North American Network Operators Group|
Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical
Re: Wired mag article on spammers playing traceroute games with trojaned boxes
(I dislike meta-discussion, but since it /is/ applicable to the list...) Thus spake Sean Donelan (email@example.com) [09/10/03 21:32]: > Susan did not say it wasn't an operational issue. She said there are > other lists which focus on that issue. Agreed. > There are many subjects of interest to operators which occasionally > flare up on NANOG, but then move to other lists. BIND issues concern > network operations, but a namedroppers list exists for the topic. > Peering is of operational interest, but the model-peer mailing list > exists for the topic. Network time synchronization if of interest to > operators but then the ntp newsgroup exists for the topic. Network > security is of interest to operators, but then nsp security mailing > lists exists for the topic. Address hijacking is of interest to > operators, but then the hijack mailing list exists for the topic. So if there's a more specific list for every operational issue, should we just shift discussion off to those lists? Should NANOG exist simply as a live resource for 'What mailing list should I consult for ...'?