2008 Steering Committee Meeting Minutes

Conference call minutes from:



January 9, 2008 Steering Committee Meeting Minutes

Attending: Apologies:
  1. Meeting quorum called 00:06 UTC (10 January)

  2. Mailing List Committee

    No update was received from Alex.

  3. NANOG infrastructure

    The main mailing list has not yet migrated to new systems. Andy will check with Larry Blunk as to where things are. There is currently no schedule for website migration as the presentation and content overhaul is desired to occur at the same time.

  4. Programme Committee

    No update was received from Todd.

  5. NANOG 42, San Jose

    Andy delivered a summary, details are in progress for a sponsored Sunday social. The overall status on the technical side is clear; the venue connectivity is coming along.

    Randy expressed concern that he hasn't been able to attend the engineering calls, and hadn't yet seen any plans nor diagrams. Andy indicated he would see about getting the call rescheduled to a more mutually-convenient time for all involved and get more data out to the engineering list.

    Some concerns were expressed over the IPv6 Hour. Andy indicated that not yet announcing it to the community is a concern. Randy clarified that the purpose of the exercise was two-fold, both to demonstrate what it is like to live in v6 and to highlight what needs to be done to support it. There was discussion of how to fold this into the agenda and documenting the outcome. Todd was not here to confirm, but the concept was reported to have been discussed with the PC as a Tuesday event with Wednesday report.

    Randy introduced a meeting to take place January 28, both face- to-face in the SF Bay area and as a teleconference. A common set of goals and criteria are being examined for APRICOT & NANOG by this working group.

    After further discussion, including a lengthy one of how this event contrasted to the normal IPv6 access availability, a few follow-up items shook out. Randy and Philip are to work on the text for announcement to the community. Chris and Todd are to nail down the scheduling specifics so we can announce it.

  6. Future NANOG events status

    NANOG 43 (New York) is progressing apace. The site visit has been conducted and preparatory work needed at the hotel is under way.

    NANOG 44 (Los Angeles) is progressing as well. An MOU outlining responsibilities is being ironed out with the co-hosts.

    NANOG 45 Caribbean exploratory working group is meeting, reaching out to contacts for joint meetings, and examining the overall feasibility. A local host is interested if we do commit to having the meeting. Their next meeting is 19:00 UTC January 10; Steve will forward the minutes of the last meeting to the SC.

    No new data for NANOG 46 or 47 was available.

  7. Future planning dates discussion

    Philip asked about diving into the matter of fixing future conference dates further out. There was a little discussion of the matter in principle, but it was decided to take the matter in detail in a later meeting. Continued consensus for ongoing meeting horizon >= 18 months was expressed.

  8. New Business

    Steve distributed the last meeting minutes and SC members are requested to approve them ASAP.

  9. Meeting adjourned 00:59 UTC (10 January)

January 23, 2008 Steering Committee Meeting Minutes

Attending: Apologies: Meeting quorum called 01:06 UTC (24 January)

  1. Mailing List Committee

    Alex reported he was behind on the process documentation, so the new AUP enforcement policy is still pending. General traffic on the admin list has been low. Traffic on the actual list is high and the MLC is trying to guide discussions.

  2. NANOG infrastructure

    Andy reported no change to the mailing list migration. It was reported on the Mailing List Committee call that this is pending updates to the boiler-plates (subscribe, unsubscribe, etc). New design for the website is being worked on prior to migration to the dedicated servers. Given the attention for the IPv6 Hour, we spent some time discussing the IPv6 reachability of current and new NANOG infrastructure

  3. Programme Committee

    Todd reported no significant meta or organization issues; the focus has been on the upcoming conference agenda. The current structure has been serving them well, and splitting leadership and organizational duties between the chair and vice-chair has been effective.

    Regarding the San Jose meeting itself, Todd said that the shape of the conference is evolving rapidly, reminded folks that the draft program was posted some time ago. There has been the usual time slot juggling. Lightning talk submissions are open and the notifications for the most recent round of acceptances need to be sent out. The SC reacted well to the current draft agenda, though Todd pointed out there have been almost nothing submitted from the research community. Given a strong keynote is expected, a strong closing speaking is also being sought.

