This is the internet, can't give too much credit.
On Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 8:27 PM, Jo Rhettjrh...@netconsonance.com wrote:
On Jun 9, 2009, at 5:58 PM, Scott Weeks wrote:
'Select All' on the 'Subject' you don't want to read about and
delete. A few hours turns into a few minutes... :-)
I do
On May 11, 2009, at 11:22 PM, Randy Bush wrote:
i, for one, am ready. i have a delete key for messages that do not
interest me. but i do not have an undelete for messages which censors
do not think i should read.
Randy what you are saying makes sense. But you are forgetting the
dark side
In theory, if Nanog was topical to its own mission, Nanog would be a
must read every day.
We all agree that Pascal needs only one or two changes. The problem is
we each have a different set of changes. -- pascal hacker back in the
'70s
the problem here is that the community is diverse, and
On May 1, 2009, at 1:34 PM, Martin Hannigan wrote:
I think most of us are broad minded and appreciate common sense topics
related to network operations.
Yes.
Most know what that is. No need to make
rules to assault the few, IMHO.
If they were few, this wouldn't be a topic.
Perhaps you
--- jrh...@netconsonance.com wrote:
Perhaps you have time to sit and hit delete for a few hours every day
before you find a single post relevant to your job. I don't, and
snip
'Select All' on the 'Subject' you don't want to read about and delete. A few
On Jun 9, 2009, at 5:58 PM, Scott Weeks wrote:
'Select All' on the 'Subject' you don't want to read about and
delete. A few hours turns into a few minutes... :-)
I do that, but at risk. Far too many people who should know better
use Reply to create a new thread. So their new thread gets
clearly we have returned to a regime where folk think that censorship is
the way to improve what they see as the appropriate content of the nanog
list.
as part of that, the mlc is now saying there is a list for that,
ref. if someone would do us a favor and accumulate a list of these
lists, one
On May 12, 2009, at 2:22 AM, Randy Bush wrote:
clearly we have returned to a regime where folk think that
censorship is
the way to improve what they see as the appropriate content of the
nanog
list.
as part of that, the mlc is now saying there is a list for that,
ref. if someone
This problem has become a cyclical event which seems to cause a rash
of finger pointing at the MLC whenever it pops up. This results in
some 'action'. That action is usually like using reload as a
workaround to a hardware problem instead of replacing the buggy code.
The result is what we keep
On May 12, 2009, at 9:10 AM, Martin Hannigan wrote:
This problem has become a cyclical event which seems to cause a rash
of finger pointing at the MLC whenever it pops up. This results in
I certainly agree on the cyclical problem. This issue keeps coming
back. Personally, I'm not
This problem has become a cyclical event which seems to cause a rash
of finger pointing at the MLC whenever it pops up. This results in
some 'action'. That action is usually like using reload as a
workaround to a hardware problem instead of replacing the buggy code.
The result is what we
On Tue, May 12, 2009 at 10:43 AM, Randy Bush ra...@psg.com wrote:
This problem has become a cyclical event which seems to cause a rash
of finger pointing at the MLC whenever it pops up. This results in
some 'action'. That action is usually like using reload as a
workaround to a hardware
On Tue, May 12, 2009 at 08:25:10AM -0700, kris foster wrote:
On May 12, 2009, at 7:32 AM, Jared Mauch wrote:
On May 12, 2009, at 9:10 AM, Martin Hannigan wrote:
some 'action'. That action is usually like using reload as a
workaround to a hardware problem instead of replacing the buggy
bmann...@vacation.karoshi.com wrote:
On Tue, May 12, 2009 at 06:13:26PM +0200, Randy Bush wrote:
How about a filtered(proactive) -and- an unfiltered(reactive) feed?
works for me, though i am not sure what you mean by reactive beyond my
using the delete functions.
Dean.
what's a dean?
randy
On Mon, May 11, 2009 at 7:05 PM, Jo Rhett jrh...@netconsonance.com wrote:
On May 1, 2009, at 1:34 PM, Martin Hannigan wrote:
Loudness != majority
I think most of us are broad minded and appreciate common sense topics
related to network operations. Most know what that is. No need to make
On Sat, May 02, 2009 at 08:17:10PM -0400, Joe Abley wrote:
[...]
I'd prefer the MLC to treat each case on its merits, and to work with
a light touch to keep the list useful. Do the MLC volunteers feel that
this isn't working?
