^ Top

NANOG 46 Survey


NANOG 46 Survey Results

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania (June 14-17, 2009)

1. How did you attend NANOG?

Response Percent (Response Total)

in person in Philadelphia

93.2% (110)

via Web - QuickTime

3.4% (4)

via Web - MPEG2 Multicast

2.5% (3)

via Web - Windows Media

0.8% (1)

via Web - HD

1.7% (2) 

Answered question


(skipped this question)

2. How many NANOG meetings have you attended?


25.4% (30)

Between 2 and 5

25.4% (30)

More than 5

16.1% (19)

More than 10

11.0% (13)

More than 15

6.8% (8)

More than 20

13.6% (16) 

Answered question


(skipped this question)

3. Were the dates and location for this NANOG meeting acceptable to you?


93.6% (114)


3.4% (4)

If you answered "No" please tell us why


1. Yes - Having NANOG on the East Coast was wonderful. 

2. Really my answer is yes ... but I thought you might not read this otherwise. 

This one was close - for those of us with kids in school the last two weeks can be quite busy with "kid events". Pushing the summer meeting until the 3rd week of June would get us past the end of the school year for most. 

3. nanog is *always* on one of my children's birthdays. please avoid june 13 and october 12. thanks. :-) 

4. Only due to corporate restrictions on travel. 

5. The Location was good but I would like to see it start on Monday instead of Sunday. 

6. Personal, to close to school graduations, end of the school year trips.

Answered question


(skipped this question)

4. Is the current Registration Fee Model acceptable to you?


92.0% (103)


8.0% (9)

If you answered "No" please tell us why


1. Get professional/outside conferencing people to run it for merit, they are more experienced and would cost less overall, given all the employees sucking the nanog tit 

2. A little pricey for what you get 

3. Price is becoming unacceptable. Why aren't we working with more vendors to sponsor these meetings?

4. The fee model is OK but the signup mechanism is needlessly complex. Keeping state from meeting to meeting and then making one jump through hoops to access it is *not helpful*. 

5. The fee seems to be excessive considering what is included for the cost. If people attending are subsidizing the live streaming sessions then that needs to be fixed by charging a fee to those that wish to participate remotely. The sponsors rock and are the only thing that makes it worth the fee that is paid although the sponsors foot the bill. 

6. Meeting fee is somewhat underwritten by the hotel rates, and therefore the out-of-town people pay more towards the fees. 

7. NANOG should look into a daily badge. many people seem to attend "the hallways", taking advantage of the event without contributing. NANOG should get some compensation for the value they provide - organizing an event that brings everyone together. In my opinion that is at least of equal value to the talks. 

8. It incentivises me to get involved, talk, and get a nice discount. ;-) 

9. I like the earlier one where registration was lower if you don't attend the tutorials. Tutorials should be paid, or if there is not enough interest, scrapped or combined with the BOF. 

10. too high 

11. probably willing to pay more

Answered question


(skipped this question)

5. Are the PGP Key Signing sessions of use to you?


31.5% (34)


68.5% (74)

1. Poor attendance 

2. I manage a University's ISP connections, so don't really have the need to sign keys with other operators. 

3. I do not deal with that

4. No time to partricipate

5. Because I assiduously avoid having my PGP keys in any kind of public repository. People who need to send me encrypted mail are provided the keys on a case by case basis, in person or via other secure channels. The reason behind this policy is that there are certain people who will shrug and say "it's ok, it's encrypted" and then send stuff that oughtn't be sent.

6. Not a big PGP user, but perhaps

7. Don't use PGP. Also as far as I know the only signing session was thrown together last minute for the few people who cared.

8. I avoid PGP when possible. But that doesn't mean there shouldn't be a BoF on it for those who do use it!

9. I'm just not involved in that.

10. I don't use PGP

11. Initial contact can always lead to key exchange

12. Did not plan to attend. Might have attended if the meeting were announced earlier.

13. not overly important; conflict with more interesting talks

14. wish more folks used pgp/gpg, or other crypto...

15. It clashed with a talk I was doing.

16. Key signing is for wackjobs

17. Don't use PGP

18. did not participate

19. Not needed

20. Don't know the benefits of having a host of nanogers signing my key; the session was announced late.

21. not preannounced

22. What is PGP???

23. Signed keys aren't useuful in my work.

24. haven't used PGP in years.

25. I don't sign PGP keys.

26. pgp didn't really happen and isn't that useful. web of trust model mostly failed. which is a shame.

27. I don't believe in PGP ;)

28. If possible try to have an exclusive time for this..other BOFs interfere with it.

29. Lack of organisation, no signing

30. love the web of trust

31. n/a

32. there wasn't a pgp key signing session this time

33. I have never gotten into the habit of using keys

34. I find them useful, but there are none on the agenda for this NANOG, which is somewhat disappointing.

35. remote

36. I don't rely on PGP keys signed or otherwise

37. Don't use a PGP key, though maybe I should

38. Was there one? Don't see it on the agenda.

39. Didn't come prepared for it.

40. I saw the "I sign keys" stickers, but did not see that there was a key signing session.

41. Because I am lazy

42. I've probably got a wide enough trust network now so that I can easily validate most keys on my keychain. I'm sure they are still useful to people who are new to the community or new to needing to regularly use PGP.

43. They would be, but I do not see a formal keysigning session on the agenda for this Nanog.

44. I don't use them

45. I don't use PGP

Answered question


(skipped this question)


6. Overall, was this NANOG useful to you?

Very Useful

36.1% (43)


63.0% (75)

No Opinion

2.5% (3)

Not Very Useful

0.8% (1)


0.0% (0)

Answered question


(skipped this question)

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


92.2% (106)


2.6% (3)

No Opinion

5.2% (6) 

Answered question


(skipped this question)

8. For the next NANOG meeting, which of the following start times most suits your needs?


2.5% (3)


14.3% (17)


36.1% (43)


41.2% (49)


13.4% (16) 

Answered question


(skipped this question)

9. Did you utilize the public laptops and printer near registration?


5.2% (6)


94.8% (110)

1. Couldn't find the printer when I needed it 

2. I would like to see NANOG moving back to 2-day schedule, instead of the current 2.5 days. I would also like to see the program committee do a better job next time in selecting presentations (some talk this time was really a waste of time, at the same time I knew other more interesting presentation requests had been turned down).

3. I used the kiosk provided in the hotel lobby, however this amenity is nice to have.

4. Didn't need to

5. Normally I do for boarding passes

6. Sometimes having a printer is useful (plane tickets) though I don't want to type in my credentials, so something usb-stickable, is nice (printer or laptop).