  4. NANOG 42, San Jose

    Community members helped bring Trango to the table with the local hosts, and their gear will be providing the wireless WAN link to the hotel. Overall, Andy reported that the hotel setup seems OK and it is believed that we are in a good state: many sponsors for both breaks and Beer and Gear. The registration numbers seem good for a February meeting; high 200s at present. It is believed that both attendee and sponsor numbers are good due to the advance notice regarding location and agenda.

    Significant time was devoted to implementation challenges and the practical impact of the IPv6 hour. The PC concern over disruption and presentation distraction was explored. Several known issues were touched on (dhcpv6, Windows XP DNS, et al). A phased approach had been considered, but there will more more practical detail discussed at the SF Bay area meeting mentioned last SC meeting, which is scheduled to occur January 28.

  5. Future NANOG Events

    Andy reported that NANOG 43 (Brooklyn) is all set, contracts are signed with both the hotel and the host. It is expected that within a month or so, the meetings-specific co-ordination and connectivity calls will begin. Looking to NANOG 44 (LA), the hotel contract was signed and the co-hosts (USC and Centergate) have confirmed participation; contracts are under way.

    NANOG 45 Caribbean exploratory working group met two weeks ago, there is is another call tomorrow, and a face-to-face meeting is planning for the San Jose meeting. No significant status change from the last SC meeting.

    There was no new information for NANOG46 and NANOG47.

  6. Merit Staff Update

    Andy reported details regarding Betty's progress, all is well and we miss her contributions. She most definitely will not make San Jose.

  7. AOB

    The call time-change is working for folks who had conflicts. Next meeting will be the 6th (7th) February, 19:00 EST (01.00 UTC).

  8. Meeting adjourned 02:06 UTC (24 January)

February 6, 2008 Steering Committee Meeting Minutes

Attending: Apologies: Meeting called to order at 17:06 PST Meeting adjourned at 17:42 PST.



February 18, 2008 Mailing List Committee & Steering Committee Meeting Minutes

Attending:
  1. Meeting quorum called 16:38 UTC (07:38 local)

  2. Warning Policy

    3. There was a discussion regarding the current warning policy, and what was presented at the Community Meeting 17 February. Alex indicated that warnings are to be issued by any member of the MLC with a carbon-copy to the admins@ list. Significant time was spent discussing the community desire, consensus versus unilateralism, and revisiting what went before at the Albuquerque meeting. Don requested we examine how to go forward, and there was discussion to properly document the process of how it works. The method should be floated on nanog-futures.

    There were concerns about MLC matters taking too long due to everyone having jobs to do, being in different timezones, and votes taking a while. There was confusion on the part of some MLC members regarding the community meeting slides just presented as they were not seen beforehand. Development of the AUP was bantered about as an example of how the process *should* work. Randy suggested that the current AUP enforcement policy is in variance with the SC's perception of the community desire. There was general assent from the SC.

  3. Delays and Emergencies

    4. Sue raised the concern of handling emergency response. There was unanimity on SC and MLC that there should be no impediments to Sue (or other future Merit staff handling the MLC functions) taking the appropriate action needed to maintain service and integrity of the systems and network. Everyone expects that normal system and network administration approaches would apply. Barring actual system-level threats, list traffic explosion, and similar operational problems, the desire for accuracy rather than speed when engaging list members was expressed by the SC.

  4. Policies and Procedures

    5. There was discussion regarding the roles of the MLC and SC in these matters. Specifically, the distinction between deciding the policies versus procedures, the structure of the system versus the mechanics of executing. The MLC gets to say what is or isn't operationally feasible for procedures.

  5. Break for food 08:10-08:23

  6. Action Items and Conclusions

    For votes, a simple majority is effective and the preference of the SC and Merit. The SC requests the two competing AUP enforcement proposals be sent to both the Steering & MLC lists. We will then revisit the community-expressed policy needs to align with the MLC (with SC guidance) mechanics. One goal is to factor out specific personalities to set up the structure for the future for fairness, no matter who is serving on what committees. Alex raised the concern regarding micromanagement, and we further discuss transparency. The matter returns to needing the two proposals from the MLC such that the SC can analyze and hash out a compromise as soon as possible.

  7. Migrating Mailing Lists to Mailman

    Sue brought up the matter of the needed documentation updates. General consensus was that multiple vectors for subscription are best, though closed-loop confirmation was necessary. The actual cut-over will be next week (post-meeting) at soonest.

