[Nanog-futures] The Peering BOF and the Fallout?

[Ren Provo]

We consider the surveys, in addition to mailing list and hallway
discussions.

A rough cut from SJC was made available during the NANOG PC call this week
but should be posted soon for NANOG42.

Previous survey material -
http://www.nanog.org/mtg-0710/surveyresults.html
http://www.nanog.org/mtg-0706/surveyresults.html
http://www.nanog.org/mtg-0702/surveyresults.html
http://www.nanog.org/mtg-0610/nanog38_suvey_results.html
http://www.nanog.org/mtg-0606/surveys/
etc.

Cheers, -ren
On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 10:33 PM, Martin Hannigan <hannigan at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Joel spewed:
>
> >I think it would be remiss of the pc to not review the status of
> >program elements. That would be an abrogation of the >responsibility
> invested the pc by the charter.
>
> >Further I believe that PC review of a popular and successful >program
> element would be with the goal of helping it grow.
>
>
> Can we see the procedure that you're going to make up to do this first?
>
>
> -M<
>
> _______________________________________________
> Nanog-futures mailing list
> Nanog-futures at nanog.org
> http://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog-futures
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog-futures/attachments/20080227/7fbe878e/attachment.htm