7. But the network was down :-) It's good to print our boarding pass.

8. Get rid of those already, if people can afford the nanog registration fee they can afford a netbook

9. the office was located very far away from the main venue

10. I didn't know they were there

11. Meeting scheduled on top of the annual USENIX meeting.

12. I preferred the 2 day schedule/format.

13. not needed brought my own laptop. Connectivity was excellent.

14. not this time, but have in the past

15. I might have needed to use a fax machine, luckily it proved unneeded.

16. remotely attended this one

Answered question


(skipped this question)

10. Comments on the Community Meeting:


1. more discussion , less lecturing 

2. Did not attend.

3. Interesting, but quiet. 

4. Don't go to these. 

5. Was good. Wish there was more spicy drama regarding the MLC. Seems folks talk big on futures but don't want to hash it out in the open. 

6. Much more quiet, but still useful to understand the financial aspect and good to hear updates on charter, mailing list comm, etc.

7. This was great. No yelling or name-calling. 

8. Good to see Paul Vixie back in the mix 

9. I like that it was quiet - means NANOG is getting things right. 

10. Short and to the point which was terrific 

11. N/A

12. did not attend (arrived Monday) 

13. Did not attend. 

14. well-organized, no drama, hence good! 

15. enjoyed it; on topic, on track.

16. Hoped for more activity - maybe next time with elections and all. 

17. Very useful to get a better handle on the people on the various committees and the roles that they play. 

18. Political. 

19. did not attend 

20. Its was good at showing what the nanog community is up to. 

21. insufficient conflict! worth changing the format or cancelling this meeting. suggest sending slides out in advance and then asking for community presentations or debate. 

22. Always good to hear what y'all get up to. It's appreciated! 

23. Not as much audience participation as past meetings, which may be a good thing, as no one had any major issues to complain about.

24. Needs not to run late .. 

25. did not attend 

26. More encouragement for people to get up and talk in front of a crowd, comments and questions and potentially controversial topics

27. Well attended, however, not much said - probably because people are generally happy with how NANOG is being run. No "mob of angry villagers". However, it's important this doesn't become stale. I wonder if some organisation would be prepared to sponsor drinks and snacks at/immediately before the community meetting, to encourage attendance and participation at the Community Meeting. 

28. Very much appreciated 

29. This was m first Nanog, and while the various administrative functions can be somewhat boring, I actually found myself engaged and interested in learning more. Very impressive. :) 

30. No arguments, way cool.

Answered question


(skipped this question)


11. Comments on the Newcomers' Breakfast:


1. always worthwhile

2. Good- stacey was a good hostess.

3. Did not attend.

4. This was very nice. I got to meet some of the people from the NANOG list. It was interesting to listen to some of the discussions of the issues they were experiencing.

5. Bring back Ren. (Sorry, Stacey, but it really never took off.)

6. Great. The room was really big so it was hard to hear people, sounds odd, but may want to consider celling height a factor in picking the room. The taking everyone's badge idea was very cool.

7. Always a good time.

8. Would be nice to not have separate breakfasts so that way the newcomers could meet more people.

9. Got there too late Wed, Jun 24, 2009 6:15 AM findFind... 10. Wasn't as well attended as I expected, however we did meet some new folks

11. N/A

12. did not attend (realized too late that it was a separate area)

13. Nice

14. need *quiet* rooms and good audio - this seems to be something hotels never get right for the conference... not nanog's fault by any means, however, still something to prod the event or site-coordinators at hotels about in the future.

15. Big space but was well attended. Audio was tricky.

16. concept was good, but there wasn't much of a food selection

17. Food was a little weak compared to previous meetings.

18. It was unclear how different it was than the normal breakfast besides having tables. I did not arrive at 8:30 on the dot, though, so there might have been more things there that I missed.

19. Perhaps a bit smaller.

20. n/a

21. No bacon?? Bacon is the candy bar of meats! This is America, we need American breakfast with excessive cholesterol fat content.

22. While, I was @ 8:30, the agenda wasn't very clear that we should show up @ 8:30 as there would be things going on. Continental breakfast makes it sound that you can stop by anytime between 8:30 and 9:30.

23. well attended and great. i met several newcomers.

24. simple white toast would be great

25. it was nice that Stacy Hughes knew my name and introduced me during the breakfast

26. Did not attend.

27. did not attend

28. Missed them all. Free beer every night doesn't help this. But I'm not complaining. :)

29. Didn't attend it.

30. Good to meet others, have an opportunity for newcomers to feel welcome and perhaps approach folks that they may be hesitant to approach otherwise.

31. Great way to meet people. Tue, Jun 16, 2009 6:50 AM findFind... 32. Excellent, I enjoyed the opportunity to meet some of the Internet greats. The breakfast is an excellent opportunity to meet new people.

33. Having signs up pointing to the ballroom would have helped.

34. Didn't attend.

Answered question


(skipped this question)


12. Comments on the General Sessions:


1. generally worthwhile

2. Over all good. Speakers were a little dry however and topics in some cases very technical in nature- not of interest to all.

3. god keynote

4. Excellent sessions, much needed focus on IPv6 was very good.

5. Very interesting for a first-timer.

6. Pretty good. Not many (any?) real clunkers.

7. This was great content, good meeting in general

8. Monday's were great. The quality dropped off on Tuesday and Wednesday with a few notable exceptions (the DNSSEC talk on Tuesday, the CGN panel on Wednesday, and almost all of the lightning talks, except "Study of the Current Internet Architecture and Future Implications").

9. Keynote was awful, completely horrible. I feel dumber for having to listen to Vixie drone on and on about his views that dont play out in the real world. Plus, what was up with the slides? He had slides where the only text was like size 8 font in centered...no one could read it. 

I was hoping that someone would load up the youtube video and play him out keyboard cat.

10. I generally did not like the PA system.

11. Keynote ended up being tough to take in the morning given speaker's lack of clarity and terseness of slides. Not positive how well this could've been foreseen, though.

12. generally the general sessions were good and were also timely

13. Good topics. I like that the PC is finding things of interest.

14. A good mix of relevant topics

15. I was on panel for Datacenter cooling trends - the discussions held prior were very interesting though

16. Please dear heavens less Vixie. Especially early in the morning. No one has had enough caffeine to deal with monotone.

17. NANOG is always informative, but there were more sessions useful to me than usual, even.

18. All talks were given well. I was interested in most of the topics, but not all.

19. I liked the mix of talks, especially the routing security related ones.

20. good selection, and very topical/operationally relevant. good to see v6 progressing from academia to mainstream production, interested in seeing more talks of that nature.