  8. Management Issues

    Philip indicates that the matter of staff management is for the SC, but if the MLC is comfortable, we may discuss. The MLC No Confidence vote was discussed and the recipient of that vote communicated apologies for possible offensiveness.

    Further discussion of the liaison role for Steve Feldman and desire to foster continual two-way communication between SC and MLC. We talked about process issues and the perception that people were "gumming up the works". Philip discussed mentoring, issues regarding carrying the workload and responsiveness were raised; Steve's liaison role was revisited again and all were in agreement that it should go forward.

  9. Meeting adjourned 17:53 UTC (08:53 local)




February 18, 2008 Program Committee & Steering Committee Meeting Minutes

[Attendance not taken, start and stop times not noted.]

There was no formal agenda for this meeting. Inquiries about meeting progress, questions, issues and concerns formed the basis of the discussions.

There was no clear consensus on the later start. Many parties heard both positive and negative feedback.

The agenda feedback has been positive. PC & SC members noted many folks paying attention more to the sessions than their laptops. Kudos came in from multiple quarters regarding the Amazon keynote.

Attendance considered very good; registered attendees have been climbing through the morning. We started the day at 559, by lunch it was 569. Various committee members were tracking approximate session numbers; it was noted the Newcomers' Breakfast was well-received with attendance in the low 70s, the bulk of which (55-60) were actual newcomers. The Problem Solving tutorial seemed to be hampered being the first thing in a hard-to-find room; appeared to be well-received by the attendees, which numbered in the mid 30s. Opinions were offered regarding additional similar topic domains for the future.

The BGP Troubleshooting, L2 Attack and Network Core BCP tutorials appeared to have good audiences (ran approximately 70-80 for all), and led into discussion of vendor-specific content. Joel Jaeggli introduced the topic of drumming up more operator-driven tutorials to balance the existing vendor- and platform-specific ones.

The good attendance triggered discussion of growth of the event in general. Is a bigger meeting a better meeting? Kobi Hsu requested more detailed attendance data from Merit to see if there are interesting hidden trends; Don Welch acknowledged this for Merit.

The PC expressed concern regarding getting their minutes out in a timely manner. The SC suggested to invert the current ratification process and require commentary within 24 hours.



February 20, 2008 Steering Committee Meeting Minutes

Attending:


March 5, 2008 Steering Committee Meeting Minutes

Attending: Meeting called to order at 17:11 PST (01:11 GMT)
  1. NANOG 42, San Jose

    Andy reported that although financial results are not yet available, the general feeling is that NANOG 42 was a success. Merit is working on the video archive and survey data.

  2. Mailing List Committee

    Alex reported that the MLC is continuing internal discussions over AUP enforcement process. There are two documents under discussion, but no consensus.

    Randy asked whether the document circulated by Marty Hannigan to nanog-futures seems to best document the SC's understanding of the NANOG community consensus. When discussion indicated that this was the case, Randy moved that it adopted in its current state as the interim process, with the intent that the MLC will use it as a baseline for further discussion and refinement.

    The current document is version 1.1, dated 26 Feb 2008, and is available as a PDF at:
    http://www.fugawi.net/~hannigan/nanog-mlcp1-1.pdf
    Alex noted that the MLC has not achieved consensus on this document.

    The motion is carried by unanimous vote.

  3. Program Committee

    Todd reports that the call for presentations for NANOG 43 has been issued, and proposals are already coming in.

    The PC is encountering "recruitment collisions" with multiple members attempting to recruit the same speakers and/or topics. He notes that this is a good sign that PC members are actively engaged in recruiting.

    No keynote speaker has been identified for NANOG 43.

    The PC has been discussing migrating some of the long-standing BOFs toward longer and more formal tracks. The challenge is to balance between PC review of formal presentations and the spontaneity and timeliness of the informal discussion.

    Some vendors with facilities in the New York area have expressed the desire to organize tours. Our policy is that this is allowed, with the caveats:


  4. Press at NANOG

    No action since the last meeting.

  5. NANOG infrastructure

    Merit is working on migration of the NANOG mailing list to mailman on the new server. No specific date has been set.

    Merit is working on a redesign of the NANOG web site, as well as the publishing infrastructure for the new web server. They will work toward a plan to get the site moved to the new server sooner, possibly delaying some aspects of the redesign.

    The current web server is reachable via IPv6 as www.ipv6.nanog.org.

