North American Network Operators Group

Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical

Re: "Real Operator"

  • From: John Fraizer
  • Date: Tue Nov 21 18:39:16 2000

On Tue, 21 Nov 2000, JIM FLEMING wrote:

> 
> In my opinion, "real operators" pay careful attention to the basics, such as
> quality of service, up-time, performance, true "end-to-end" IPv4 transport,
> etc. The consesus here seems to be that NANOG is a group of hobbyists
> with no "policy rudder" to steer them in a direction where the O implicitly
> stands for "Real Operator". The Real Operators that I know have told me
> that NANOG no longer cares, in other words, it is not like the old days.
> 
> I guess this is what happens when "operators" can not agree on how to
> process the first 20 bytes in a packet header, in a consistent manner,
> without
> breaking things after the fact.
> 
> Jim Fleming
> http://www.unir.com/images/architech.gif
> http://www.unir.com/images/address.gif
> http://www.unir.com/images/headers.gif
> http://www.ntia.doc.gov/ntiahome/domainname/130dftmail/unir.txt
> http://msdn.microsoft.com/downloads/sdks/platform/tpipv6/start.asp
> 
> 


Jim,

PLEASE give it a rest.  If you don't like the practices of a particular
operator, that's fine.  NANOG isn't the place for your to bitch and moan
about it though.

I would venture to guess that this group of so-called "Hobbyists" has a
customer base several million fold that of your own.

If you don't want someone dicking with the TOS field of your traffic, I
have a suggestion for you:

Set up your _OWN_ global backbone!

I just checked.  ALLKNOWINGFRUITCAKE.NET is available and would be very
appropriate.

As for the "Real Operators" that you know: I notice that you did not
mention them by name.  I'll bet that you have their undieing grattitude
for that.

We're _ALL_ sick of your whining.  Have the past five requests for you to
lay off escaped you?


GO AWAY YOU NUT!  WE DON'T CARE WHAT YOU HAVE TO SAY!  WE NEVER DID!

---
John Fraizer
EnterZone, Inc