21. Good content. HVAC is always a challenge.

22. Paul Vixie was terrible. Complete rambling nutjob. Who approved that presentation?

23. I've noticed there were some talks just removed from the program last minute, e.g. Randy Bush Talk, the key note address by Paul Vixie was too long and boring

24. Need the coffee to stay out longer. The hotel staff pulled it at 9:30, so i can't get a cup at 9:45, or 10:15.

25. Very good info here, there were set up nicely.

26. For the most part, they were great especially the ones on Monday. I like the presentations that are about what the organization has done and the problem encountered and what can we expect when it happens.

27. Most of the talks were very strong. Monday keynote totally sucked and was a waste of an hour, and did nothing to start of the meeting on the right foot. Material Wednesday AM was weak as well.

28. Great diversity in the topics. Nice job.

29. The Netflix IPv6 talk was interesting and new. In general, lets have more NEW stuff and less repetition. I only come to NANOGs occasionally, but I get to see a lot of the same stuff.

30. very informative, lots of great information

31. Overall very informative and mostly interesting.

32. Cooling panel - the guy from Terremark had a really painful style, 'high hype' though the content was OK

33. sessions were very good.

34. Good sessions. Time management still needs considerable improvement.

35. Good times. Informative.

36. More encouragement for people to get up and talk in front of a crowd, comments and questions and potentially controversial topics

37. Please can session chairs place a request to the room at the start of the session for all the various bits of electronica (laptops, phones, widgets, etc.) to be put into SILENT MODE before the meeting starts. This NANOG has something like the worst display of speaker courtesy (or lack of) that I've ever seen, in terms of beeping, buzzing and little tunes, interrupting the talks. It's offputting to the speakers, and disruptive to the audience's concentration.

38. Something was odd with the audio - all the mics were on but I had to strain to understand what many of the speakers said Tue, Jun 16, 2009 7:32 AM findFind...

39. I would like to see more topics/sessions. I believe reducing NANOG events to twice a year will help.

40. While the sessions were informative and incredibly useful, I did find that the acoustics were severely lacking. In some instances, the speakers themselves contributed to the problem, being soft spoken in general, but in other situations the acoustics of the room seemed to detract from the ability to hear the speaker effectively.

41. Having the correct powerpoint slides up on the web would have been a big help (the ones posted look to be very out-of-date, out of order, or just missing). Having them in PDF instead of PPTX would be even better.

42. Too many computers in the room.

Answered question


(skipped this question)


13. Was the Welcome Speaker(s) address of value?


1. seldom worth a damn

2. Yes, perfect - could have been a keynote

3. I missed the first morning, so dont know what this "Welcome Speaker(s) address " really is. But I did hear multiple comments about that "art of war" talk, all felt that's lower value than expected.

4. Paul is a bit less capable as a speaker than I would prefer, though the content was OK.

5. If you mean KeyNote.. um.. While Paul is generally a fine speaker it would be of sooo much more value to hear from someone not in our industry. Get the CTO of FedEx and ask them why they are pushing for v6. The CTO of CBS a few NANOGs ago was great. This way we get a glimpse of the way things are done outside of ISPs and content providers.

6. Todd and John, or Paul? Todd and John had pretty basic welcome stuff. Meh. Paul's talk was very good, though hard to hear over the open doors, talking in the back, and ringing cellphones, let alone Paul's speaking style.

7. It was valuable, what little I could hear of it.

8. Not really.

9. not really

10. Yes

11. The topic was good, but the speaker needed a lot of help.

12. Yes and no. Great topic, flat delivery.

13. I think this is a good idea; more of a formality but it would be weird without it.

14. N/A

15. Not really. Jay was a better speaker at 43. Someone up and coming in the industry is usually going to be a hit. Even if they are a heavy use of networks rather than a strict owner of one. They often have useful things to say about being a major customer of networks.

16. thought the speaker had some interesting insights on technology future

17. It was ok.

18. Paul's speech was good, though depressing...

19. Vixie's talk was, at best, lightning talk material. clearly not insightful or otherwise interesting as a keynote.

20. Value, hard to say. Not terribly "encouraging" - perhaps look towards topics "take us ahead" or that are the product of extensive examination, travel, or notable exploration. 

I think, in general, the direction keynotes should head is towards 'the sky' - for example -- Len Bozak @ Bellvue: talked about the *real* impact physics has on datacom and how he views the market, Vint @ LA: talked about IP at the edges of the inhabited solar and extra-solar system and the special things that happen there. 

These and things like them seem to make great keynote topics, as they point in a very affirmative and positive direction, and bring 'down to us' things that we don't often get to (or will ever get) to explore.

21. Yes Wed, Jun 17, 2009 12:21 PM findFind... 22. Vixie was vixie, smaller timeslice for him in future :-)

23. see comment above

24. yes

25. Yes

26. As a first time it was but it probably won't be in the future.

27. I'm assuming that this is Paul Vixie. It was a great start to the meetings. It has some perspective and he talked about the bigger picture and larger ideas than the rest of the sessions.

28. Since I'm having a hard time remembering what was said, it doesn't seem to have been memorable :(

29. Yes, always interesting to get another perspective.

30. Please speak clearly. I could not get it.

31. not really

32. He commented on a problem in a fashion taht was interesting. It is not clear that he actually changed anyones view of the problem.

33. Vixie's talk was very good.

34. yes

35. Yes

36. Yes. Wish the government sector would hear it.

37. It was interesting to see John Schanz in person

38. Good value.

39. Good topic. Iffy presentation. Would it have had more impact if it was presented better?

40. Who was the welcome speaker? There wasn't actually a "keynote" this time.

41. Yes.

42. Being my first Nanog, yes, I learned quite a bit.

43. Yes.

44. Haven't heard it yet.

Answered question


(skipped this question)


14. Comments on the Tutorials: (Please reference the Tutorial(s) you are commenting on)


1. were good the first few years, haven't been recently

2. Good tutorials, DHCPv6 was useful.

3. I found the IPv6 in 30 minutes tutorial very helpful. Well-focused!

4. Both the IPv6 and RFP tutorials were good.

5. I liked the IPv6 tutorial.

6. More practical presentations and live online demonstrations will be wonderful.

7. tutorials were good, keep them up

8. IPv6 in 30 minutes or less was great Also liked Dani Roisman's Effective BGP Load Balancing

9. N/A

10. Please check your Tutorial presenters slides for non-technical/political stupidity.

11. did not attend

12. I missed the tutorials.

13. The DHCPv6 tutorial was a tad dry, though I'm not sure how else to present such a talk... also the room sat 400+ and only 20 people were in it, that probably didn't help the speaker any.

14. Hannigan RFP = okay, said what it had to, not stellar Roisman = good

15. The tutorials I attended were useful. ras's ipv6 90 minute in 30 minutes tutorial was good. I think that these are a great resource for people who are newer to the industry and a good way to allow these people to justify the trip/expense to their management.