    There was discussion of a notification policy for outages affecting the NANOG site and mail services. It was decided that this is not a chronic problem, so no formal policy is needed.

  6. Future NANOG events status



  7. Other business

    Betty is doing better, and expects to return to day-to-day management. Andy remains available as her backup.

    The SC thanks Andy for stepping in.

Meeting adjourned at 17:58 PST (01:58 GMT)



March 19, 2008 Steering Committee Meeting Minutes

Attending:
  1. NANOG 42 results

    Betty reported that there were two major pieces of the financial information still pending. Data is expected on the next call and hopefully will be published prior to the next meeting.

  2. Mailing List Committee

    Alex reported concerns over the unintended consequences of the document favored by the SC, namely that while the SC was focused on the AUP enforcement issues, the document represented an overall outline of MLC processes. Steve Feldman was spending time seeking to reconcile the conflicts between this "overarching" charter-like document and the previous "lean" bullet-point process. He suggested that we expressly only adopt the AUP enforcement policy portion, to clarify the original intent.

    Randy observed that part of this may be an issue of finding that with which the MLC can live. A conversation regarding the specifics and detail regarding bans and warnings (official and unofficial), took place. After discussing the chilling effect when personal opinions are offered by committee members, and if by dint of volunteering to do the heavy lifting that the MLC members give up their unofficial voice. Alex re-iterated the desire to segment the AUP issues (where the SC have a reasonable say) and the implementation details (wholly under the MLC). The SC membership agreed that the MLC needs to be fully empowered and the SC does not wish to micromanage.

    Steve proposed that we rescind last meeting's vote due to the issue and offered to bring the reconciled process document to the SC. This proposal was accepted and carried.

  3. Program Committee

    Todd reported that there are many submissions for the next conference under consideration. There is a PC meeting tomorrow (20 March 2008), and Todd indicated that the quality and quantity is well ahead of what we've seen at this stage previously. The 'keynote is not nailed down, but there is a tentative agreement.

    A matter for the SC is the resignation of Ted Seely from the PC. We discussed the process of replacement, previous replacements, and if there are any immediate suggested participants. Some PC members have committed to beating the brush for volunteers, several SC members committed to doing the same. Todd will draft a note to solicit volunteers from the community.

  4. Press at NANOG

    Philip has submitted a draft to merit for opinions, which will then be circulated to the SC.

  5. NANOG infrastructure

    Betty indicated that the mailing list migration still has some missing information; the MLC (Sue) is handling some mechanics. The web site migration is in process as well, though currently a separation of the redesign from the migration are being pursued. IPv6 connectivity is targeted as part of the move and while there is NANOG-specific IPv4 space, Betty is currently looking into the same for IPv6.

  6. Future NANOG events status

    Betty indicated the NANOG43 (NYC) engineering mailing list has been updated, though there have been some telX staffing changes. All the host contracts for NANOG44 (LA) are all signed; the MOU with ISI is still in progress.

    The working group exploring the feasibility of a Caribbean NANOG (for NANOG45) did not have a call this week. At present there is no active opposition, but some seeming apathy. Both ARIN and LACNIC have indicated they will try to support the effort in some way. Discussion ranged across sponsors' willingness, location cost concerns, and local host commitments. At this point, we will be moving forward with an MOU; Merit and the SC need to make a firm decision such that we have sufficient lead time to announce ideally at the New York meeting.

    Dearborn is under consideration for NANOG46; several hosting offers and suggestions came in after NANOG42. Carol and Betty are examining several options, and preferred venues will be fodder for discussion next meeting. The consensus remains that we wish to target an 18 month horizon.




April 10, 2008 Steering Committee Meeting Minutes

Attending: Apologies: There is a backlog of unpublished meeting minutes Joe is catching up on these. Various bits are in various stages. Expect results over the next week. The SC/PC meeting in San Jose had few notes taken as it was mostly a working meeting. Those notes will be written up as minutes in due course.

We had no financial summary from San Jose as Betty was not on the call.

Alex gave an MLC update. There was no significant update as Alex was not exactly sure what the SC had approved as process. Steve said that the final document has not been delivered and approved. Steve did send a summary of differences to the SC but not to the MLC; this has been sent to the MLC. Now that Steve is no longer sick, he will try to interleave this with his day job.

