[190169] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: NANOG67 - Tipping point of community and sponsor bashing?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Owen DeLong)
Fri Jun 17 04:20:39 2016
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
From: Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAD6AjGTFJ35yNtqF+uewvAL3KJwWBg3E96WYnvF7vvM6=wUAAQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 17 Jun 2016 01:20:32 -0700
To: Ca By <cb.list6@gmail.com>
Cc: "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
> On Jun 16, 2016, at 06:03 , Ca By <cb.list6@gmail.com> wrote:
>=20
> Perhaps it is me and my sensibilities, perhaps it is my miser corp =
culture, but i could not even dream of asking to go to Jamaica (arin =
area) for the last ARIN meeting.=20
You are entitled to your opinion.
If ARIN didn=E2=80=99t exist, how would you go about guaranteeing unique =
registered GUA blocks and ASNs? Who would operate whois and =
in-addr.arpa, ip6.arpa?
As to Jamaica, as you point out, it=E2=80=99s in the ARIN region. We =
really have two choices there=E2=80=A6 One, we can avoid the caribbean =
and do a disservice to our community members there, or, two, we can =
occasionally (usually about once out of every 4 meetings) meet in the =
Caribbean.
Do you really think that our members in the Caribbean should be excluded =
from having the possibility of a local meeting simply because they =
happen to live in a popular vacation spot?
If you don=E2=80=99t think that having the meeting in the Caribbean =
serves our Caribbean community members, you=E2=80=99re flat out wrong. =
There were many attendees present from the Caribbean region who have not =
been able (either for financial, Visa, or other reasons) to attend our =
meetings in the US and Canada.
While you might want to make the argument against holding the meeting at =
a resort destination, the reality is that there alternatives in the =
Caribbean region that can accommodate a meeting and the number of hotel =
rooms needed by a group our size are few and far between. Most of the =
facilities that have adequate facilities ARE resorts.
>=20
> I am not alone. Have a look at Ren's comments from
>=20
> http://research.dyn.com/2006/02/lovely-peering-cruise-on-lake/ =
<http://research.dyn.com/2006/02/lovely-peering-cruise-on-lake/>
>=20
> Posted here:
> "
> The Peering Forum is more for peer & IX information distribution and =
contact refresh across a multi-continent body of participants than it is =
for initial trial concerns. The invite only nature implies the attendees =
are actively peering at one or more of the IXs sponsoring portions of =
the Forum. Many of us, hand raised here, are taking vacation time, =
covering flights, upgraded cabins, etc. to help remove the conflict of =
interest concerns. It is unfortunate there is not a link to the agenda =
as it is jam packed with useful peering focused presentations and more =
than qualifies this as a business need. Last year dozens of participants =
interacted for the first time and I=E2=80=99m looking forward to similar =
introductions later this month. Putting a face to the name helps =
significantly in this very relationship based role which has more to do =
with international relations than enable.=E2=80=9D
What you are leaving out here is that IIRC, Ren was one of the people =
behind the original idea of having things like Peering Cruises. Frankly, =
if you want to have a concentrated focused meeting, a cruise can be a =
very cost-effective approach, where you can cover meeting rooms, hotel =
rooms, meals, etc. for less per person than the cost of a hotel room in =
some cities in the US that I suspect you=E2=80=99d consider perfectly =
acceptable. (NYC, ORD, SFO, SJC, LAX to name just a few)
> I am not willing to fork over my pto or personal cash to "remove the =
conflict of interest" . I'd rather buy transit.=20
I=E2=80=99m not sure what this supposed COI is.
> And, i am also not willing to spend my corp money with dec-ix or =
others to send my competitors on a cruise. Unless =E2=80=A6
Well=E2=80=A6 I=E2=80=99m unaware of DE-CIX providing cruises at their =
expense, so I=E2=80=99m not sure where that comes from. Perhaps I missed =
out somewhere. Wouldn=E2=80=99t surprise me.
> why cant this just be business?=20
Why can=E2=80=99t it be just business on a cruise? Who says that =
business has to be a windowless conference room in a city with little or =
no appeal to tourists?
> That said, i have never been on a peering cruise and all my peering =
needs are met with peeringdb and email. So it is just business for me, =
and no i am not going to spend money at an IX that does not see things =
the way i do.=20
I=E2=80=99m happy for you, but you aren=E2=80=99t exactly what I would =
call a major backbone. I=E2=80=99m pretty sure you have to buy transit =
from at least one or two major backbones to deal with your networking =
needs. Are you so certain that those major backbones that you pay =
didn=E2=80=99t need in person meetings to get some of their peering =
arrangements done? Are you so sure that there are not significant swaths =
of internet infrastructure (including much of the state of the art in =
IXPs today) that didn=E2=80=99t develop and evolve largely in these =
collaborative environments?
You have the luxury of using the tools that others have built to meet =
your peering needs. You talk about your use of peeringdb=E2=80=A6 I=E2=80=99=
m pretty sure that the origin of peeringdb can be traced back to people =
talking together at some of these fora that you consider non-business =
for reasons passing understanding.
This isn=E2=80=99t an all-business focus question or even a miserly =
question.
It=E2=80=99s purely an optics question. If you want to live in fear of =
the optics, go for it. I, for one, prefer to look at =E2=80=9Cwhat will =
this cost? what is the value my company can get from it?=E2=80=9D If the =
latter is greater than or equal to the former, then it=E2=80=99s =
probably worth making the case to management. Otherwise, I usually =
don=E2=80=99t even attempt it.
YMMV
Owen
