Everyone is invited to join us in Seattle for several importanat follow-on meetings to our Las Vegas community meeting. Sunday evening's presentations will provide food for thought for Tuesday, when informal afternoon and evening meetings will give us an opportunity for open community discussion.

Sunday evening: Community Update
Our agenda will include:

1. Merit budget update (Betty Burke)
2. Spring 2005 Program Committee survey results (Steve Feldman, PC Chair)
3. Analysis of previous meeting surveys (Merit)
4. Update on NANOG list-admin activities (Martin Hannigan)

Sunday evening presentations
Marcia's PDF presentation (attendee survey analysis)
Steve's PDF presentation (Program Committee report)

Steve Gibbard's notes from Tuesday's meeting

From scg@gibbard.org Fri May 20 10:34:10 2005
Date: Tue, 17 May 2005 23:14:36 -0700 (PDT)
From: Steve Gibbard 
To: nanog-futures@merit.edu, nanog-reform@nac.net
Subject: Notes from today's NANOG "community meeting"

Merit had many hours scheduled for discussions on the future of NANOG 
today.  After less than 45 minutes, we agreed to all "declare victory and 
enjoy a beautiful afternoon."

Mike McPherson, Merit's President, presented Merit's draft of the NANOG 
bylaw proposal.  Merit's draft is at http://www.nanog.org/charter05.html, 
and is quite similar to my version of the NANOG Reform bylaw proposal 
presented on these lists a few weeks ago, being the same word for word in 
some places with some differences in others.

Merit invited Steve Feldman, the program committee chair, and Marty 
Hannigan, who they had somehow decided was a representative of the NANOG 
Reform group, to comment on it.  Steve said the program committee was 
willing to accept the proposal and that he was glad Merit was now thinking 
about what NANOG should be.  Marty disclaimed representation of the NANOG 
Reform group (rightly -- he wasn't part of the NANOG Reform proposals), 
but said he agreed with Merit's proposal too.

As the most recent editor of the NANOG Reform bylaws, I thanked Merit for 
their proposal, and said I thought it was an improvement over by own.

Various others expressed support for the Merit proposal.

Mitchell Rose expressed a concern that the summary of the Merit proposal 
on the slides referenced NANOG as an organization for Internet service 
providers, and appeared to be excluding other large network operators. 
Merit agreed that this could be changed, but it appears that was wording 
only in the Powerpoint summary and not in their actual draft.

Vijay Gill said we're all crazy and should just go back to how things 
were.  Nobody seemed willing to publicly agree with him.

Daniel Karrenberg suggested that since we all seemed to be agreeing with 
each other, we should "declare victory and go home."  There seemed to be 
general agreement with that.

So, it looks like we'll end up with the Merit draft or something pretty 
close to that, which I think is the right outcome.  We should have 
"steering committee" elections sometime this summer, with the committee in 
place in time for the fall NANOG.  I told Susan Harris that I'd be happy 
to help with wording as they finalize it.  She seemed receptive to that 
idea.

-Steve