Peering BOF/Peering social @NANOG69?

Tue Feb 7 02:51:08 UTC 2017

I would like to see the session continue in some form.
Social was close to good.

The peering presentations weren't as useful to me personally.
They sometimes made the time for actual peering conversations
too short.

The extra food and drinks were not important to me personally.

...

Perhaps an "extended break" 45 minutes, with typical
break food, and no presentations.  Or if you want, a *silent*
rolling slide show on a screen, with 1-slide per submitter,
for peering news items or general peering requests...

Cheaper... quieter... shorter...  But having all the people
in the same room at the same time for the same purpose, usually
pretty useful.

2 cents,
John Kemp

On 2/6/17 9:17 PM, Dave Temkin wrote:
> Hi Bob,
> 
> This was inadvertent and we will bring this back for NANOG 70.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> -Dave
> 
> On Feb 6, 2017, 6:58 PM -0500, Bob Evans <bob at fiberinternetcenter.com>, wrote:
>> I suggest in the future NOT to get rid of something because a new method
>> is attempted. I.E nanog had a nice method of identifying potential and
>> existing peers with a simple green dot at registration to indicate an
>> individual was involved with BGP in their company. That went away and
>> today there is nothing. Cost of implementation was less than 5 dollars at
>> any office supply retailer.
>>
>> Just a thought.
>>
>> Thank You
>> Bob Evans
>> CTO
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> The Peering Personals has been shelved while we try to figure out a better
>>> option.
>>>
>>> There was no peering content submitted to the Program Committee that
>>> justified a separate track, and so they chose to include the content in
>>> the general session throughout the program.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> -Dave
>>>
>>> On Feb 6, 2017, 8:12 AM -0500, Matthew Petach <mpetach at netflight.com>,
>>> wrote:
>>>> I'm squinting at the Guidebook for NANOG69,
>>>> and I don't seem to see any peering BOF or
>>>> peering social this time around. Am I being
>>>> blind again, and it's on the agenda somewhere
>>>> but I'm just overlooking it?
>>>> Pointers in the right direction would be appreciated.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks! :)
>>>>
>>>> Matt
>>>
>>
>>