Re: NANOG 90 Attendance?

2024-02-20 Thread Warren Kumari
On Mon, Feb 19, 2024 at 7:37 PM, Randy Bush wrote: > We actually had an IETF "Help Desk" at NANOG 63 (San Antonio, 2015) and > NANOG 64 or 65 ― > https://www.internetsociety.org/blog/2015/01/ > chris-grundemann-nanog-63-talking-bcop-ietf-and-more/ and >

Re: NANOG 90 Attendance?

2024-02-19 Thread Randy Bush
> We actually had an IETF "Help Desk" at NANOG 63 (San Antonio, 2015) and > NANOG 64 or 65 ― > https://www.internetsociety.org/blog/2015/01/chris-grundemann-nanog-63-talking-bcop-ietf-and-more/ > and > https://www.internetsociety.org/blog/2014/11/operators-and-the-ietf-update-from-ietf-91/ > > We

RE: NANOG 90 Attendance?

2024-02-19 Thread Warren Kumari
etings > in a row, and I know the board is giving them a lot of thought, and I’m > just trying to support those efforts from outside the board. > > > > Maybe this should have gone to the members mailing list, but I couldn’t > find one. > > > > Lee > > > > > >

RE: NANOG 90 Attendance?

2024-02-15 Thread Howard, Lee via NANOG
From: Tom Beecher Sent: Thursday, February 15, 2024 10:53 AM To: Howard, Lee Cc: Warren Kumari ; nanog Subject: Re: NANOG 90 Attendance? This message is from an EXTERNAL SENDER - be CAUTIOUS, particularly with links and attachments. Maybe this should have gone to the members mailing list

Re: NANOG 90 Attendance?

2024-02-15 Thread Tom Beecher
should have gone to the members mailing list, but I couldn’t > find one. > > > > Lee > > > > > > *From:* NANOG *On > Behalf Of *Warren Kumari > *Sent:* Sunday, February 11, 2024 2:50 PM > *To:* Mike Hammett > *Cc:* nanog > *Subject:* Re: NANOG 90

RE: NANOG 90 Attendance?

2024-02-15 Thread Howard, Lee via NANOG
efforts from outside the board. Maybe this should have gone to the members mailing list, but I couldn't find one. Lee From: NANOG On Behalf Of Warren Kumari Sent: Sunday, February 11, 2024 2:50 PM To: Mike Hammett Cc: nanog Subject: Re: NANOG 90 Attendance? You don't often get email fro

Re: NANOG 90 Attendance?

2024-02-14 Thread Tom Beecher
None of the conversation was about COVID protocols. Lowered in person attendance because of *individual concerns about health risks* was mentioned. The conversation then went sideways into public health policy and definitions, which absolutely doesn't belong on the list. On Wed, Feb 14, 2024 at

Re: NANOG 90 Attendance?

2024-02-14 Thread Paul Ebersman
mhammett> This seems more ideological and not overly appropriate for mhammett> NANOG. No, covid protocols are something that every conference that is serious about inclusion should be *very* concerned with. Saying that NANOG doesn't care about this says that NANOG can't be bothered to make an

Re: NANOG 90 Attendance?

2024-02-14 Thread Mike Hammett
) Subject: Re: NANOG 90 Attendance? On 11/02/2024 7:56 a.m., Tom Beecher wrote: > Yup. Post pandemic, the unfortunate hotel situation, and a non-zero > number of companies still have tight travel budgets. > > It's been slowly creeping back though. Except we aren't really "post-

Re: NANOG 90 Attendance?

2024-02-13 Thread Glen A. Pearce
On 13/02/2024 7:39 p.m., Tom Beecher wrote: Except we aren't really "post-pandemic" despite the claims that we are. "post-pandemic" the way that I used it was to mean "after the COVID lockdowns,  with close to normal travel gatherings". It certainly wasn't intended to be commentary

Re: NANOG 90 Attendance?

2024-02-13 Thread Tom Beecher
> > Except we aren't really "post-pandemic" despite the claims that we are. > "post-pandemic" the way that I used it was to mean "after the COVID lockdowns, with close to normal travel gatherings". It certainly wasn't intended to be commentary on the current state of COVID, if it's referred to

Re: NANOG 90 Attendance?

2024-02-13 Thread Glen A. Pearce
On 11/02/2024 7:56 a.m., Tom Beecher wrote: Yup. Post pandemic, the unfortunate hotel situation, and a non-zero number of companies still have tight travel budgets. It's been slowly creeping back though. Except we aren't really "post-pandemic" despite the claims that we are. As long as

Re: NANOG 90 Attendance?

2024-02-11 Thread Warren Kumari
On Sun, Feb 11, 2024 at 8:31 AM, Mike Hammett wrote: > I haven't been to a NANOG meeting in a while. While going through the > attendee list for NANOG 90 to try to book meetings with people, I noticed a > lack of (or extremely minimal) attendance by several organizations that > have

Re: NANOG 90 Attendance?

2024-02-11 Thread Mike Hammett
el" Cc: "Mike Hammett" , "nanog" Sent: Sunday, February 11, 2024 7:56:28 AM Subject: Re: NANOG 90 Attendance? Yup. Post pandemic, the unfortunate hotel situation, and a non-zero number of companies still have tight travel budgets. It's been slowly creeping back though.

Re: NANOG 90 Attendance?

2024-02-11 Thread Tom Beecher
Yup. Post pandemic, the unfortunate hotel situation, and a non-zero number of companies still have tight travel budgets. It's been slowly creeping back though. On Sun, Feb 11, 2024 at 8:44 AM Ryan Hamel wrote: > Mike, > > The numbers have not bounced back to pre-pandemic levels, and it doesn't

Re: NANOG 90 Attendance?

2024-02-11 Thread Ryan Hamel
Mike, The numbers have not bounced back to pre-pandemic levels, and it doesn't help that NANOG 90 has had some hotel issues. Ryan From: NANOG on behalf of Mike Hammett Sent: Sunday, February 11, 2024 5:31:02 AM To: nanog Subject: NANOG 90 Attendance?