[145475] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: meeting network
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Jared Mauch)
Mon Oct 10 13:22:28 2011
In-Reply-To: <001201cc876f$c9307ee0$5b917ca0$@iname.com>
From: Jared Mauch <jared@puck.nether.net>
Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2011 13:20:37 -0400
To: "frnkblk@iname.com" <frnkblk@iname.com>
Cc: North American Network Operators' Group <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
In my historical knowledge of this: there are only so many venues that can h=
ave 500-650 people and fit.=20
Jared Mauch
On Oct 10, 2011, at 1:12 PM, "Frank Bulk" <frnkblk@iname.com> wrote:
> Then the RFP for the meeting needs to be more specific with some basic SLA=
s
> that result in a smaller bill if not met.
>=20
> Frank
>=20
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Randy Bush [mailto:randy@psg.com]=20
> Sent: Monday, October 10, 2011 9:44 AM
> To: Randy Carpenter
> Cc: North American Network Operators' Group
> Subject: Re: meeting network
>=20
>> I would think that the contract with the hotel for the conference
>> would include the specific requirements for the network. Is that not
>> the case?
>=20
> underlying problems
>=20
> o no hotel believe that we'll actually be significantly high use. =20
> they simply can not conceive of it. ietf, apricot, ... have
> seen this time and time again
>=20
> o the hotel does not manage the network, so you have two comms hops
> to anyone who can do anything. and anyway, they are not going to
> provision more bandwidth
>=20
> but the problems of which i spoke were the meeting network. which we
> do supposedly control.
>=20
> randy
>=20
>=20
>=20