Alex said the issue of non-warning emails from MLC members was still not comfortable to him. He really felt that asking the MLC to reach consensus before commenting was unwieldy. Randy asked if it was then true that no non-warning emails had actually gone out. Alex sent none; others may have. Steve will finish his document in the next few days, and the SC can discuss it when there is substance.

Joe asked where the MLC meeting minutes as agreed were. Alex said that there had been three calls minuted, but the MLC has not approved the minutes yet so they have not been sent to MERIT for posting.

Todd has not yet sent out the solicitation for volunteer to replace Ted. He promised to do this quickly. It was noted that Ted's replacement will serve out Ted's term which ends in October; but an active participatory replacement would most likely be reappointed on their own merits.

Some folk did not realize that the April 1st posting was an April Fools joke and not from the PC.

Todd reported that the tentative agenda has been posted to the web site and an announcement has gone out. Pushing the schedule seems to have worked, and the agenda is pretty well firmed up.

Todd reported that the controversy over the Peering BoF had changed character as the Peering BoF founder and leader has changed jobs and is no longer available to host the Peering BoF. Todd said that the PC is committed to expanding peering related content and is working hard to recruit BoF leaders and presenters to fill the void.

There was discussion of the draft of how we should handle press at NANOG. Philip will finalize a first draft and circulate to Futures etc. It was suggested that it also be shown to friendly members of the press.

Betty sent email with the schedule of server moves, approximately 18 April. Steve disabled the lightning talk submission for the moment as it garnered spam and talk submission window is not until the meeting.

Steve reported that discussions have been very positive with our Latin American friends to hold a meeting in the Caribbean. This makes it likely we will be able to hold NANOG 45 in the Dominican Republic.

Randy mentioned that some researchers were considering a research meeting just before the October NANOG.



May 9, 2008 Steering Committee Meeting Minutes

Attending:
  1. Meeting quorum called 20:05 UTC

  2. Previous Meeting Minutes status

    Barring a single typo, the 23 April minutes were approved. After correction, Steve will send them for publication.

  3. Mailing List Committee

    Steve sent an updated AUP enforcement document shortly before the MLC call and therefore some MLC members did not have time to review. Steve was unable to make the call, but Alex indicated that there was no update on any competing proposal. It was discussed that something need to be done, a simple bit of test to act as a baseline. The inability to make progress on this simple, core document is suggested as a symptom of a widespread level of conflict making the MLC essentially dysfunction. It was agreed that next Wednesday the MLC will settle on a proposal and then bring it to the SC.

    Philip requested additional issues, and Alex indicated he had not been doing any list guidance for the last few weeks and he wished to make additional guidelines to follow for the MLC surrounding topicality "do"s and "don't"s.

    Regarding the nanog-futures thread of default mailman subject tagging, it quite clearly seems to be a matter of a minor topic filling the vacuum. It was agreed that the previous configuration was the majority desire, so it should just be handled.

  4. Program Committee

    Todd reported that there were no major issues, some last minute items related to the video consent forms. A few nominations have been received to fill the vacant PC slot which will be sent to the SC.

  5. NANOG 42

    Betty mailed the financials to the SC last week and overall, it looks good. Betty has requested from other Merit staff a clarification of the carry-forward.

  6. NANOG 43

    Todd indicated the program had some minor churn as a presenter dropped out due to changing employment. Steve asked when the lightning talks submissions for NANOG 43 are expected to be open, due to the need to add the anti-spam protection to the submission tool. Todd's intent is to do it no later than two weeks out from the meeting, and he requested the video consent form be added to the submission click-through.

    Betty requested two weeks notice for the session leads once the draft schedule is finalized. She reported that on the call this morning the room block was extended by twenty more rooms. If folks are still having trouble, Betty wants to know.

    Carol, Jason and Betty are taking the first pass at aligning rooms with sessions, and will send their draft to Todd and Ren for the PC. The next update for the network status will be with David Diaz of Telx tomorrow morning.

    Betty relayed Gail's report of the registration numbers; with not all the speakers registered, we have 275. This includes 3 students and 70 first time NANOG attendees. Good numbers for this point and we expect to see a rise over the next few weeks. As for sponsors, we still have three break spots open and one Beer and Gear space available ($4,000 and $10,000 respectively).

    Due to the overlap with AfNOG, both Philip and Randy won't be in attendance. If we keep to the original committee meeting schedule and can manage a phone for the SC meeting, they both can still participate. The MLC should all be there, though Alex indicated he wasn't sure about David.

