Perhaps it's time to think about enhancements to the NANOG list...?

Sun Mar 21 00:47:23 UTC 2021

On 3/20/21 2:06 PM, Randy Bush wrote:
> i do not find the volume or diversity on the nanog list problematic.
> in fact, i suspect its diversity and openness are major factors in
> it being the de facto global anything-ops list.  perhaps we do not
> need to fix that.

+1

-- 
Bryan Fields

727-409-1194 - Voice
http://bryanfields.net