16. RFP tutorial was great.

. 17. DOCSIS 3.0, DOCSIS IPV6 - if you are trying deploy it, I would think they would be useful.

18. Alot of rehashed v6 presentations, although perhaps it's still needed.

19. The IPV6 in 30 minutes or less was great. being new to V6 and trying to deploy by year end, this was a major tutorial for me.

20. DOCIS one by cisco overran, was slow going and required far more cerebral attention than I was prepared for that day

21. BGP Metric System tutorial was very useful. IPv6 in 30 minutes also very useful: loved the focused topic and "rubber meets the road" details.

22. not very strong

23. More variety, please.

24. BGP load balancing using metric is too basic for this audiance.

25. The BGP tutorial was incredible. Dani is an excellent speaker and was quite helpful. I was able to understand the concepts being presented and learned quite a bit. Given the chance, I would attend more of his talks.

26. I am always impressed with the NANOG tutorials.

27. The DOCSIS 3.0 tutorial was *EXCEEDINGLY* dry. The rest were pretty good.

28. ipv6 YEAH!

29. What tutorials?

Answered question


(skipped this question)


15. Comments on the Tracks: (Please reference the Track(s) you are commenting on)

1. Tracks are just really short and general. I would rather see less tracks with more information.

2. IPv6 track was awesome. Really enjoyed it. Great job, Nina.

3. The IPv6 track was valuable.

4. Peering is _always_ entertaining.

5. The IPv6 track had plenty of content and was most useful to us

6. I liked the datacenter cooling trends rather well (but I was on panel)

7. I thought the v6 track was good and seemed to be useful to everyone else (given the number of comments at the mike).

8. Tuesday Switching track: I was a presenter. It was also good.

9. Peering was packed, as always.

10. I was at the security track. The one main thing is that the tracks have/encourage audience participation and I felt the time was a bit limited for this interactions.

11. Peering Track was well run!

12. Hijack mitigation, DNSSEC, ISP SECURITY are good discussions for network community prepare for various attacks.

13. The entire IPv6 track has been very informative. v6 is new to me and to us as an organization, so we're looking for all the information we can get.

Answered question


(skipped this question)


16. Comments on the BoFs: (Please reference the BoF(s) you are commenting on)


1. always useful

2. Peering BOF- very good, well attended. Comments re survey and questions/format interesting - everyone needs to contribute.

3. A bit of confusion regarding the ad hoc BoFs. Better to have them not confirmed at nearly the last minute and have them conflict with other, previously scheduled events.

4. The Federated CDN BOF was scheduled to clash against the Equinix party - Boo hiss It was a good discussion on the topic of CDNs - would have been better with more people Perhaps the ad hoc BOFs can be scheduled to not clash - maybe have the party later Good to see the ad hoc BOFs have group DISCUSSION

5. IPv6 BOF/Panel was great!

6. I attended the Peering BOF, even though we only peer with a local educational org. Very interesting to hear where people were from, what they had to offer, etc.

7. Ryan did a great job with the Peering BoF. Thanks for shortening the survey update. Also, nice to see the IX update didn't take 20 mins. We really need to start working a summary ahead of time.

8. Did not attend.

9. Peering BOF is turning into the #ix comedy hour

10. The peering BoF seems to become more and more of a social event for a very few people, this needs to be fixed.

11. I found the BoFs to be the most interesting and valuable, mostly from a networking perspective. They allowed people to get together and talk more one on one than in the large room presentations.

12. Peering BOF was lots of fun!

13. N/A

14. Tuesday Switching BoF: I was a presenter. It was also good.

15. peering was okay, but conveniently missing was a presentation by the host (Comcast) on their v4 and v6 peering policy. as a future practice, each peering BoF should have a peering personal by its host (where applicable), as well as some information on the local market and the climate for interconnection there, to keep things interesting.

16. Peering BOF is getting old - and of dubious utility, imho. Peering personals, perhaps of some utility. In general, though, this BOF and others like it are perhaps becoming something of a grandstanding event or network 'rock concert.' However, the switching bof held lots of 'new stuff, what's mattering in the networ' value for me.

17. I attended peering BOF. It was a shame that JPNAP where not encouraged to get involved. I think they pay a lot of money to come a long way and this was not acknowledged. They were not invited to provide an IX update like the other IX's present.

18. This was extremely helpful to me as a new peering coord.

19. I didn't attend any.

20. Joel's 10G switch BOF was excellent. Having non-sales engineers from more than one vendor was a nice touch.

21. new bofs are *great*. i'd like to see this system expanded. perhaps use google moderator or something to put it online.

22. NOC Tools BOF was wonderful. Helped me to find some great new tools. The Peering BOF was good, but I was a little put off. This is my first Nanog, and I felt out of place. It seems that there are a lot of people that know each other. This can intimidating to a newcomer. Was a good session though. I learned a lot.

23. Like the ad-hoc did-dad, but wonder if having them so late in the day impacted attendance since it was in parallel to a sponsored party.

24. Peering BOF was very informative and entertaining.

25. The ISP Security BOF was fun and informative. I enjoyed all the talks given and was able to engage the speakers both during and after the BOF. I very much like the relaxed nature of the BOFs.

26. The room was way to crowded.

Answered question


(skipped this question)


17. Did you attempt to connect to the nanog-v6only SSID during the meeting?


21.7% (23)


79.2% (84)


1. First time every the v6 was rock solid. Thanks Comcast for the native v6!

2. My laptop would not associate (ASUS EEE 900 running xubuntu 9.04). IPv6 connectivity worked great on the nanog SSID (minus the rogue RAs).

3. I've already done extensive v6 only testing.

4. unfortunately corporate laptop did not permit connectivity

5. v6 wireless on nanog-a kept on dying & i finally turned v6 on my laptop off.

6. there's nothing good on the v6 internet. i like the real internet better.

7. I was able to connect to the V6 only SSID.

8. IPv6 worked for me - and I used it almost exclusively (at least to my v6 http proxy at home ;)

9. No point. No need to test a protocol that provides so little value when I'm on the road.

10. Due to my bad configuration, probably, my mac cannot resolve names. Consequently I cannot use ipv6-only network

11. Using XP

12. company laptop, didn't want to turn on v6 and then have to figure out how to turn it off :(

13. I am using the v6 connectivity on the nanog SSID however, and that appears to be working well. Dual stack definitely appears to be viable.

14. If only the rest of the world spoke ipv6 :(

15. The company macine I was using does not have an acceptable IPv6 security policy for connection to the unfiltered public internet.