    Regarding the on-site work, there was concern over the suggested network topology having too many links back to 60 Hudson. As there are only two diverse paths, this seems to add complexity with little added value. The ARIN IPv6 application was approved but won't be ready until the October meeting. We do not have the ballroom until Sunday. Merit staff will be arriving Friday, Tony Kapela will arrive Saturday morning.

  7. Future NANOG events status (Betty)

    For NANOG 44 in Los Angeles, Betty reported that there is a new event co-ordinator from ARIN. A related discussion regarding the creation of more sponsorship literature to assist the process took place. We talked about the elections and that we need to solicit community input for any charter revisions. There is a schedule conflict for folks in the R&E world due to this meeting overlapping with an I2 meeting.

    Betty indicates that the Caribbean hotel and venue data for NANOG 45 is needed by the end of the week. Josh Snowhorn indicated he would have the data by end of day. We all agree that the desire is to go to Brooklyn with a comfortable sense of the numbers.

    Given the New York AfNOG and Los Angeles I2 conflicts, Merit committed to helping co-ordinate better and put forth a strong future schedule with fewer conflicts. NANOG 46 has a few open offers; Betty sent email to the SC for discussion.

  8. Press at NANOG

    Philip has some updates for the draft version based on the SC mail thread. Looking to shore this up and propose to nanog-futures as a 'formalized process' for handling the requests.

  9. AOB

    There was a brief conversation regarding the nanog.org website updates. Brian Warkoczeski of Merit had a preview of the new design and layout, both Joe and Betty had been providing input. The SC members in Berlin will get a quick walk-through after the call.

    October charter updates were discussed. Both Steve and Joe had some items to suggest, primarily in the realm of language normalization. At the New York community meeting, we need to remind folks that October is the time to get amendments voted upon.

    After excusing the non-voting members of the Steering Committee, MLC personnel issues were discussed and the SC unanimously agreed to a course of action.

  10. Meeting adjourned 21:16 UTC



May 21, 2008 Steering Committee Meeting Minutes

Attending: Apologies:
  1. Previous Meeting Minutes status

    Joe reported by email that the May 7 minutes are almost done.

  2. Mailing List Committee

    Text regarding handling of vacation auto-responders will be added to the procedure text.

    Discussion of MLC volunteers will be deferred to the end of the meeting.

  3. Program Committee

    Todd reports that aside from some last-minute juggling, the agenda for NANOG 43 is complete.

    Due to some miscommunication, the deadline for nominees to fill the vacant PC position has been extended until Sunday, May 25. Todd will forward the final nominee list will to the SC on Monday, with PC feedback to follow. The nominee list will also be sent to nanog-announce for public comment.

    Selection will take place during an interim SC meeting on May 28.

  4. NANOG 43 - venue status

    Betty reports that there have been various issues with hotel, including premature filling of the room block, and higher than expected food and beverage costs. None of these are major.

    Connectivity issues to the hotel being resolved, remote access to the meeting router should be available by Tuesday.

    Merit is working on the attendee handouts.

    Registration numbers are lower than Merit would like.

    The schedule for committee meetings in is set, there will be a conference phone available so SC members attending AfNOG can participate remotely.

    There will be an off-site reception on Tuesday night.

    Betty has circulated a draft of the agenda to the SC and PC for comment. The final agenda will include sponsorship acknowledgements.

    There was some discussion on seeking community input about one-day passes.

  5. Future NANOG events status (Betty)

    • NANOG 44, LA

      Major planning (e.g. room scheduling) will begin after NANOG 43. The web site is almost ready to go.

    • NANOG 45: Caribbean

      The host has requested that the meeting end on the Tuesday afternoon, rather than Wednesday morning. The SC has no strong feelings either way.

      Merit hopes to announce tentative plans at NANOG43.

    • NANOG 46+ ?

      Merit has been focusing on work to make it easier to solicit hosts:
      - new web site has hosting info/marketing
      - list of tentative dates

  6. Press at NANOG - draft proposal (Philip)

    No activity.

  7. AOB

    Philip called for agenda items for the NANOG43 community meeting.

    Due to time constraints, it was decided to postpone discussion of MLC volunteers until the interim SC meeting on May 28.

Meeting adjourned at 17:59 PDT / 00:59 UTC.


