North American Network Operators Group|
Date Prev | Date Next |
Date Index |
Thread Index |
Author Index |
Re: NANOG, its decline in s/n
- From: David Diaz
- Date: Thu Aug 08 12:01:30 2002
I would go along with that. Not to create a 'loop' here. But if you
think about what you said, you can be correct, but still not be able
to change the behavior, nor should we try.
A newbie or someone that might not 'know' the resume of the replier,
does a post on something of great importance to him. He is unsure of
the solution himself, and receives a wonderful response from a
veteran on the list. Let's be honest here, most of the pros will
post a very brief but curt reply. They dont have time to waste but
want to be helpful. The newbie not knowing the backround of a Sean
or a Manning, will question the brief advice since it is their router
(etc) they are about to type COMMIT into. That makes the Pro feel
like his advice was unheeded.
In reality, it comes across as arrogant for us to expect the newbie
not to question the advice. I am not saying it IS in fact arrogant
but it does come across that way. And the newbie may in fact simply
be playing devil's advocate back. I always learn from the threads I
have time to read through, someone might have a better way of
explaining something as simple as BGP.
I also learn from each time in front of a white board, explaining the
same thing I might have done 100 times. And yes Mr. Norton, I am
learning to s-p-e-a-k s-l-o-w-e-r.
FYI the only recent waste of mail space was the thread on that poor
engineers signature. I am not sure how that really needed a thread.
That was about as unforgiving a response Ive seen since someone wore
a tie to nanog!
At 10:42 -0500 8/8/02, Rob Healey wrote:
I've been a lurker on the list for a good long while now, and recently I
have become pretty active. I think a lot of the pro's post, and the
problem isn't that the people are banished to newbie.dev.nul (I like
that by the way.), but that the people that originally asked the
question endlessly debate the advice that gets posted by people that
really know what they're talking about. This causes a great deal of
frustration, and it's how the endless loops in threads end up happening
I've noticed that alot of the advise given is appropriate for
larger, i.e. tier 1, setups but isn't necessarily as useful
for tier 2/3/N+1.
Things that work great in large scale might be unweildy or not
even feasable on a smaller scale and vice-versa.
North American Network Operators aren't necessarily just tier 1's...
This might be one of the causes of "energetic" discussion when one tier
answers what makes sense for its scale but another tier is puzzled why
anyone would ever consider such an approach.
To avoid confusion in the future it might be helpful for both
questioner's and answerers to mention what scale their addressing
in the question/answer.
Just a suggestion,
Smotons (Smart Photons) trump dumb photons