[45015] in North American Network Operators' Group
RE: Blocking Internet Gaming
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Paul Lantinga)
Wed Jan 9 13:34:01 2002
Message-ID: <05924A4A9DEDAD46A21EE3C8C64B090D5AD480@cheetah.zoo.q9networks.com>
From: Paul Lantinga <prl@q9.com>
To: nanog@merit.edu
Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2002 13:32:41 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C1993C.0908E933"
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.
------_=_NextPart_001_01C1993C.0908E933
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
-----Original Message-----
From: Stephen Griffin [mailto:stephen.griffin@rcn.com]
[snip]
>What needs to be done is to balance the knee-jerk IT folks reactions
>to make life as miserable as possible for the greatest number vs.
>allowing some amount of employee usage, to increase satisfaction,
>_increase_ productivity, and basically make it worth going into the
>office.
That's an excellent point Stephen. Killing employee morale can have
longlasting repurcussions. I had the pleasure of experiencing a good
decision of this type about 3 years ago when I worked in India. The execs
decided NOT to block outbound port 80, even though it was taking up 75% of
the bandwidth on a 128k link. They paid for an upgrade to 256k (SFO ->
Bangalore, not cheap!) and decided not to block port 80, as the damage to
employee morale would be too severe.
-Paul.
------_=_NextPart_001_01C1993C.0908E933
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV=3D"Content-Type" CONTENT=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META NAME=3D"Generator" CONTENT=3D"MS Exchange Server version =
5.5.2650.12">
<TITLE>RE: Blocking Internet Gaming</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>-----Original Message-----</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>From: Stephen Griffin [<A =
HREF=3D"mailto:stephen.griffin@rcn.com">mailto:stephen.griffin@rcn.com</=
A>]</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>[snip]</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>>What needs to be done is to balance the =
knee-jerk IT folks reactions</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>>to make life as miserable as possible for the =
greatest number vs.</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>>allowing some amount of employee usage, to =
increase satisfaction,</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>>_increase_ productivity, and basically make it =
worth going into the</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>>office.</FONT>
</P>
<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>That's an excellent point Stephen. Killing =
employee morale can have longlasting repurcussions. I had the =
pleasure of experiencing a good decision of this type about 3 years ago =
when I worked in India. The execs decided NOT to block outbound =
port 80, even though it was taking up 75% of the bandwidth on a 128k =
link. They paid for an upgrade to 256k (SFO -> Bangalore, not =
cheap!) and decided not to block port 80, as the damage to employee =
morale would be too severe.</FONT></P>
<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>-Paul.</FONT>
</P>
</BODY>
</HTML>
------_=_NextPart_001_01C1993C.0908E933--
