Curious question on hop identity...

Scott Weeks surfer at mauigateway.com
Thu Dec 14 23:29:40 UTC 2006




--- JJackson at aninetworks.com wrote:
nanog list. But I do have to say that when I speak to the designers and
such at larger companies and I mention NANOG most of them brush it off
and say "The NANOG people are the past and what they have to say doesn't
matter anymore".  
That's the general feel I get from others when it concerns NANOG. 
------------------------------------------------


Did they say who they felt 'the present' folks are?

scott


ps. feel free to move it to nanog-futures if that's a better place for this discussion







--- JJackson at aninetworks.com wrote:

From: "Joseph Jackson" <JJackson at aninetworks.com>
To: <Michael.Dillon at btradianz.com>, <nanog at nanog.org>
Subject: RE: Curious question on hop identity...
Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2006 15:10:51 -0800

I'm pretty new to the networking world.  While I don't run a huge and
complex network in a service provider market. We're just an enterprise
network.  I have read a lot of useful info about networking from the
nanog list. But I do have to say that when I speak to the designers and
such at larger companies and I mention NANOG most of them brush it off
and say "The NANOG people are the past and what they have to say doesn't
matter anymore".  
That's the general feel I get from others when it concerns NANOG. 


Joseph

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-nanog at merit.edu [mailto:owner-nanog at merit.edu] On Behalf Of
Michael.Dillon at btradianz.com
Sent: Thursday, December 14, 2006 12:19 PM
To: nanog at nanog.org
Subject: Re: Curious question on hop identity...


> Besides, why do you believe the text in an in-addr.arpa record?  Or
why 
do 
> you think the absence of an in-addr.arpa record is meaningful?

Back in the old days, say 10 years ago, you
could run a network by the seat of your pants
using rules of thumb about interpretation of
in-addr.arpa records. And you could be quite
successful at running a network using such techniques
because everybody else was doing pretty much the
same thing. Because of this uniformity, you could make
a lot of intelligent guesses and resolve problems.

However, I think times have changed, there is no
longer uniformity among the people making technical
decisions about Internet networks and many rules 
of thumb don't work any more even though they are
still out there in network operator folklore.

In fact, most people making network architectural
decisions about Internet networks don't participate
in NANOG any more. Most people making network operational
decisions also do not participate in NANOG anymore.
It's not just that many people have left NANOG behind,
but a lot of newcomers to the industry over the past
few years have not joined NANOG because they don't 
get why it is relevant to them.

Not that I'm complaining about the message quoted above.
It is a great example of the useful information that one
can find in this mailing list. I wish there were more
messages like this one, i.e. people sharing info rather
than complaints and pleas for help.

--Michael Dillon




More information about the NANOG mailing list