2600 just posted there own statement on the wikileaks ddos: http://www.2600.com/news/view/article/12037
IMHO the issue we should have jumped on: the DHS/ICE confiscation of DNS names from the 70 web sites during the Thanksgiving holiday. Did ICANN just hand them over with out so much as court order? Isn't icann supposed to be an international org? What happens when another country wants a DNS entry? Now multiple groups are calling for a fragmentation of DNS. Nobody trusts centralized DNS, by extension no one trusts ICANN sysadmins. How do we respond to this? Do we care? What constitutes an authoritative dns root in the light these events? Certainly not the current roots as they can be manipulated through political flights of fancy. No sysadmin should ever have to persue unlawful acts to keep their job or to keep in good stead with their employer. On Dec 10, 2010 12:23 PM, "Aaron McCaleb" <[email protected]> wrote: > > (Sorry...just noticed that I only replied back to Matt with this > instead of the whole list[s]...) > > On Thu, Dec 9, 2010 at 22:19, Matt Simmons > <[email protected]> wrote: > > ... > > We should have media statements ready, identifying typical > > responsibilities (as non-technical and as abstract as possible, like > > 'reliably maintaining the IT infrastructure according to established > > policies' and so forth), and we should have people on both coasts > > willing and ready to speak with media folks about what SysAdmins do, > > and what they /should/ do. > > ... > > I agree. This might be one of the best places to start. And having > prepared statements regarding who SysAdmins actually are, and what their > responsibilities can encompass, etc., also helps put a dent in what I > described as a lack of identity. Very good place to start, I think. > > > On Thu, Dec 9, 2010 at 10:52 PM, <[email protected]> wrote: > >> ... > >> The League of Professional System Administrators (LOPSA) is a nonprofit > >> corporation with members throughout the world. Our mission is to advance the > >> practice of system administration; to support, recognize, educate, and > >> encourage its practitioners; and to serve the public through education and > >> outreach on system administration issues. > >> ... > > One thing that caught my eye in that is 'recognize...it's > practitioners'. This brings up another process that we should > probably consider...and it may be a better place to start, initially, > rather than focusing on prepared position statements: Recognition of > achievements of other organizations and municipalities somehow within > the realm of system administration. An example from another > organization is the Outstanding Environmental and Engineering Geologic > Project award from the Association of Environmental & Engineering > Geologists: > > http://www.aegweb.org/i4a/pages/index.cfm?pageid=3758 > > > >> ... > >> The second benefit of joining LOPSA is to advance the profession as a whole. > >> LOPSA aims to bring a voice to system administrators to society beyond. We > >> want to educate the public, influence policy both corporate and legislative, > >> and ensure that our voice is heard. We will reach this goal with outreach, > >> research into sysadmin issues, and active efforts to expose the media and > >> public to our viewpoints. > >> ... > > This sounds really nice, but it also smells of B.S. (but only > slightly...). But in both I see what we want to do, "advance the > practice of system administration" and "advance the profession as a > whole". And how we want to do that is clearly specified. But what is > missing is the nice explanation of _why_ we think that needs to be > done. In what areas, exactly, is the practice of system > administration and the profession as a whole _not_ being advanced? > What, exactly, do we mean by "advancing"? Do we want to get more > people to become system administrators? Do we want to influence grade > school or college curricula? Do we want better pay or shorter hours? > (Though wouldn't that be more like a union?) > > It certainly makes good ad copy for attracting new members and for > convincing sponsors to make donations, and I'm not suggesting that we > change it. But I do think that we need to tighten up our > understanding of what we all think these phrases actually mean. I > think we really need to pin down what we think _isn't_ being properly > advanced within our profession. That's the only way we can ascertain how > our "viewpoints" are actually meaningful and are contributing to the debate, > rather than just a "me too!" supporting other, better known > organizations' opinions on the same topics. > > (And I'm not volunteering for that one. I'm sure there are aspects of > the profession that could be better advanced and advocated. But I > really have no idea what those aspects might be. ...or at least what > aspects could be better advanced that _also_ take advantage of our > particular perspective within organizations and differentiate us from > other, potentially overlapping organizations.) > > > --Aaron McCaleb > _______________________________________________ > Discuss mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.lopsa.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss > This list provided by the League of Professional System Administrators > http://lopsa.org/
_______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list [email protected] https://lists.lopsa.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss This list provided by the League of Professional System Administrators http://lopsa.org/
