alan@globalcenter.NET (Alan Hannan) writes:

However, for those who have subscribed to nanog for more than 3 years, nanog has traditionally been useful to discuss operational issues, where issue is defined as a concept or problem.

Real time issues are generally helped little by nanog discussions.

I agree 100%. Unfortunately, unlike Alan, I've found nanog discussions are very good at fixing 'real time issues' and not so good at fixing long-term operational issues. Carriers should be the ones who first notify their customers about problems. In theory, there should be no way I could know and post about a problem before a carrier monitoring its own facilities. Likewise, reporting a routing loop problem to a carrier should result in its repair without the need to post about it on a public mailing list. After all, it affects them whether reported by a customer or a non-customer. Most of the reasons why I post problems have their root-causes in some very old operational problems. Heck, the routing loop Alan mentioned seems to have been aggravated by a Cisco IOS bug (or at least similar to a bug) dating back to the days when Alan was still a network tech in Nebraska. How about this as a long-term operational issue, defined as a concept or problem: why are we still discussing the same issues three years later? What makes them so difficult to fix? -- Sean Donelan, Data Research Associates, Inc, St. Louis, MO Affiliation given for identification not representation