May 28, 2008 Steering Committee Meeting Minutes

Attending:
  1. Previous Meeting Minutes status

    Joe's minutes for May 7 are out for approval. Steve is working on the minutes for May 21, and expects to send them out for approval today.

  2. NANOG 43 update

    Betty reported that about 380 people have registered so far. Hotel costs are higher than Merit would like, but they still anticpate at least a small profit for the meeeting.

    Betty will send out a last reminder to nanog-announce.

    The meeting router is up and reachable. The remaining configuration will be done when Merit staff arrive on-site.

    The agenda will be sent to the printer within a few hours.

    Philip is working on a draft agenda for the community meeting. Aside from the usual reports, Jared will present the MLC status (with data provided by Sue Joiner) and Steve will present the SC's current thinking on this year's charter amendments and invite community participation.

  3. Mailing List Committee

    There are four vacant positions to fill. Two have terms ending in October 2008, and two have terms ending in October 2009.

    After discussion of the volunteers, the SC chose David Barak and Tim Yocum to fill the vacant positions for terms ending in October 2008, and Kris Foster and Simon Lyall to fill the vacant postions for terms ending in October 2009.

    Philip will notify all the volunteers of the results, and encourage the new MLC members to organize themselves and select a chair as soon as practical. If the MLC feels itself to be ready in time, the new chair may present the MLC portion of the community meeting.

  4. Program Committee selection

    There is one vacant position to fill, for a term ending in October, 2008.

    After discussion of the candidates and input from the PC and the community, the SC chose Brian Deardorff to fill the vacant position.

  5. AOB

    There was no additional business.

Meeting adjourned at 13:38 PDT / 20:38 UTC.



June 3, 2008 Steering Committee & Program Committee Meeting Minutes

Attending: Apologies Received:
  1. Meeting quorum called 18:24 UTC

  2. NANOG 43

    Betty reported that attendance keeps climbing; presently 436. Todd expressed concern that the attendance was not correlated with the previous experience of early agendas. Ren and Jared brought up the conflict with GFIRST and Joel re-iterated the AfNOG/AFRINIC conflict. We revisited the concerns over timing in early June: US Memorial Day, student graduations, and general start-of-summer for the hemisphere. Betty revisited the Merit scheduling concerns, indicating that slightly later in June might be feasible but not mid-month.

    Members of both the SC and PC related concerns that had been expressed to many of them regarding the room block selling out. Betty explained the formula for setting target number has many variables (time of year, location, cost, anticipated attendance, etc) before even talking to a hotel. In this case, we had a block from Saturday to Wednesday and a base of $650 room-nights.

    The keynote was well received according to all comments. We have had four and so far only one didn't seem to go well.

  3. NANOG 44

    Due to the number of anniversaries, there is planned a panel covering the whys and wherefores on the road of our collective history that would be relevant to both organizations. We explored the scheduling of events during the week that the conference shared with ARIN. While there is flexibility in the public policy portion of the meeting, the quantity is highly variable and usually unknown until shortly before the meeting. Betty indicated that any joint planning for Wednesday is something Merit believes the PC should handle and provided contacts.

    An aside regarding the content for Los Angeles and its distribution across the schedule was discussed. Rodney has a strong lead on a keynote. Josh reported that the Tuesday night GPF ".5" event is already booked. We might have good ISI co-operation for more of the main program on Sunday, especially important if we have no shared time on Wednesday. Betty reminded us to be sure that we set aside a good slice of time for the community meeting as it will be election and charter amendment time.

    Speaking to the election cycle, Betty noted that nominations need to be opened no later than August 1 (3 months before the Fall meeting by the charter). Merit is looking to tie more automation with the new website and therefore streamline the process.

  4. Further IPv6 tests at meetings

    There are apparently multiple proposals for additional IPv6 testing at future meetings. In addition to the way we've already done it (NAT-PT), there is a tunneling solution with less NAT involved, and Bill Manning has offered some code used in China. None of these appear mutually exclusive, and the real question will be how much work will Merit and the local host wish to shoulder to make parallel variations available. If they are all offered, will enough people try the different methods to provide any meaningful data?

    Does the community wish to be the guinea pig in any technology experiment? We are *not* talking about a repeat of the IPv6-only hour. Joel stated that in this case in specific, and any "demo" in general, which is well-integrated with the program should be acceptable. Kevin related another conference experience where there was a v6 hour (without v4 cut off) where the actual program content was interactive instruction, debugging and feedback. The PC will further discuss these models at their meeting tomorrow.

