[Nanog-futures] Conference Network Experiment policy
nanog-fut at rsuc.gweep.net
Wed Apr 8 21:14:25 UTC 2009
Thanks for the feedback - please do keep it coming! We'll pop out
an updated draft to reflect the concensus when some equilibrium is
reached, but just to comment on some of the questions and points
raised so far (both on-list and off):
- In addition to the v6 hour, there have been more recently
proposed experiments that didn't come to fruition. Part of
the intent here is to provide a fair standard to apply to such
proposals, and set a level of expectation for preparadeness on
the part of the proposer.
- Nothing in this suggested policy precludes additional, parallel
networks. The focus is what will and will not be considered
for the conference network. WRT opt-in, note the "voluntary
not compulsary" bullet.
- Costs were intended to be covered under the "Have finite and
well-defined requirements for support [...]" (WRT static/sunk
costs of labour, etc) and "a statement regarding resources the
proposer is committing to supply" (WRT money or specific equipment
needed for the experiment). The draft will be updated to make
both more explict.
- This started out as more general principles and consciously
avoided attemtps to dictate the future (encoding specific VLANs
or SSIDs, address space, etc), but it was observed that without
setting minimum expectations the per-meeting conference engineering
teams would be spending time spinning their wheels on something
which may not come together.
- Integration with the program was intended to be covered by
"SC will evaluate submission, conferring as needed with the
Program Committee[...]" and "Have clear measurement [...]
related in a lightning talk submission, if not full presentation."
The draft will be updated to make this intent more clear.
RSUC / GweepNet / Spunk / FnB / Usenix / SAGE
More information about the Nanog-futures