16. It was cool that you had it, but I live an IPv4 world, so was not applicable to me :(

17. I fail at IPv6. As a newbie to v6, I find that I need to do more research and learning to make it work. I was able to get simple pings working to some addresses I uncovered, but I had difficulty getting name resolution, and consequently, web access working. Purely my issue, I believe.

18. was able to get connectivity but it is not particularly useful :)

19. It seemed to work flawlessly.

Answered question


(skipped this question)


18. What did you like/dislike about the meeting venue?


1. no complaints

2. Good central location, lots of stuff in walking distance.

3. Hotel was great

4. Cable demonstration plus the Netflix/Limelight/ThePlanet was fantastic!

5. The venue was great, and very convenient.

6. Great hotel! Great location.. really easy to get around!

7. Elevators were my only real issue. Having only one elevator to floors 5-18 on Monday caused some pain. Otherwise, both the city and the hotel were great.

8. Venue was fine... $city as long as it's not freezing near major airport is always fine with me.

9. The Loews/PSFS building was beautiful.

10. Great hotel. Terrible food.

11. Great venue.

12. PA system

13. Very nice venue. The hotel was clean and very accommodating.

14. the freaking parking fee was outrageous

15. I thought the hotel and accommodations were perfect for the event. Good location. Actually had room to move around at beer n gear

16. Decent venue. Local bar on site was good. :) Wireless in the rooms would have been nice, but the meeting spaces were good. Esp liked power being easily accessible in the large room.

17. I didn't like that the bar did not have chairs right outside so when it was noisy you couldn't step out and sit down. But I liked that there was one bar where you could find everyone, and plenty of food "close". I _loved_ the escalators.

18. Great location, easy flow between rooms. Horrible elevators, very disappointing "breakfast" and break food, and why were they so anxious to strike the food the millisecond that the breaks were over?

19. I like the fact that it was in a city and it was easy to walk to the social events, restaurants etc. Also, nice that I didn't have to fly there! Mon, Jun 22, 2009 9:20 AM findFind... 20. I thought it was great since I am from Phila area and hotel was right across from the regional rail station.

21. N/A

22. The hotel room connectivity was terrible. Often there were issues getting an elevator. And there were not ice machines on every floor and of the ones that did have ice machines, they often did not work. 

Power strips at every row of tables. More tables for laptops.

23. Nifty hotel, but expensive (and their elevators were slow). Conference facilities were good.

24. The meeting venue was very nice.

25. good location, clean hotel, streetwalkers/bums/other unsavory elements were kept to a minimum as much as possible for a big city

26. the ballrooms were to cold

27. Hotel itself was extremely good, excellent levels of customer service which really helps. Downtown venue means there are interesting things to do nearby. Philly is a hub airport for an airline which serves my region in Europe. Logistically, this nanog was a breeze.

28. Great hotel, a little over-the-river-and-thru-the-woods. Location/city couldn't be better!

29. Not enough lobby space to sit and talk

30. The meeting rooms were way too cold

31. Venue was great.

32. Brilliant city centre location

33. Meeting venue was fine. No problems. good location. I used the fitness room, went to some local sights.

34. Very cold.

35. I thought this was an excellent venue, lot's to do in close proximity.

36. The location was great especially being across the street from market east station. I like the power at the desks.

37. Elevators were ridiculous.

38. *great* hotel. fantastic facility, good location. i was shocked at how much i liked philly.

39. I thought the venue was great -- it was centrally located, with lots of surrounding resources. The hotel was nicely appointed and well suited to the conference.

40. The venue was good. I like the large layout of the room and that most of the sessions were all held in one or two rooms. Normally at a conference like this you have to choose what you want to go to. I was able to attend everything that was of interest to me.

41. + central location - parking is expensive

42. Elevator trauma!

43. I liked that I had a location to stow laptop bag during lunch/after events.

44. Parking. Expensive and not convenient.

45. the venue was really excellent. Nice location right downtown

46. great location meeting room too cold

47. it was hard to navigate to the right floor and place at first... a map in the handout would have been useful

48. Several of the guys were mentioning that this is the first hotel bar they've seen that closed at 2am and not earlier.

49. Overall very much like the venue, good lunching options in the immediate area, very nice building. Elevators have been an issue, but that's about it.

50. had to wait long periods for elevators to floors 6-19

51. elevators stunk - took way too long to arrive - sound system terrible - sounded like MUD

52. air conditioning was severe :)

53. Elevators were slow and unreliable.

54. a bit froofy Front desk staff seemed dismissive towards conference attendees.

55. Hate having to pay for crappy hotel room wireless. Can we leverage numbers to get discount or free?

56. Wish my first NANOG would've been in Bermuda or what not.

57. The banqueting staff were over-zealous about clearing away the breakfast and break food. For example, on the stroke of 9.30, they were there clearing food away, while people were still collecting food. This not only looked "cheap" on the part of the hotel, but was rude, and the clearing trolleys blocked up the space outside the meeting room. Better to get the banqueting staff to wait until the meeting is in session before changing the break food out. Other hotels seem to manage this pretty well.

58. Hotel rooms were awesome, meeting space was good, elevators were *stupid slow*, but location (good places within walking distance) was great

59. WiFi connections are not reliable.

60. The hotel is beautiful and the staff seemed to be attentive and nice. The elevator situation was extremely frustrating, especially for those with rooms on floors 6-18. It seems that, at times, the elevators servicing those floors were completely non-functioning.

61. Reasonably nice hotel, although the hotel-provided wireless was essentially non-functional after Sunday afternoon. Had to stay downstairs to use NANOG's wireless network to get any work done.

62. not in DC ;)

63. The room was too cold.

Answered question


(skipped this question)


19. What worked well and what should be improved for the next meeting?


1. costs/ merge with arin meetings to save costs and improve conference

2. Maybe a slightly smaller room for general sessions. Very hard to see and even hear well from the back of the room.

3. make NANOG more professional - less like amateur night speakers

4. Would like to see a better progra for next meeting. Would also like to see the presentation submission deadline be moved closer to the meeting, rather than 3 months in advance.

5. We should have a nanog around the DC area.

6. You need a better opening speaker!

7. power power power power power! :D I had to leave the meeting several times to charge my laptop. Many of us have to work while at these events. :) Everything else was good.

8. No real complaints.

9. Great event overall, so my nits are the most minor of nits: coach session chairs on how to end presentations on time, especially at break time. Coach anyone who might be using a microphone to keep talking after saying "Is this microphone on?" - if you don't say anything, no one will know.

10. I thought the flow of the meeting was very good - no improvement needed.

11. N/A

12. I think more examples of someone implementing something and the trials and tribulations would be nice to hear. How well operations dealt with the roll-out. Any work done between engineering and operations teams.

