North American Network Operators Group

Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical

Re: geeting NANOG listed in Encyclopedia of Associations

  • From: Curtis Villamizar
  • Date: Mon Oct 02 12:34:48 1995

In message <[email protected]>, Nigel Allen writes:
> Groups like NANOG may find it useful to be listed in the _Encyclopedia
> of Associations_, a directory of national non-profit groups in the
> United States, so that journalists, researchers and potential new
> members can get in touch with you more easily.
> I have transcribed the questionnaire that the _Encyclopedia of Associations_
> uses to compile its listings, and I would be happy to send a copy
> to anyone who would like their group listed.
> The Encyclopedia of Associations is published by Gale Research Inc.
> of Detroit, a well-known publisher of reference books. Your local
> library probably has a copy of the _Encyclopedia of Associations_
> that you can look through to see how other progressive groups are listed.
> To request a questionnaire, send me e-mail ([email protected]), or 
> contact:
>  Encyclopedia of Associations
>  Gale Research Inc.
>  835 Penobscot Building
>  Detroit, MI 48226-4094
>  U.S.A.
>  telephone (313) 961-2242 or 800-877-GALE
>  fax (313) 961-6815
>  --
>  Nigel Allen, Toronto, Ontario, Canada       [email protected]
>  Web page:

NANOG has no official spokesperson (unless someone wants Merit to take
on that role with the public media) and produces no documents.  NANOG
is a forum for providers to discuss and hopefully resolve operational
issues, but not a policy making body.  NANOG has never written any
formal decree.  IMO: If NANOG starts to try to produce documents,
discussion would quickly deteriorate from network operations to petty
wording in the documents.

The IETF would be more appropriate (if IETF is not already in there)
as well as the IETF WGs such as CIDRD, allowing the chair to serve as
spokesperson for the WG, hopefully providing draft documents and
status of WG documents and any official WG adgenda, but not any
personal agenda for the WG.

Do we really expect popular media to query IETF Operational Area WGs
on their progress and their impact on the Internet?  I doubt it.