Wired mag article on spammers playing traceroute games with trojaned boxes

Fri Oct 10 01:39:51 UTC 2003

(I dislike meta-discussion, but since it /is/ applicable to the list...)

Thus spake Sean Donelan (sean at donelan.com) [09/10/03 21:32]:
> Susan did not say it wasn't an operational issue.  She said there are
> other lists which focus on that issue.

Agreed.

> There are many subjects of interest to operators which occasionally
> flare up on NANOG, but then move to other lists.  BIND issues concern
> network operations, but a namedroppers list exists for the topic.
> Peering is of operational interest, but the model-peer mailing list
> exists for the topic. Network time synchronization if of interest to
> operators but then the ntp newsgroup exists for the topic.  Network
> security is of interest to operators, but then nsp security mailing
> lists exists for the topic.  Address hijacking is of interest to
> operators, but then the hijack mailing list exists for the topic.

So if there's a more specific list for every operational issue, should we
just shift discussion off to those lists?  Should NANOG exist simply as a
live resource for 'What mailing list should I consult for ...'?