Also, when a .edu speaker comes up with an idea, more examples of ways their idea might fit into the market/network would be good. They often come up with something that could be interesting, but clearly have not worked on a real network to see how it is implemented. Perhaps case studies of implementations (names removed of course)

13. Connectivity was very spotty and extremely slow.

14. Need more power outlets.

15. People that play with there laptop should leave the room. It was hard to concentrate.

16. Choosing more hotels with stronger in-hotel networking. The open seating rooms seem to only be used in hotels with poor/no in-room connectivity.

17. Moving in the right direction on the badges, BUT: 

1) I prefered the old style with the clip on the badge so I could clip it to my shirt and prevent it from flipping over
2) If you're going to do the schedule on the back like ripe, make it fit on one page so you dont have to pull the paper out and unfold it to read it. Also you need speaker names. Why not put up a big LCD screen near registration desk with the current updated schedule?

18. The structure worked well. The one thing is lunch, which some things could be added. Make it sorta like a BOF, why waste the time, when something informal could be going on. Like: people interested in X, Y, Z are going to somewhere. The other is a pointer to good local places. It isn't totally obvious when you walk out.

19. Wireless-A coverage was remarkably good.

20. I would tighten/condense the schedule back down to two days. Things have felt a bit sparse in the last few NANOGs.

21. As a newcomer, I would like to see a little bit more in the way of introductions. So when people step up to speak a little more detail would be great.

22. there are too many sponsored social events. one each night is excessive Wed, Jun 17, 2009 6:24 AM findFind... 23. Audio quality in the room was pretty bad. I had a hard time hearing all the presenters and people from the mike line. Apparently some presenters did not hear questions either. 

In general, spend less time on lengthy presentations and allow more time for discussion.

24. I think everything worked very well. I like the new Track format, and the ad-hoc BoFs.

25. Microphones for webcast. People on panel as well as audience need to speak into them.

26. Audio/video systems worked well. 

Need more power for laptop charging.

27. Offer additional t-shirts for cheap. People back home love them.

28. T-Shirts should have the breast POCKET because I am addicted to keeping stuff there.

29. The connectivity seemed to be very lumpy at times. Lots of dropouts, even on 802.11a wireless. There didn't seem to be any published stats of the access point and connectivity utilisation, or if there was, it was well hidden. 

The breaks often got "compressed" by insufficient time allowed for questions. This cuts down hallway conversation opportunities. Hallway networking is a vital element of NANOG and sufficient time must be allowed for this during the day. It's great that there are questions, but this has to be better managed.

30. Sound checks?

31. Great venue. Centrally located near many (other) hotels, groceries, public transportation, and walking distance to China town.

32. I think my biggest complaint is the acoustics in the main meeting room. It was very difficult to understand many of the speakers. 

The agenda seemed to be accommodating enough to prevent any major conflicts in interest. While there were some tracks I would have liked to attend, I was quite happy with those I made it to.

33. There was no HD feed online this year. Presentations were very hard to see and its difficult to have video up and follow along with the slide sets at the same time. The flash feed provided the best viewing out of the choices of streaming media, however this wasn't on your list of choices in the survey. Seemed to me as if the creator of the survey didn't check the page to see the streaming media offerings.

34. No comment

Answered question


(skipped this question)


20. Do you have suggestions for future NANOG presentations? (topics and/or speakers)


1. More industry analysis, marketing/business oriented topics. Panel discussions are also good.

2. More and more people access Internet from hand-held devices now. Getting some people from mobile operators to talk about their issues, plan, forecast, etc.

3. More IPv6.

4. Cloud computing impact on network. Analyst perspective on datacenters and ISPs.. Has the measurement changed over the years from $/sqft to something else?

5. IPv6 needs to be more and more relevant, it is probably the biggest operational challenge that will be faced over the next 4-5 years

6. Cloud infrastructure

7. Some MPLS? More DNSSEC.

8. A presentation or panel on carrier ranking - how valuable is it really? We see results from Renesys, caida etc. How much stock should we put in these rankings?

9. I'm sure I'll think of some by NANOG 47

10. More on datacenters...smart grid tech and how Cisco is penetrating that market Sat, Jun 20, 2009 10:06 AM findFind... 11. A little more content and direction on the routing security issues/directions would be nice, if nothing else than for keeping the community informed.

12. more v6 in real live operational/service provider/content host environments 

more datacenter networking (eg Roisman talk; well done there) focus

13. More technical.

14. Dave Ward is doing an excellent panel right now. Seems he's a good speaker we haven't had in a while. Wed, Jun 17, 2009 8:41 AM findFind... 15. more bofs on Noc tools, Andy Davidson did a very good job on this one

16. router and switch security best practices

17. Bring back the guy from Arastra who talked at the switching BOF

18. I wonder if CERT/CC could do a presentation. Marcus and Jarred talked how few go to meetings that involve Washington, could we just bring those to us for a presenation and maybe an extended feedback session.

19. metro-ethernet layer2

20. Virtualization Networking features and performance... (?)

21. I would like to see some "best practices" talks. This could cover almost any topic. Peering, V6 deployment, data retention etc.

22. People need to stop chirping about how wonderful IPv6 is and get into some real-world details like the lightning talk from Yahoo person on the quad A issues for clients and how much breakage it can cause and a suggestion on how to fix 

Of course IPv6 "just works" when it comes to addressing router ints and moving packets. After 15 years of development, it had better "just work." 

But router ints and packet passing is the lowest level of operation, and there won't be major uptake until people post details on exactly what the problems are and exactly how to deal with real world issues like the quad A screwups in the clients. 

ALso, hand waves on client management like "use dynamic addressing" are never going to get traction in enterprise networks that rely on DHCPv4 for managing their networks.

23. no, but I have a list of things that I would NOT like to hear next time: - survey results from "would you like to move to a Future Internet without spam" poll. Duh. - yet another Lisp tutorial (where the interesting points where given from the audience, like issues with caching)

24. Build off the L2 STP presentation theme; have a session on data center design - MLAG; commodity HPC clusters and connectivity between them


26. Monitoring and maintaining diverse circuit types.

27. I'd like to find a large enterprise who can come and present on some interesting element or challenge of their network - as we may find that our problems and theirs may not be a million miles apart.

28. I'd like to learn more on initiatives to prevent prefix hijacking. BGP SEC? What are the government initiatives to make BGP more secure?

29. Personally, I'm interested in more security information. I would love to see a presentation on how companies are handling network security, from a tools and procedures perspective. We're a small college, but seeing what others do can give us incredible insight into what we should be doing. 

