-related (although lots of network-related issues here, too), isn't on-topic, than I fail to see what is. operational material maybe? nah, i'm just a confused lurker, haven't seen any of it here for a while.
the steering committee has been discussing the idea of a nanog blog. of course it would be directed to operational content and not your daily pointer to some cartoon etc. but, in the spirit of an open group, we are very interested to hear what the community thinks of this. but please let's discuss it over on nanog-futures@nanog.org. HINT! randy
On Tue, Aug 30, 2005 at 03:48:52PM -1000, Randy Bush wrote:
the steering committee has been discussing the idea of a nanog blog. of course it would be directed to operational content and not your daily pointer to some cartoon etc.
Manners, Randy. Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth jra@baylink.com Designer Baylink RFC 2100 Ashworth & Associates The Things I Think '87 e24 St Petersburg FL USA http://baylink.pitas.com +1 727 647 1274 "NPR has a lot in common with Nascar... we both turn to the left." - Peter Sagal, on Wait Wait, Don't Tell Me!
On Wed, Aug 31, 2005 at 01:22:13AM +0000, Fergie (Paul Ferguson) wrote:
I'll file that comment where it belongs -- in file 13.
If a major catastrophe, albeit more human than network-related (although lots of network-related issues here, too), isn't on-topic, than I fail to see what is.
North American Network Operations perhaps? Talking about the impact to networks is on-topic, talking about steps being taken to protect or restore networks is on-topic, talking about networking infrastructure as it relates to the public communications infrastructure is on-topic during an event like this. Replying to idiotic slashdot articles asking really stupid questions is not on topic. Telling the entire NANOG reader base that you like your POTS line and will never switch to VoIP is not on topic. Technically speaking a human tragedy isn't even on topic. Like I said, it might be different if there was some actual insight being provided here. If someone was talking about some specific data relating to the reliability of the infrastructure or otherwise something OPERATIONAL to talk about that would be one thing, but this is not operational, this is simply chatter. Chatter has its place, that is why people read Slashdot and watch the news, but replacing an operational mailing list with the slashdot commentary section and seeing what happens is not my or anyone else's idea of a good time. -- Richard A Steenbergen <ras@e-gerbil.net> http://www.e-gerbil.net/ras GPG Key ID: 0xF8B12CBC (7535 7F59 8204 ED1F CC1C 53AF 4C41 5ECA F8B1 2CBC)
On Wed, 31 Aug 2005, Fergie (Paul Ferguson) wrote:
I'll file that comment where it belongs -- in file 13.
If a major catastrophe, albeit more human than network-related (although lots of network-related issues here, too), isn't on-topic, than I fail to see what is.
The danger here is that if real operational questions needed to be asked (like, "my router is under water, can somebody help get my network back online?" as a hypothetical example), they might get lost in the noise. At the same time, there is plenty of information out there that makes it easier to operate networks, and it is useful if that information gets shared. And, humans experiencing an unfolding disaster, or even watching from a distance, may be under a lot of stress, and asking them not to reach out to whatever communities they're part of is probably pretty futile. The key is striking the right balance, and that means the usual request to list members to please think before you post. So, for those of you who have infrastructure in the affected areas, is there anything the rest of us can do to help? -Steve
participants (6)
-
Fergie (Paul Ferguson) -
Jay R. Ashworth -
Paul G -
Randy Bush -
Richard A Steenbergen -
Steve Gibbard