Re: [72attendees] Clarifying Host Responsibilities (was Re: Guestroom Network not under NOC Control)

Kurt Erik Lindqvist <> Mon, 28 July 2008 23:08 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from [] (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5B1553A6B46; Mon, 28 Jul 2008 16:08:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 15BD43A6B46 for <>; Mon, 28 Jul 2008 16:08:12 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.084
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.084 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.155, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_EQ_IP_ADDR=1.119, RDNS_NONE=0.1]
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id oJMJeutmJj7t for <>; Mon, 28 Jul 2008 16:08:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2001:670:87:2::25]) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1094D3A688E for <>; Mon, 28 Jul 2008 16:08:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [] (unknown []) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 803CF78C2B; Tue, 29 Jul 2008 02:08:19 +0300 (EEST)
Message-Id: <>
From: Kurt Erik Lindqvist <>
To: Soininen Jonne (NSN FI/Espoo) <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v926)
Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2008 01:08:18 +0200
References: <>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.926)
Subject: Re: [72attendees] Clarifying Host Responsibilities (was Re: Guestroom Network not under NOC Control)
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Discussion list for the attendees of IETF 72 meeting." <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed"; DelSp="yes"

On 28 jul 2008, at 23.56, Soininen Jonne (NSN FI/Espoo) wrote:

> Everybody complaining about the guest room network,
> <The IAOC Chair hat on>
> I have a bit of sentiment that people don't understand the guest room
> network is not the primary responsibility of the host. It is extra  
> what we
> get if the host (this time Alcatel-Lucent) decides to provide it for  
> us for
> free. We have network requirements for hosts at
> for everybody to check.
> I have a bit of sentiment that the people complaining about the  
> guest room
> network have a hard time appreciating what it means to get free  
> access to
> the Internet from the hotel rooms and what it costs. Usually getting
> "ownership" of the hotel network is not an option, but never it is a
> priority. The priority is to get the meeting, production network to  
> work.
> That is what the host is responsible for. If you have problems with  
> that,
> you can submit a ticket at
> In addition, no hotel networks are made for this kind of crowd. They  
> are
> made for "business people" who just download their e-mails. Not for  
> the
> hotel full of geeks running everything from bittorrent to something  
> they
> wrote last night after the bar. So, making it work would mean  
> upgrading the
> whole network - not an option.
> So, please, let's stop bashing our host about something they have  
> given us
> extra!
> I would like to thank our host for providing the guest room network  
> for
> free. In addition, they have done a great job hosting the meeting!
> Thank you, Alcatel-Lucent!
> </The IAOC Chair hat on>
> Cheers,
> Jonne.
> PS. If anybody feels they have capability to build a better network,  
> please,
> show it by hosting one of the future meetings. You can find the  
> hosting
> opportunities from They  
> are
> clearly marked as "Host: TBD". Thank you.

I would like to after the first day extend a great thank you to the  
host and the volunteers for a great network!

Best regards,

- kurtis -

72attendees mailing list