NANOG38 Survey

How did you attend NANOG?

		Response Percent	Response Total
in person in St. Louis		98.5%	66
via Web - Real Media		0%	0
via Web - MPEG2 Multicast		0%	0
via Web - DVTS Multicast		0%	0
via Web - Windows Media		1.5%	1
via Web - VIC/RAT Multicast		0%	0
Total Respondents			67
(skipped this question)			0

Overall, was this NANOG useful to you?

		Response Percent	Response Total
Very Useful		28.4%	19
Useful		62.7%	42
No Opinion		4.5%	3
Not Very Useful		4.5%	3
Useless		0%	0
Total Respondents			67
(skipped this question)			0

Is this your first time attending NANOG?

		Response Percent	Response Total
Yes		25.8%	17
No		74.2%	49
Total Respondents			66
(skipped this question)			1

If you have attened a previous NANOG, how does this NANOG compare?

		Response Percent	Response Total
Better		27.7%	18
About the Same		44.6%	29
Worse		4.6%	3
N/A		23.1%	15
Total Respondents			65
(skipped this question)			2

Did you find the General Session and Tutorial/BoF schedule acceptable?

		Response Percent	Response Total
Very Useful		25.4%	17
Useful		62.7%	42
No Opinion		11.9%	8
Total Respondents			67
(skipped this question)			0

Did you find the public laptops near the General Session room satisfactory?

		Response Percent	Response Total
Worked fine		25.8%	17
Did not use		72.7%	48
Bring back the Terminal Room!		1.5%	1
Total Respondents			66
(skipped this question)			1

Comments on the General Session:

Excellent

I found the Pragmatism vt an ill-aimed panel, waste of time. The fundamental problem is global routing . independent from v4 or vt

I would like to see more technical talks. Tuesday, this conference, was better than monday

General Session was INteresting but not exciting

The first day was a bit sparse -- Tuesday was much better.

I prefer the 3-day general session format, but this meeting seemed less hectic than previous 2-day general session meetings. Content overall was good. While it is appreciated that we keep within time limits, each talk should be allowed at least some minutes of follow-up from the audience. I think it might be a disservice to limit the comments if good mic follow-up is still flowing. Although there wasn't any particular problem, I'd prefer to go over a little rather than cut discussion short.

Much better topics, format seems to be working well. Stll having issues with first up after breaks and lunch

The room had a terrible echo Very offputting seeing a person on stage reading email cut off the wireless during talks make the room smaller on tuesday cause we lose so many people some talks were really hard to understand, especially after a night of partying, because they were so pressed for time. And maybe because of the partying.

Too many research/theory presentations... I hope we can have more practical case study next time...

general session was good

V6 panel session was less than useful, more a rant by people who need to be slightly better informed about what is happening outside their own little worlds. Panels need to be balanced, and this one was not. First sessions on Monday needed to be highlights for NANOG - unfortunately they were the low points.

program a bit weaker this time

Good times!

I think they were fine generally

Good lightning talks again. There were some issues with the sound, I think - such as quite bad echoing in the room.

There were more presenations than usual that actually interested me.

Bit short on topics this time.

Comments on the Tutorials:

WAY to much politics. It really sounds like the same individuals who fight the mail list just bring it to the conference and argue in person. Stop the anti-sisco rederigue or judging vs crsco SBGP vs BGP, ect. How about something useful like solving problems common to all networks regardless of platform. the arrogance and smugness of some networks and its people is incredible

tutorials were fine. good real-world applications

Learned a lot - worth price admission

All very great thanks

did not attend

Philip Smith is great! Bring him Back!

More More please! Maybe extend the conference by 1 day; 2 days tutorial and 2 days general

N/A

did not attend

The disaster recovery talk by Howard was interesting mainly for his relaying his extensive experience. It was somewhat a mish-mash of topics and not quite what I expected, but still worthwhile. He mentioned some URLs that weren't in his slides. He spent some time describing these resources so they would have been useful to include.

didn't attend tutorials

I hope the tutorials are not just for routine sessions. I would like to have "beginners", "experienced" type of info for each tutorials, so people can select tutorials for their needs.

could use some better topic tutorials.

did not attend

Did not attend

Didn't attend them.

Did not attend

Phillip Smith is great! Bring him back!

Comments on the BoF's:

gets a little political rather then useful

Great debate

peering BOf's interesting NSP - SEC Could have been better prepared

Liked debate format

Need More

Security BOf not as useful as i expected

Needed more space in the pering BOF