It's not clear to me exactly what problem this proposed
Joel Jaeggli wrote:
Simon Lyall wrote:
On Thu, 30 Apr 2009, Martin Hannigan wrote:
Not such a great idea. A down search engine is an operational problem
whether its application or network. It makes lots of phones ring and
finger pointing at our networks. This costs us money. Same for major
A policy idea that has been put forward, thoughts (especially from
lurkers) ?
Simon
NANOG MLC
Policy re individual sites
==
The availability and operation of specific Internet site such as websites
and email services is off-topic unless:
(a) The problems
Policy re individual sites
==
The availability and operation of specific Internet site such as websites
and email services is off-topic unless:
(a) The problems are caused by network reachability rather than problems
at the site hosting the service.
(b) The
Jo Rhett wrote:
On Apr 30, 2009, at 8:45 PM, Joel Jaeggli wrote:
dnsbl shuts down and starts responding with affirmative responses to all
queries, on topic.
On topic for who? Show me how to configure my router to use a dnsbl.
It's on topic for a mailing list about e-mail servers,
On May 1, 2009, at 2:03 PM, Gadi Evron wrote:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't NANOG about network operations
rather
than routing? With routing naturally being the main point of interest?
--
Gadi Evron,
g...@linuxbox.org.
Thanks, Gadi.
Some on this list appear to believe that the
And
Loudness != majority
I think most of us are broad minded and appreciate common sense topics
related to network operations. Most know what that is. No need to make
rules to assault the few, IMHO.
On 5/1/09, James R. Cutler james.cut...@consultant.com wrote:
On May 1, 2009, at 2:03 PM,
My personal opinion (not wearing SC hat for the moment) is that
enumeration of specific subjects which are on and off topic is an
infinite rathole.
I'd rather see more generic guidelines, like maybe:
- If there's a well-known mailing list for the subject, discussion
should be redirected
On topic for who? Show me how to configure my router to use a dnsbl.
please be seated when you read the next sentence.
pause
network operations is not only about routers
randy
___
Nanog-futures mailing list
Nanog-futures@nanog.org
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Fri, May 1, 2009 at 3:05 PM, Gadi Evron g...@linuxbox.org wrote:
Steve Feldman wrote:
I honestly don't mind seeing the occasional newbie question,
especially if there are polite and intelligent responses pointing to
answers. (See
- If there's a well-known mailing list for the subject, discussion
should be redirected there.
nope. i do not want to have to manage subscriptions (and get monthly
mailman garbage:) from 42 mailing lists, and have to track where subject
19.43 has moved this week.
do people not have mail
On May 1, 2009, at 2:03 PM, Steve Feldman wrote:
What bugs me is when these degenerate into long-lived off-topic
threads, and that's where I'd like to see the MLC's effort focused.
This causes a fair bit of pain (from what a number of people have told
me, and my own opinion). I'd be happy
--- kris.fos...@gmail.com wrote:
2. Does the MLC then moderate the thread, plead with all subscribers
to stop, or play whac-a-mole with individual posters (..or worse, just
complain that people don't know how to filter email for themselves).
At this point it looks like we moderate
after
On Fri, 1 May 2009, Jo Rhett wrote:
The availability and operation of specific Internet site such as websites
and email services is off-topic unless the site provides a route-server or
similar service which directly supports network routing and connectivity.
That sounds tidier, thankyou,
--
Third-Fourthed.
On 5/1/09, Paul Ferguson fergdawgs...@gmail.com wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Fri, May 1, 2009 at 3:05 PM, Gadi Evron g...@linuxbox.org wrote:
Steve Feldman wrote:
I honestly don't mind seeing the occasional newbie question,
especially if
On May 1, 2009, at 5:20 PM, Scott Weeks wrote:
--
Some more on topic ( before it drifts again ).
The regular thread from people complaining about sending email to
yahoo
or the latest virus or some weird Japanese emails, or some random
There are many 'websites' or apps relevant to netops.
-keystone
-rupe ncc monitoring
-potaroo
-large portals (mail, communities, etc)
-search engines
If I had posted about equifax.com being down this would not be a
topic. If Rod Beck did it, he'd get banned. You can't moderate style
or
Not such a great idea. A down search engine is an operational problem
whether its application or network. It makes lots of phones ring and
finger pointing at our networks. This costs us money. Same for major
mail products.
Delete key?
On 4/30/09, Simon Lyall si...@darkmere.gen.nz wrote:
A
On Thu, Apr 30, 2009 at 18:45, Simon Lyall si...@darkmere.gen.nz wrote:
The availability and operation of specific Internet site such as websites
and email services is off-topic unless:
(a) The problems are caused by network reachability rather than problems
at the site hosting the
34 matches
Mail list logo