I'm also interested in network monitoring from a "is it up and running" perspective, to a "is it performing" perspective. We use open-source tools to monitor our network and we feel we have a good handle on this at the moment, but I'd like to learn more about what we can and should be monitoring, and why. (how helps too)

30. More BGP, more IP, more MPLS, more redundancy.

31. Keep up the great work finding topics.

Answered question


(skipped this question)


21. Suggestions/volunteers for future NANOG Hosts: (The folks who work with Merit to locate hotel, provide connectivity, build hotel network, and staff meeting.)


1. Host specific technology demonstrations would be ideal where applicable.

2. The WiFi on the 3rd floor was very poor. I attended the Security BOF & had limited/no connectivity.

3. Open BAR! (ok, I know that one isn't realistic)

4. N/A

5. More suggestions for non-chain foods. Perhaps a small map of the local area with food places, shops marked up would be good with the registration information.

6. Akamai.

7. Chicago

8. Maybe have some local tourism information displayed onsite. Referring to a towns tourism website is great for advanced planning but sometimes one may decide to do something in the spur of the moment. Tue, Jun 16, 2009 12:03 PM findFind... 9. I wouldn't mind NANOG trying another Canada meeting some time in the future. How about Vancouver? Have we got anyone in that area that could host us?

10. I think having 4 events/yr is too much.

11. Keep doing what you're doing. This was an incredible experience.

12. Some organization in Michigan.

Answered question


(skipped this question)


22. Suggestions/volunteers for future NANOG Sponsors: (The folks who provide monetary support in exchange for exhibit area and community recognition.)



2. Vendors vendors vendors... Bring in sales & marketing. cat attendee | sort | uniq and start calling.. This is a highly targeted sales opportunity. Attendees will not mind if our price goes down. IMHO.

3. I'm all for more vendors there who want to whore their gear to us. We're a good captive audience as long as it's presented in a beer and gear setting.

4. US Federal CTO/CIO Alternate cities like Minneapolis, Phoenix, Las Vegas, Atlanta, Raliegh

5. Akamai.

6. You can sell advertising space on projectors and streams during the breaks. So instead of having a NANOG-46 banner, you could have advertisement on the big screen. A random thought.

7. It's mostly been system vendors (the "gear" in "beer & gear"), but it's good to see that net widened to people who sell useful/relevant services to the community. I noticed that we had connectivity providers at the session this time.

8. Keep sponsoring. Comcast did an incredible job, as did the various Beer and Gear sponsors. I'd personally like to see more booths of information (and swag!) so I can learn more about these companies. 

Also, I'm not sure how many smaller institutions attend Nanog, but keep those guys in mind too. While there were booths here this year, may of them were vastly beyond the scope of a smaller institution.

Answered question


(skipped this question)


23. Why do you attend NANOG?


1. content + attendees + get hassled by vendors

2. Network with others, Industry knowledge, Business Opportunities

3. free beer and candy

4. To get a better understanding of the real Internet.

5. The community has useful feedback that is relevant and practical.

6. In a time of tight budgets, it was something I always wanted to do, but had a hard time justifying to upper management. Being in Philadelphia worked well for me.

7. I work in peering operations and is really useful for me day to day work.

8. To meet with peers and keep up to date on the changes in the network world.

9. To make money. I continue to interact with new people over electrons and use nanog to put faces with names, shake a hand and with some meet socially. The content has been improving so also starting to enjoy the content again.

10. Quality of the presentations and meeting people.

11. meet with peers in corridors a few useful talks

12. The people.

13. Social, keep up with technology.

14. Meet peers and see what people are doing in general in the network field.

15. Service provider. Seeking peering.

16. for the networking and information exchange

17. Gather industry knowledgs and networking

18. Mostly people networking and learning about how everyone else is doing things.

19. Talk to people in the hallway.

20. Meet people, find a new job, learn stuff.

21. To meet my colleagues in the industry, hear about what's happening, share opinions, get some fresh ideas - just to name a few.

22. Half for technical reasons and half for social. Mon, Jun 22, 2009 7:59 AM findFind... 23. To be on panel

24. Get updates on what everyone is doing in their networks. Find new tools to run networks. Social networking within the Internet community.

25. I'm in the security area, but not an operator, so I attend to hear people talk about the networks they are building, the problems they are facing, the security mechanisms they are using and their experiences with those -- all as a guage of where the important problems to solve lie and what solutions have to look like.

26. To present in the Switching BoF.

27. content, networking, duty-to-the-community

28. I wanted to learn.

29. to meet peers and significant bright and skilled people from the industry. the peers for inproving and maintaining my peering network - meeiting the people for improving my skills and understanding of networking - and finally not to forget - to have a good time

30. Learn, Talk, Sell things, socialise.

31. Talk to people of like minds, get exposed to ideas, bash brains with other smart folks. To solve problems, some of which I didn't even know I had.

32. Gain insight into trends in the network industry and network with others.

33. Teeshirt replenishment.

34. For networking

35. Because I can.

36. meet people & keep in touch with ones i know

37. For Peering

38. I attend NANOG as it is the best way to interact with operators and others. There a true technical depth here and full of expereince.

39. networking, finding out what others are doing as to not re-invent the wheel.

40. Peer contacts, and keeping up to date.

41. make contact with network operators, understand the current facts about how networks are built and what's coming down the pike in the future. to hear these things from the people who are the most important engineers on the internet.

42. It's one of the only venues that's well-attended by a large, diverse group of networks with whom I manage relationships. Coupled with updates on standards and various operational experiences, I can kill quite a few birds with one stone.

43. learn more about V6 and other practices and services. Learning.

44. to stay on top of network issues

45. I have a fettish for Todds shiny head. erm, I mean, the quality of the talks and general networking and stuff.

46. Information, networking

47. Content and networking.

48. Try to get to at least one NANOG a year to find out what's happening and what new tools and approaches are available. Freuquently can't afford the time/effort to get to all NANOGs. 

It would help to have a "NANOG BCP" wiki for people like me who can't afford to get to all the NANOGS and who want to stay in the loop on BCP/community knowledge.

49. Gathering operational information, meeting people

50. 1. to meet customers
2. to meet prospects
3. to learn about cutting edge developments / BCP

51. Network Operator

52. Trying to figure out the best way to understand what the operators really need.

53. I want to understand what concerns and desires the network operators have. I work for a equipment vendor.

54. I am a network engineer at switch and data, and I am looking to stay on top of the latest things going on in the field, as well as to socially network with other engineers and customers that I deal with on a regular basis. 55. Chance to learn and discuss with peers instead of vendors.

56. Technical knowledge expansion.

57. Operations issues balance engineering/architecture as well as being able to close sales.

58. keep in touch with peers keep up to date

59. to keep up to date on recent movements and hot topics in the industry. Also to get an idea of what other people's experiences are in my area of interest.