  5. NANOG 45

    While the hotel contract is not finalized, things are looking pretty good for the Dominican Republic. Room rates are very attractive and likely to offset travel cost concerns. The GPF is set for the latter half of the week; transportation issues from the possible NANOG site to the GPF site were discussed. Schedule concerns were aired, and we explored resolving possible conflicts with Wednesday by having content not geared for GPF attendees on that day.

    Possible use of a translation service was discussed. There was strong desire to keep the 'working group' mailing list running and put a note out to the community such that any more folks interested in volunteering assistance can join up and do so. Perhaps as soon as next week, have th SC chair send a note to nanog-announce.

  6. AOB

    Betty suggested a followup SC/PC call to continue discussing some of the NANOG 44 and 45 issues.

  7. Meeting adjourned 19:26 UTC



June 3, 2008 Steering Committee Meeting Minutes

Attending: Apologies Received:
  1. Meeting quorum called 12:30 UTC

  2. Press policy

    The press policy need to be addressed before NANOG 44, given the west-coast location and potential for industry press to care about the relevant anniversaries and the historical retrospective already on-deck. Jared observed that the level of government support for NANOG 45 may also draw press in the region.

  3. Attendance and funding

    The day pass suggestion was revisited, and a reminder that RIPE's different funding model doesn't make their implementation a direct analog for us. If we were to pursue it, we would need to price it a little higher than we think would be a disincentive to start out cautiously. Previously there were concerns with the workload for Merit; that needs to be verified if we seriously pursue this. Todd related an additional administrative bit that could need to be of concern: RIPE day pass purchasers do not show up on the attendee list, which can have 'hallway-track' implications.

    There was interest to revisit the room-night figure related yesterday and how it correlates with the actual hotel wrap-up data. Our lowest attendance in recent years was Salt Lake at 340 folks; should that be treated as the floor for any room block discussions, or is that over-optimistic?

    In a previous conversation, Betty mentioned to both Joe and Jared a potential for smaller sponsorships to contribute to a pool for assisting or underwriting NANOG attendance for low budget or startup entities. We definitely need to discuss in a full SC meeting, but the idea of aggregating smaller contributions was well received.

  4. Fall elections and charter updates

    It was noted that Joe, Randy and Philip have terms expiring this cycle, and both Randy and Philip are at their term limit. Todd would related the PC term expirations in email to the SC. A critique was related from the community meeting regarding the over-use of self-deprecating humor. No one wants to make thee committee work seem larger than it is, but at this point we may be turning folks away from wishing to step up.

    Steve noted that we want to be sure and dedicate some time in the community meeting to allow the SC candidates to have time to say something to those in attendance. We've done well with that in the past, but poorly last time. Candidates should be given advance notice of this, of course. In addition to having the bios posted to the website, Jared suggested a post to nanog-futures or nanog-announce in the week[s] prior.

    We spent some time discussing the self-organization and chair selection in both the PC and MLC. While no-one is interested in micro-managing or restricting the committees through excessive codification of procedures, it was observed that the current PC structure wasn't exactly a democratic process. It was inside the PC, there were no objections and then it went forward. SC members in attendance expressed a preference for such self-organized systems. The idea of the SC confirming the self-selected chair in both PC and MLC was floated. The previously-suggested term extension for the PC chair was brought up, to mixed response. The points were made that the program 'construction' process is actually now better understood and more open, and that the SC should be mindful of who could be good chair candidates when assembling the PC.

    We haven't seen community desire for charter updates, though we have stumbled across a few likely possibilities. There was a brief discussion about seeing who in the community might be interested in volunteering to draft updates.

  5. New mailing list committee

    Steve had dinner with David Barak the previous night. He is interested in "light-touch" moderation. There was a discussion about the informal notices; in the past these seemed to work when the delivery manner was polite, and folks seemed to think it is a useful tool. All the members in attendance were in agreement that any committee-member's warning is in effect "formal", and concern was expressed over a non-consensus position being expressed in those warnings. Steve will seek to organize a call to get the new MLC together with the goal of them picking a chair.

  6. Meeting adjourned 13:10 UTC







The Steering Committee email address is steering@nanog.org.


Back to the Steering Committee Activities page.