Re: [72attendees] Guestroom Network not under NOC Control

Paul Hoffman <> Tue, 29 July 2008 06:23 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from [] (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id D04083A6A87; Mon, 28 Jul 2008 23:23:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 064713A69EB for <>; Mon, 28 Jul 2008 23:23:34 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.738
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.738 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.308, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553]
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id A+mF0KwtBcbf for <>; Mon, 28 Jul 2008 23:23:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from (Balder-227.Proper.COM []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5114D3A69C3 for <>; Mon, 28 Jul 2008 23:23:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [] ([]) (authenticated bits=0) by (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id m6T6MNel033215 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for <>; Mon, 28 Jul 2008 23:22:29 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from
Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <p0624080fc4b465d03e13@[]>
In-Reply-To: <>
References: <> <>
Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2008 07:21:21 +0100
From: Paul Hoffman <>
Subject: Re: [72attendees] 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"

At 7:11 PM +0200 7/28/08, Balazs Lengyel wrote:
>I think the guest-room network should be controlled by the NOC. Or 
>if control is a too strong term, then they should try to assure 
>somehow that it works properly. As the number of mails on this and 
>on previous IETF shows us, there is a real need to use it.

Fully disagree. If I can work from my room, great; if not, the lobby 
and bar and terminal room are in walking distance.

On top of us being rude (loudly talking over the host's welcoming 
talk at the Sunday reception) and demanding (not being willing to 
wait in a slowish line to buy sandwiches like regular people do), do 
we also have to be lazy? There was a time when IETFers were thankful 
when we were offered semi-reliable meeting amenities above what 
typical conference people got.

--Paul Hoffman, Director
--VPN Consortium
72attendees mailing list