60. Catch up on everything that's been happening in the industry while I was running my network, meet new people, network.

61. Kibitzing and keeping current.

62. To stay on the bleeding edge...and to network.

63. For the IPV6 stuff and Peering

64. Firstly, for Vacation Time, Secondly to intake on a fundamental level how many other geeks there are out there and what I can strive for, thirdly to absorb new concepts and fourthly to learn things.

65. To meet with industry peers, suppliers and customers. Coming together in the same place is important. Good talks are make what's already a good meeting great.

66. Meet with other network professionals, increase personal and company visibility, social aspect of seeing "old friends"

67. Good tutorial and minimum or no marketing materials. Opportunity to meet with the key people who runs the Internet.

68. I've wanted to attend for about 10 years. I finally got the opportunity this year and I'd attend again in a heartbeat. The information I've received will be incredibly useful. It also helped to rejuvenate my enthusiasm and give me a number of great ideas for the future. I was able to put faces to emails and meet some of the Internet greats. Overall it was an awesome experience.

69. To get information about what is happening in telecommunications today and what is important to the carriers.

70. network with peers, new ideas or revisit others

71. To learn about new technologies and to meet with the community.

Answered question


(skipped this question)


24. Comments for future NANOG meeting locations: (Does it matter to folks who attend meetings in person to anchor our meetings in the same Locations/hotels and work with the same vendor providing connectivity, or does it simply not matter to you?)


1. yes/ do e.coast/west coast alternately

2. The best meeting locations for me are major hubs of major airlines for easy in/out, save time, save money.

3. Philadelphia, PA

4. Please make Philadelphia a regular meeting location!

5. does not matter as long as it moves between east and west. Would be great to combine with ARIN and only host 2 a year.

6. It's good to move them around. East coast meetings are much easier for me to attend. Philly was a 30 minute train ride away.

7. Boston/Montreal would be nice.

8. i strongly believe that NANOG should tighten its partnership with ARIN and only have 2 meetings a year in conjunction with ARIN's meetings...this would be a huge benefit to the community.

9. Doesn't really matter. Hopping locations is fun.

10. I like the smaller cities, like Eugene & Albuquerque. But that's me.

11. Although I like variety, NANOG would probably be able to get a better deal if they locked into a 3-5 year committment with a hotel.

12. I'm open to whatever is suggested by others. Everyone has always done a great job!

13. N/A

14. One side of the country and then the other is useful. Traveling far from home for a relatively short period is often difficult. 

15. Same as what? Same as previous meetings? That doesn't matter much to me.

16. Does not matter.

17. same locations would work for me - preferred near major hub for international flights

18. repeat hotles would matter if it helps our cost models. maybe get a hotel chain to give us a discount for a year if we don't just use them but put them on our material as a "sponsor", like was done with the badges?

19. I prefer new cities and downtown hotel locations. Would also love to see a local (Boston) nanog someday.

20. Does not matter. Moving around would keep attendence up IMO. Minneapolis would be a great summertime location.

21. It easier to get to US/Canada locations than others. Esepcially when it comes getting someone else to pay.

22. northeast-ish at least once a year (within 6 hours driving from NY or VA)

23. Does not matter. West coast is easier to reach for me.

24. Can we please stop having winter NANOGs in cold places? :)

25. Hawaii :-)

26. No matter

27. I do not mind much, but I actually do prefer to visit different cities.

28. Chicago (hasn't been there since 2003, would be nice to see it there again)

29. doesn't matter, as long as it works and its easy for you guys.

30. It matters a lot.

31. Of course, for purely selfish reasons, I would love to have frequents NANOGs in my backyard (i.e New York City)

32. I think getting one location that is regular each year may help with logistics, though there is the problem of it discouraging competition amongst venues. Maybe have a 5 year hosting contract for a regular but popular location, e.g. San Francisco, or somewhere else we know that NANOG is well attended.

33. I don't care.

34. It doesn't matter to me, per se, but being a smaller institution, it's sometimes difficult to get funding and justify travel to a distant location. As such, I would love to see more east-coast meetings. I'm honestly not sure if there is any sort of standard for this within nanog already, but it would be immensely cool if one meeting was on the west coast, and the next on the east.

35. How about Atlanta, Jacksonville, Savannah, Charleston, or Myrtle Beach, Orlando, Birmingham, RTPNC?

36. A variety of locations would be better - see more cities.

37. As long as it is a major city, anywhere is good. East coast is easier to drive to :)

38. Doesn't matter to me.

Answered question


(skipped this question)


25. Is there something you would like to comment on which does not fit into a question above? Please leave us your comments here.


1. Nice job COMCAST!

2. The additional socials were a great benefit. While I was tired and needed a new liver, more business was done on this trip than any ever in the past. I would prefer to have socials like we did and open the meetings a little later :)

3. the pc is a disaster

4. N/A

5. Good job on having social events every evening. 

Lightening talk subjects should be posted online sooner than 5 minutes before the talks, so people can see if they want to attend.

6. Liked the long-ish breaks, as they help the side conversations. 

Like the lightning talks very much.

7. perhaps the singularly most useful take-away from nanog was John Jason Brzowski's "v6 over cable broadband" demonstration suite. unfortunately this was not widely publicized, and we were lucky to have gotten word orally at all.

8. Thank you for your hard work !!

9. A lot of good evening events. First NANOG for me really where all three evenings had some event or the other. Good job on that. It was hard for me to talk to people on Sunday night since the music was too loud, but it was a good event nevertheless.

10. Great turn out, this was the best NANOG I have attended in a while!

11. I thought Comcast did a great job as host and the after hour events were great. Kudos to Comcast, S & D, and Equinix.

12. You don't have a box for lighting talks. The usenet was pretty good. While nametags have colors for roles in the meetings, how about colors or a stick on them for our fields. Like blue for ISPs, pink for vendor, orange for academics, brown for content providers. It would make it easier to scan and room and look for peers or someone froma field when we may not know the person.

13. Another great NANOG!

14. keep on the good work

15. Have a section on how government policy affects operations/engineering/architecture.

16. SDP link for webcast did not work. Did not see HD webcast referred to above.

17. The quality of the food and beverages available was much better at Santo Domingo.

18. Ren did a great job - bowling event very good, first time - new and fresh

19. Start time and duration of lunch are perfect.

20. T-Shirts with Pockets, Polo Shirts with Pockets, Sometimes A/C makes it too cold to sit for too long in the conferences

21. Thanks again for a wildly successful meeting - looking forwards to the joint NOG/ARIN in October!

22. Nothing comes to mind. This was an incredible experience (as I've stated way too many times already) and I'm looking forward to attending again.

23. I really hate filling out surveys.

Answered question


(skipped this question)



^ Back to Top