|
North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical Re: AUP for NANOG?
On Apr 14, 9:22am, Scott Grayban <[email protected]> wrote: > The more bashing I hear here the less I want to ask a question here. > I'm not stupid but I am worried that one question might spark a rash of flames back at me. > > This is a newbies point of view. Thanks for braving it.-) It would be interesting if we knew the newbie:bully:oldie ratio on NANOG. As an oldie, I would rather see "clueless" newbie questions as opposed to contentless rants and posturing, and I don't believe any kind of "edge" vs "core" split of NANOG is good. Networking is end-to-end, and what is needed is a "tech" vs "non-tech" split. In the old days we had a list called com-priv which effectively worked as the non-tech counterpart; anything to do with domain names, law suits, business practices, peering politics, legislation and regulation, etc, etc, etc would go on com-priv. Many, if not most, people subscribed to both lists, but kept things separate in their heads and in their postings. That didn't mean NANOG was a panacea for newbies, but just getting today's S/N ratio under control would be of great help. -- Per
|