David W. Hankins wrote: > On Wed, Aug 01, 2007 at 09:12:14AM -0700, Joel Jaeggli wrote: >> Told by whom? > > Hain...something like that? I can't remember. You'll have to check > whatever minutes or recordings are up. > >> Start by asking the contractor, the volunteers and the IAD for a >> postmortem on the operation of the network. anything else is just >> speculation. > > Why? > > It's a lot of work, and I think we already know the conclusion, given > what we can observe as users. > > It berates our volunteers and sponsors who provide us with the network > services during our stay...treating them like children that have to be > kept after school to explain themselves. I'm one of those volunteers, operating that part of the service was not my responsibility... My point is to both you and the people complaining about the network, Drawing conclusions from an incomplete picture is fraught with peril. > It embarrasses vendors who provide us with gear or software, making > them less likely to provide either. There's a difference between trashing someone in public and describing your issue it doesn't always involve somebody else's hardware Diplomacy is key. > And all we're going to discover is, "It hurts when you go like this, > so don't do that then." > > A useless and frivolous excercise. At IETF 55 I had issues with all the terminal room macs coming up with the same ip address because they all had the same hostid, between that and some unexpected behavior from our dynamic dns implmentation I gained some experience on running the dhcp and dns services that has been folded back into what future hosts did for other meetings. I don't think the exercise is frivolous, it's only useless if we don't learn anything from it or we overdo it and it devolves in navel gazing. Self criticism either public or otherwise is an essential component of self improvement. > > If we wanted to stop begging, and really buy a network for every > IETF meeting, complete with SLA's and funding extensive testing > before opening it 'live', then that's one thing. One totally > rediculous thing. We have a network contractor who has provided services at the ietf68 and ietf69. We pay them money, they do stuff. We also have volunteers. > But in lieu of an absence of begging, we should stop being so > choosy. > > They did a good job, and we more or less had net the entire meeting. Indeed. How do we (I'm being rather inclusive here) do better next time? > I don't think we have anything to complain about. > I ask myself fairly frequently (about 3 times a year) "What can I do to make the next one better?" Not everyone can or should volunteer to help but the pool of volunteers is not that big... > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > Ietf mailing list > Ietf@xxxxxxxx > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf