^ Top

NANOG 47 Survey

 

NANOG 47 Survey Results

Dearborn, Michigan (October 18-21, 2009)

1. How did you attend NANOG?

Response Percent (Response Total)

in person in Dearborn

94.2% (114)

via Web - QuickTime

0.8% (1)

via Web - MPEG2 Multicast

0.8% (1)

via Web - Windows Media

3.3% (4)

via Web - HD

2.5% (3) 

Answered question

121

(skipped this question)

2. How many NANOG meetings have you attended?

First

27.5% (33)

Less than 5

22.5% (27)

More than 5

19.2% (23)

More than 10

12.5% (15)

More than 15

4.2% (5)

More than 20

15.0% (18) 

Answered question

120

(skipped this question)

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

Yes

95.9% (116)

No

5.8% (7)

If you answered "No" please tell us why

 

1. Selfishly, nothing beats nanogs in the nyc metro area

2. Hotel was not within government per diem 

3. Locations should be chosen based on walking proximity to the rest of civilization. 

No sights, restaurants, activities, etc in Dearborn easily reachable. 

4. I'd love to see one in the Midwest. By Midwest I mean the middle of the country such as KC, Tulsa, OKC, Wichita, etc. :-) 

5. Not much in Dearborn 

6. Prefer somthing in city center. Philly was great! 

7. Suburban Dearborn isn't ideal, but it's still acceptable.

Answered question

121

(skipped this question)

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

Yes

95.9% (116)

No

4.1% (5)

If you answered "No" please tell us why

 

1. Show us a program that doesn't requre the same people to present over and over and I'll show you some additional fundage. 

2. Not totally bad, but would favor if not this "expensive" for some of us coming from other regions 

3. wish it could be lower 

4. a bit steep

Answered question

121

(skipped this question)

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

Yes

39.8% (43)

No

61.1% (66)

1. I do not make my PGP key public half publicly available through a web of trust; I only provide it directly to individuals with whom I need to communicate securely.

2. I generate PGP keys occasionally when I need to send something securely, but I tend to lose them and I've never bothered to get one signed. Mostly, I worry about people impersonating me to my bank, rather than impersonating me to PGP hobbyists. 

That said, some of the more serious PGP hobbyists really seem to like the signings, and they don't seem to add much overhead to the conference. I don't see any reason to get rid of them.

3. didn't need it

4. I try not to use PGP if I can

5. I dont use PGP

6. I still haven't figured out how to use PGP. :(

7. Not useful to me this time because I was too busy. Useful in general.

8. I don't use PGP

9. I don't have a much need for it.

10. I do not attend them.

11. N/A

12. No apparent need, yet.

13. Why sign PGP when I could be at the bar drinking?

14. Don't personally use them

15. I didn't attend it

16. need more info into implementing

17. Current official company email system and policy doesn't support PGP, yet.

18. didn't go.

19. don't currently do PGP

20. Never real seen what value signing adds to PGP keys.

21. I don't use PGP usually.

22. Not a user of PGP keys

23. Not a huge PGP maven.

24. No not use PGP

25. I've got a fairly well developed PGP trust web and don't need to extend it.

26. What is used for?

27. in marketing, not technical

28. I don't use PGP.

29. Not widely used.

30. not interested 

31. i am not working that area

Answered question

108

(skipped this question)

13 

6. Overall, was this NANOG useful to you?

Very Useful

38.8% (47)

Useful

57.9% (70)

No Opinion

3.3% (4)

Not Very Useful

0.8% (1)

Useless

0.8% (1)

Answered question

121

(skipped this question)

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

Yes

85.7% (102)

No

4.2% (5)

No Opinion

10.1% (12) 

Answered question

119

(skipped this question)

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

8:00am

3.3% (4)

8:30am

17.4% (21)

9:00am

43.8% (53)

9:30am

29.8% (36)

10:00am

14.0% (17) 

Answered question

121

(skipped this question)

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

Yes

9.2% (11)

No

90.8% (108)

1. The current situation with a *NETWORK CONNECTED* printer that speaks both Bonjour (Mac location protocol) and JetDirect with a CORRECT ip address label attached was VERY VERY VERY MUCH APPRECIATED, not only by me, but by at least two other individuals who had a need to print from their personal laptops during the course of the meeting. Would like to see this carried forward.

2. It is nice to have a printer available, though I didn't need it during this meeting.

3. Printer is a godsend for printing out boarding pass before going to the airport. :)

4. well,, I will go and use them now

5. I like the 2-day meeting better.

6. Didn't know they were for public use

7. I need some printing services.

8. Brought my own laptop.

9. n/a

10. Printer

11. Boarding pass printing is helpful 

Answered question

119

(skipped this question)

10. Comments on the Community Meeting:

Comments:

1. Politics as usual.

2. n.a.

3. Useful, keep it up.

4. Not nearly as fractious as earlier ones have been, good to see the community settling into a more focused, coherent alignment now.

5. Due to family constraints, I no longer can be in soon enough on the Sunday and have been missing the last 3 community meetings which is a shame. I wish for the Community meeting to be part of the plenary timeslots either on the Monday or Tuesday.

6. Whenever we are up against a deadline, I wish we had more time. When we are unbounded, is seems to be unfocused. We should try to always have a hard-stop deadline to stimualate activity.

7. Fun as usual. It nice to have a meeting on the direction of nanog.

8. couldn't attend - wouldn't you get better comments/discussion AFTER the meeting (Tuesday night for example)?

9. I was surprised that so many candidates werent at the meeting, or even knew that they were going to be allowed to say a few words.

10. Although I was tired from a six hour drive, I'm glad I could make it.

11. Good for quick updates.

12. None

13. Missed it (hard to get here on time from west coast, with connection flight, unless one wants to come one day early)

14. Was fun.

15. I did not attend. Who needs that ?

16. Was a good community meeting. The transparency is important, and I think remains a fundamental cornerstone of the NANOG community.

17. n/a

18. Educational, but boring. Always important to have; gives me time to drink coffee.

19. it is good. open and honest 

Answered question

19

(skipped this question)

102 

11. Comments on the Newcomers' Breakfast:

Comments:

1. Politics as usual.

2. n.a.

3. Best food of the whole conference--thank you for the protein!!

4. We had over 100 participants, good mix of oldtimers and newcomers. This event is becoming a strong point of the agenda and we ought to keep on marketing it. The most positive feedback I received was : 'I can now overcome my newcomer shyness and feel confortable to walk up to 100 people on Day1'. Nicely done!

5. Good - met lots of folks!

6. Very helpful! Though there were quite a few people, personal introduction was a good way to get started! Thanks!

7. n/a

8. Well run, but lots of the SC and PC members got there very late and ended up at just a couple of tables. (Note: Not all of htem, but about 6-10 showed up about 9:00.) Try to be on time, guys and gals.

9. Only slightly more useful as reading the attendee list out loud

10. My favorite part! Meeting newbs and vets while enjoying a meal was a great start to the conference.

11. N/A

12. Very nice and well hosted

13. I would have liked more information about NANOG as an organization.

14. good program, useful to the first timer.

15. Hope to attend it next time.

16. Did not go.

17. Didn't Make it

18. Very good idea, good way to meet new members.

19. The newcomer breakfast was nice. It was good to have people introduce themselves.

20. Has a bit of a "Hi, I'm Bob, and I'm an alcoholic..." sort of feel... be nice to freshen this up a little bit...

21. I did not attend the newcomers breakfast this time.

22. Even though the introduction round was rather long and nobody can remember all the names, it was a good start of the meeting for me as a newcomer.

23. There wasn't any time to do anything except state names and introduce pets. Not sure if there's a better balance that could be struck to allow more substantive interaction between smaller groups of folks...

24. n/a

25. N/A 

Answered question

25

(skipped this question)

96 

12. Comments on the General Sessions:

Comments:

1. Some talks were rescheduled on the fly as sessions ran early or late, so I end up missing talks that I've planned to see. I'd like to see moderators stick to timelines as much as possible, and even throw in unscheduled breaks instead of moving talks up by 30-60 min.

2. Marketing as usual.

3. 2 ARIN Panel Discussion were too much ARIN related discussion, specially at a joint meeting.

4. Good mix of technical and general topics. The technical talks had the right depth.

5. I found the sessions to be introductory and not what I was expecting from the community. Previous NANOG's that I have attended had more advanced topics. The was hoping to hear more IPv6 transition stories/lessons learned from network operators as well as challenges due to bandwidth growth. The security sessions were good however I found an overlap of material from Sunday's session and Monday afternoon's sessions.

6. Weaker agenda than usual except for keynote. Fewer research talks and more operational focus.

7. Good job. I'm thinking a 2 hour lunch is better, I always miss the first 15 minutes after lunch because every restaurant is full of NANOG-ites.

8. An excellent blend this time; pacing was good, interleaving of talks was well done, and there was a good cross-section of topics to keep everyone interested.

9. Good stuff, the ARIN scheduling/sharing caused some confusion just like every time.

10. mostly helpful and well presented

11. They were good and assesable to all. There weren't too much that were on very specific topics that weren't relevant for most.

12. Good sessions, more IPv6 from new people.

13. The informal BOF idea has NEVER been acceptably executed. You should not clash the informal BOF with anything if you really want it to take off. No one in their right mind would try and in initiate a new BOF against a well established established BOF.

14. I found that I really enjoyed the Mobile Data, and the AMS-IX presentations. While these may not seem to be that interesting both were very detailed and unique to more of the audience than DNSSEC (again) etc.

15. I appreciate the broad set of informative topics. I wish I had brought another coworker to cover what I couldn't attend or understand.

16. I think some of the sessions require a little bit more meat in them .. or make the keynote presentations larger.

17. Good: Mon 10, Mon 10:30, 11:30, Tues 10:30, Tues 11:30, Tues 12:30 OK: Mon 12, Mon 3:00, Tues 10:00, Tues 12:00, Tues 3:30 Poor: Mon 3:30, Tues 3:00

18. some good presentations. but some had the feel of look how badly I hacked this together (eg: microsoft talk)

19. QT video worked fine -- multicast would be more efficient, but, I guess not enough people used the QT server to overload it, so, everything was fine. Tue, Oct 20, 2009 12:25 PM Find... 20. Would a Webex format be a better way to show content remotely? The screens were really hard to read, even at 640x480. I'm thinking that a pre-loaded window for content and a small actively updated window to show the headon camera for the presenter would produce better results. It would be great if there was a way for me as a remote viewer to submit questions to the presenter via chat.

21. the quality of presentations varies widely, some great talks, some not so great.

22. Were good.

23. I'm learning a lot

24. More "What people are doing" type discussions.

25. Good subject matter for the attendance group. The memebership seems to attend sessions better than any I have seen at other conferences

26. Significantly below average. I have spoken with others and his program was below average. 

And if we have to listen to IEEE delivering yesterday's technology tomorrow one more time, I am going to make a public Randy-like scene.

27. More IPv6 content required.

28. Well pitched program.

29. a good mix of topics

30. Having the sessions start early and deviate significantly from the published agenda is not all positive - I missed half of the 100GE session by joining it a few minutes before it was due to start.

31. n/a

32. good 

Answered question

32

(skipped this question)

89 

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

Comments:

1. BGP-101 is was good, but Avi spent a lot of time correcting or claiming it was relevant when he wrote the presentation years ago. Perhaps he should update it before giving it?

2. I strongly encourage nanog to keep on expanding the tutorials by widening the range of topics. It is a duty of the community to distribute practical knowledge via seminars or formal training. A full-fledged education track (from beginners to advanced) would increase the attractiveness of the nanog conference.

3. n/a

4. The BGP load balancing with metrics with Dani was awesome.

5. Liked Dani's BGP metrics tutorial. I'd call it BGP for the customer ,but NANOG draws a fair number of people from hte enterprise community and many are local area people who have never been to a NANOG and won't be back soon. They were the people who attended and I thing that this was a great tutorial for them. They are terrified of BGP. This was perfect for them. (No competent network provider engineer would have learned anything, though.)

6. PDFs were not always available on Nanog website during presentations

7. N/A

8. didn't go any

9. There didn't seem to be as much meat this time as in previous meetings. At least I didn't see as much meat that interested me

10. Did not go.

11. Didn't attend.

12. did not attend

13. n/a

14. network security from juniper is pretty good 

Answered question

14

(skipped this question)

107 

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

1. Peering BoF was awesome. The cake idea rocked!

2. peering was great -loved the cake!

3. The security track was extremely helpful and I learned several new techniques that I am looking forward to researching and testing in depth.

4. The security track was great, but it felt that the presenters felt rushed with insuffient time with for their talks.

5. Peering track as usual was fun.

6. Peering track, might be useful to tape this.

7. Lightnings generally good

8. I really liked the info on IPv6 and DNSsec. 

In general, some of the sessions seemed more technically sophisticated than previously == that's Good! I hate arguing amongst get-rich-quick websites and service providers (that is boring and not worth traveling for).

9. All fine

10. Attended Mobile data track. Good information for those not familiar with Mobility in data networks

11. nit sure what the difference is between the general session and the tracks

12. n/a. 

Answered question

12

(skipped this question)

109 

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

Comments:

1. Most delicious peering BoF ever.

2. n.a.

3. As always, love the Peering BoF--Virtual Martin was a huge hit. :D

4. Attended the peering bof: great job by Colin.

5. n/a, heard igor's was packed

6. n/a

7. Excellent IPv6 and DNS BOF with good discussion often problem and a consensus on an approach to dealing wiht the problem. Exactly what a BOF should be.

8. DNS BOF for IPv6 (Igor) is a good idea.

9. Attended the peering bof, which wasnt bad. Slightly google centric, but perhaps more structure to what the IXP's were to discuss would have been cool.

10. N/A

11. Mon 4:30 Mobile good

12. I would have loved to participate in them or at least view them but as a remote viewer I could not. Is there a way to make that possible in the future?

13. Security BoF was great.

14. Didn't attend.

15. Security BOFs: they were great and should be expanded next time.

16. did not attend

17. n/a 

Answered question

17

(skipped this question)

104 

16. Did you attend the joint NANOG/ARIN program on Wednesday?

Yes, please comment on program content or value to you.

62.4% (58

No, please comment as to why not.

37.6% (35)

Comments:

1. Left Wed morning

2. Strong IPv6 content, great crossover topic for the NANOG crowd

3. Too staged.

4. Good update on where IPv6 is right now.

5. Nice to see that the different RIR's are working together on the same issues and almost the same topics are discussed within the RIR's which proves the global need to solve the issues.

6. I didn't attend on Wednesday due to an offisite meeting with a vendor.

7. NANOG and ARIN have a great deal of community overlap and it's good to have sessions that address common issues

8. I intended to attend it, but failed to wake up in time. I arrived just as it was ending.

9. Didn't really seem uniquely more valuable than other numbering related discussions/presentations that happen as part of the normal NANOG agenda.

10. ARIN needs more operator involvement, and the Wednesday program was a good way to bridge the gap.

11. I felt the NANOG/ARIN integration was very good - and important. It would be difficult to go to both NANOG and ARIN if they weren't in the same week. I would encourage the NANOG leadership to look at dropping to two meetings per year like ARIN - and having them all joint meetings.

12. Someone else from my company goes to ARIN

13. had to leave tue morning for biz elsewhere

14. Excellent--I think ARIN and NANOG need to work more closely together in the future

15. Nanog and Arin must dovetail more. The two programs should find a way to intersect in order to increase awareness and mobilisation on both sides. Policy cannot ignore operations and operations should not ignore current or future policy. To keep the Internet functioning in a sane way, without too much official regulation, the community must step up and demonstrate its ability to efficiently manage the entrusted public good (IP resources). We all have fiduciary duty.

16. Have to leave

17. great! keep working for more "joint" ness in the schedule please

18. The joint panel was very informative re: IPv6 implementation. Aaron's presentation in particular was useful as we are getting ready to deploy IPv6 in our development environment this quarter.

19. The IPv6 transition details was extremely helpful.

20. IPv6 is relevant especially if you're trying to get it deployed within your organization

21. Works well for me, since I always attend the ARIN meetings.

22. I found it generally interesting, but not very exciting.

23. Due to other travel I had to leave Dearborn, MI.

24. I'm tired by Wednesday

25. The more cross pollination the better.

26. Had to leave due to work reasons.

27. time constraints to be gone for the whole week.

28. Attending virtually.

29. Wasn't there in person.

30. content is fine, but the schedule looks loose

31. Good.

32. planning to do so...

33. No interest

34. First time for this too

35. mobile data track

36. Needed to travel back to work

37. Had to leave on Tuesday.

38. it is not Wed yet.

39. I have intertst for Policy Development Processes.

40. Who needs to watch weenie policy wonks screw up the Internet

41. Only so many hours in the day.

42. Today is Tuesday. Planning on attending.

43. Needed to leave and return home early.

44. had to catch a flight

45. I work for ARIN so no comment :)

46. I had to leave Tuesday evening.

47. It hasn't happened yet, but I'm primarily here for ARIN, so I'll be there.

48. Early flight.

49. lack of time

50. I left on Tuesday

51. Not pertinent to my line of work.

52. It is still Tuesday. 

Answered question

93

(skipped this question)

28 

17. For Fall NANOG meetings, what would you like the Wednesday program to include?

Comments:

1. Continued NANOG/ARIN joint mtg with IPv6 focus

2. I would like the Wednesday program to contain more operator interest talks.

3. I would rather see the NANOG and ARIN content fully interwoven, forcing both groups to see each other longer.

4. Content with relevance to both network operators and addressing policy people.

5. Perhaps put the joint ARIN / NANOG stuff on Wednesday instead of having ARIN present twice in the general session.

6. Joint IPv6 efforts, IPv4 runout status update, global routing table size update

7. To encourage participation on Wednesday, I would devote the entire half-day to Net Neutrality, a hot topic if any. I would be extremely surprised if 10% of attendees could clearly sum up the net-neutrality issue. Yet everyone has an opinion. I envision a 90-120 min panel. The first goal would be to clearly explain in a didactic fashion the regulatory principles at play. A neutral university professor or even FCC advisor could fill that role (20 min). After that clear statement of facts and distribution of knowledge on regulatory guidelines, I would welcome a moderated debate of 4 panelists (10 min each) from industry, consumer groups, stakeholders... Then, open mic for Q&A (30 min).

8. IRR and RIR updates. PKI, software

9. Anything that involves network operations and activities that Arin are doing that would change the status quo

10. The Kosters panel would have been perfect for Wednesday morning!

11. put IX updates in Wednesday morning so I can sleep in and not miss anything.

12. Not sure.

13. More than 1 presentation. Another way to say it would be "a reason to come to the last day." There just isn't much this time around. A really interesting technical presentation or two would be ideal.

14. I like the 2-day meetings in old days

15. More NANOG less ARIN.

16. Technical, ops, research content. This one sure didn't.

17. Obviously, for the joint meetings, cross-over topics, such as the stuff which was covered on the Monday panel at this meeting, would be ideal for the cross-over morning.

18. More technical discussion related to pending ARIN policies.

19. no opinion

20. n/a 

Answered question

20

(skipped this question)

101 

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

Yes

19.2% (20)

No

81.7% (85)

Comments:

1. I didn't know there was one.

2. I usually like to try it, but didn't have time during this meeting.

3. too busy taking notes!

4. Had to do work ;-)

5. I should have brought my Linux laptop. I don't have a v6 stack installed on this one.

6. I tried, but was unsuccessful associating with my Ubuntu 9.04 (up to date). I'll try again before I leave...

7. It didn't work for me.

8. I didn't connect to the v6 only SSID but it's valuable to have it at future meetings.

9. IPv6 ran fine on the main wireless, but the routing to my office on gthe west coast was terible, so I ended up forcing my traffic over IPv4. :-( NOTE! this was not the fault of Merit or NANOG folks!

10. why bother?

11. We all know how well Windows let alone Windows XP plays with v6.

12. Would of loved to, but I didn't really bring my laptop to the meeting.

13. Worked pretty well, just need some better DHCPv6 client software :-) Network was speed (of course) and was able to reach a number of places that am not normally able to reach on R&E networks only.

14. Wasn't there in person.

15. Linux net-manager still won't accept IPv6 only DNCP responses so could not connect. Otherwise the IPv6 worked well and seamlessly.

16. Wish more sites had AAAAs :)

17. I can't conect :-(

18. Worked

19. Drat. My wife's netbook that I am borrowing only has IPv4 -- hafta fix that.

20. Wireless would not connect to access point.

21. Tried to connect and it worked. It however, failed to autodiscover a name resolver. I had to switch to v4 and find the resolvers listed on the nanog47 site and then switch back.

22. I like my IP to Just Work (dual-stack works nicely).

23. I probably should have...

24. couldn't get it to work (didn't try hard)

25. I'm a looser and am not using IPv6 for anything useful yet. :( 

Answered question

104

(skipped this question)

17 

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

Comments:

1. Lack of quality restaurants within walking distance.

2. I disliked that it was in the middle of nowhere.

3. Nice hotel. Not too far from the airport. Wasn't downtown but there did seem to be many restaurant options within walking distance.

4. truly the middle of nowhere, right up there with toronto (1st).

5. No organized lunch for all attendees.

6. I found the venue to be great, no complaints.

7. Like: All the neat Ford-related museums around. 

Dislike: The lack of anything walkable near the hotel. 

Showstopper that would keep me from attending future meetings in that hotel: The smoke in the lobby. I mostly go to NANOGs for the hallway and lobby conversations, but the smoke was so thick in the bar and lobby that I had to cut those conversations way short, and was still finding my nose and throat hurting hours later. Given how rare it is to find smokey hotel lobbies in the US or Canada these days (or even in Europe for that matter), it would seem easy and quite reasonable to have a NANOG policy against having NANOG meetings in venues that permit smoking.

8. Not enough stuff in walking distance.

9. Smoking hotel sucked! You could not get away from the smoke anywhere.

10. I found the Detroit airport quick/easy to get in and out of (despite the whole airport/taxi contract tiff) with many non-stop flights available. The hotel was clean and large, food was within close proximity, weather was mild. More food options within walking distance would have been nice, but no major complaints.

11. Walking distance to nowhere.

12. Like: the hotel was generally nice, the restaurant was above average. Dislike: the lobby/restroom music drove me nuts!

13. Restaurants were slightly far away.

14. liked it fine....no complaints

15. too cold in main room. ^_^;

16. The air was too too dry in the hotel

17. The piped "Techno Music" was very annoying all day/evening long.

18. Overall it was a good venue. I'd like to see more vegetarian/vegan food options with emphasis on locally produced and organic food options.

19. Really liked: Free Parking. There was space outside the meeting location to gather at during breaks. Lots more room that at the Lowes in Philly. Plenty of tables around too. The social at the rouge factory was awesome and it was something thats pretty specific to Dearborn. It was nice to have an activity that can't be done at other locations. 

I don't have anything that I didn't like.

20. A bit depressed and the lack of airport transit was weird. Hotel was fine. Typical terrible Hyatt room layout, but I expected that. (Don't the folks who lay out the rooms ever actually stay in them for a few nights?)

21. very low end hyatt - wed. breakfast was weak, the restaurant was lame,

22. Dearborn doesn't have much to offer except the small hotel bar.

23. Good facilities at the hotel. Hotel too far away from anything - like good restaurants. Hotel reasonable priced.

24. Detroit easy and inexpensive airfare from east coast, nice fall weather, Ford factory museum fun (had own car so didn't care about bus mishap).

25. I Loved the local map!

26. venue is good.

27. very remote from anything, limited choices on transportation

28. See above re: proximity to civilization

29. lack of public transportation from airport except taxi (otherwise everything seems fine).

30. Fast working elevators. The hotel was very nice. The "Night at the Roxybury" music was nifty.

31. Nothing special. Kept the rain off and the wind out.

32. It seems that the schedule and contents is less intensive than before.

33. Main ballroom is too cold

34. close to home!

35. All good - hotel and rooms are fine

36. construction

37. Availability of Restaurants

38. Fine Venue

39. It's nice to have local restaurants within walking distance of the hotel

40. A bit too far from downtown/civilization. But nice to be able to drive to NANOG from Ohio for once.

41. Food provided during breaks was mediocre. Bottled water availability would have been nice.

42. Distance from a selection of good food

43. Convenient location.

44. Dearborn is kind of dead...let's stick to downtown areas

45. Like: There was plenty of space in the hotel for the meeting. Dislike: The hotel was surrounded by plenty of space. Even getting to the local restaurants involved either a mile-hike across a wasteland of parking lots or getting in the car and driving. The bar in the hotel was a touch on the small side but seemed to cope.

46. very large hotel built for conferences. Lots of rooms and great elevator access. Restaurant was priced fairly and food was good.

47. Did not like the smoking in the bar.

48. not a very interesting place, but worked well for the meeting

49. Very nice hotel and services overall. Good food. Good gym. Good location and meeting room set up.

50. Not enough stuff within walking distance.

51. It was acceptable.

52. road construction

53. Michigan ave construction

54. too far from the city

55. Could have used more lounge area. The area on the second floor isn't all that valuable since there is no electric. Access to food is a bit tricky, but a pleasant walk. Could be bad if the weather was bad. 

Bar wasn't nearly large enough and smoking sucks.

Answered question

55

(skipped this question)

66 

20. What worked well at this meeting?

Comments:

1. The Lobby Bar

2. The venue worked really well.

3. The wireless network worked great. Rooms were easy to find.

4. Hotel was nice. Well staffed registration.

5. The ARIN/NANOG crossover topics came across very well, and (especailly with IPv6) got the audience involved.

6. I thought the presentation were high quality, which has been true for a few NANOGs now.

7. everything

8. wireless worked well, screen setup was good, table size and power was good.

9. As a first-timer, it seemed a well-run, well-moderated meeting. From the general sessions to the BoFs, the leaders seemed experienced with their tasks. Wed, Oct 21, 2009 7:15 AM Find... 10. Most things.

11. Start time was good. Sunday reception was excellent once we go there. The pizza party was fun except for the heartburn later on. :-)

12. NANOG to me is always valuable for the conversations.

13. The wireless network has been fast and reliable. Plenty of refreshments throughout the day.

14. hotel good, next to mall convenient lunches

15. QT video.

16. Well organized (the late busses ended up not being a big deal really.)

17. Everything.

18. The coffee

19. Back-to-back with ARIN ?

20. wireless worked very well in meeting areas, hit-or-miss in the hotel rooms (as can be expected)

21. Hotel Accommodations

22. Stayed on and stuck to schedule. Also great work on keeping the nanog.org agenda updated near real time.

23. everything..atleast so far...

24. Network, hallways, ...

25. lightning talks

26. Not the Rouge tour

27. The connectivity seemed to be very good. Nice job Merit!

28. Everything. I thought the agenda was good. I liked the location, it was a short flight and the hotel is close to the airport.

29. Audio to Windows Media was very stable; the slide reproduction was only good enough to tell which slide the presenter was talking about. Once the pdf for the presentation was published, then one could see good quality slides along with the audio.

30. Wi-fi was available in my 9th floor hotel room: thanks.

31. the bar

32. the topics were good and it was better organized than the previous one I attended

33. The wireless worked well for once -- didn't even need EVDO all that much.

34. Power for laptops

35. this is my first time. it seems pretty good. 

Answered question

35

(skipped this question)

86 

21. What should be improved for the next meeting?

Comments:

1. Continue to improve the program.

2. Obviously the transportation to the Ford Rouge Plant was a disaster and I'm sure that won't happen again. Other than that, I think everything worked well.

3. I would prefer a meeting venue in the city centre.

4. Not sure you can!

5. Work with Peering Forum folks and ARIN reception to try to not overlap quite so much? ^_^;

6. I don't get the constant reminders for fillingout the survey when one of the questions almost requires you to attend the last event, the joint nanog/arin section.

7. A bit less ARIN on before Tuesday evening, please. Wed, Oct 21, 2009 6:17 AM Find... 8. More IPv6 sessions and technology demonstrations which includes IPv6.

9. Do something different in the program - add an experimental trial of some software; free downloads of presentation groupware software for us to all play with at the event for example. NANOG should lead innovation. 

NANOG should set BCP standards 

NANOG should have a "spotlight startup innovation" during breaks, like beer-n-gear with interesting stuff to watch

10. Remote Jabber Participation would be really nice.

11. network backhaul seemed very slow

12. Less ARIN policy stuff during the NANOG part of the meeting. Temperature in Grand room was very cold tuesday.

13. Please for the love of god make meeting ICS files for MS Outlook or iCal for the mac users available for download, this simplifies keeping track of what is going on. If enough people reach out to this you can save paper and not have to print an agenda all the time! Think of the trees!

14. Buses!

15. Location. 

I very much like the example of RIPE's 'Meet and Greet" team. While waiting for thus busses for the Ford Museum, there was a lot of confusion and such. It would've been nice to have somebody obvious to approach to find out information.

16. quality of presentations. I also wish to move down the deadline for call for presentations (i.e. closer to the meeting date, as in the old days)

17. Nothing.

18. More prepared presentations...

19. more "gear" at the beer-n-gear

20. No complaints.. was overall a well run conference Tue, Oct 20, 2009 11:46 AM Find... 21. The program. Then again, this program gave me a lot of time to get work done with peers.

22. Would like to see more tutorials on IPv6 deployment and best practices for ISPs.

23. Please can all the venue banqueting/convention staff be reminded that this meeting is attended by international attendees and people on diets, and a choice of something besides half-and-half to go in your coffee would be great.

24. Integration with ARIN. This is not a NANOG problem, it is a ARIN / NANOG problem no easy solution.

25. Important to get the slide pdf up -if possible before the presenter starts talking. 

For me, the Quicktime access wasn't buffered enough to be usable. Having several access options is good.

26. n/a

27. Tutorials, I believe we should have more Tutorials 

Answered question

27

(skipped this question)

94 

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

Comments:

1. I'd like to see more service outage post-mortems. Twitter's outage in August would have made a great preso, like the Youtube/Pakistan talk and ThePlanet's datacenter explosion talk of previous NANOGs. Valuable as both learning experiences and as justification for great DR spending (attendee takeaway).

2. Get Marty to do more sub cable talks.

3. I would like to start seeing IPv6 BCPs. We're starting to do IPv6 trials and I would like to know what everyone else is doing so that I can base our policies on something proven.

4. getting tired of seeing PC member after PC member giving talks. tell them do their jobs and get talks and stop making up for their inability to do so by filling it with themselves. if they/you can't, then get rid of them.

5. I'd like to see more advanced topics. For instance, if there is an "introduction to " it would be nice if there was a simultaneous "advanced ". Consider the seniority of a large number in the audience, these types of sessions would generate more feedback and become more interactive.

6. More presentations centered around network architectures/topologies for service provider and large content networks.

7. The focus on IPv6 is pretty critical at this point. Please continue this focus. Possibly dive a bit deeper into the business drivers and maybe even some predictions as to how long we'll have a dual stacked environment on backbones - and if we'll ever be able to kill IPv4.

8. I liked the Avi/Richard future of IX preso and the AMSIX thing. I'm interested in more high-volume / high-traffic info, given the 'future of HD' Sat, Oct 24, 2009 1:14 PM Find... 9. I'd be happy to come back with a quick update on how our efforts at providing IPv6 content are coming

10. I'm hearing impaired and non native english. If acoustic also is bad and you can't even see the speaker moving his lips you have a hard time to understand anything.

11. I think a topic of Best Practices to keep your fellow networks happy. You know information that we want others (ISP/Networks) to do to make the Internet "better" and our lives easier. (obviously things to do other than attending nanog).

12. IPv6 training ! IPv6 how too !

13. More content presentations - video delivery ins and outs Where are the emerging growth areas in the net and educate us on the nuances of emerging technologies supporting those new business models

14. Would be interesting to have a meeting that ONLY has discussions regarding ipv6, no ipv4 what so ever, not even the wireless/internet.

15. MPLS refresher for those who are either new to it or hae never touched it. Perhaps revive the very old tutorials from 5-6 years back.

16. I would suggest a meeting mostly focused on v6 deployment. v6 address allocation, v6 BGP, v6 DNS, v6 web hosts, practical v6 to the home, etc.

17. SP security techniques. Real recommendations for how SPs can address specific problems, not just generalizations on downsides of certain methods. The Yahoo speaker today that presented on IPv6 emphasized how important it was for there to be a solid IP addressing plan before attempting to deploy v6. However he didn't delve into it at all. I want to learn something at these meetings and not delving into those topics (IPv6 addressing options, problems, solutions and BCPs) are what I want to hear.

18. integration between internet and cellular networks. as I understand, there is no nanog-equivalent for mobile operators. given the rapid increase of cellular relevance, lets get nanog to cover that ground as well.

19. No.

20. I really like the lightening talks, the more the better.

21. some sessions devoted to ISP start-ups and challenges associated

22. More advanced IPv6 topics... i.e. security issues, etc.

23. REal life stories/strategies for v4 to v6 adoption for customers.

24. Content delivery networks - Akamai, Limelight, Hulu, Cisco's EOS group, Google, Comcast - the big volume drivers as listed in the Observatory talk.

25. More mobile oriented info.

26. n/a

27. WiMax

28. if we can have case/application session, it would be better

29. BGP Multihome - Cisco Philip Smith
IPv6 - Cisco Philip Smith 

Answered question

29

(skipped this question)

92 

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

Comments:

1. Tata Communications should host a NANOG.

2. I know it may be difficult to measure but do hotels exist that have decent in room connectivity? The "broadband" connectivity in the rooms at $10/day were pretty much dial-up speeds. The NANOG Wifi network was great as usual. I prefer a downtown venue but helping out the people of Michigan in these economic times was possibly a good move. Should we help out Las Vegas next?

3. akamai

4. Mark Cuban

5. N/A

6. Toronto or Ottawa for 2011 (or whichever date was ??? as listed by Betty Burke)

7. You should really look at VeriLAN. All meetings I've been to where they provide network services have been outstanding. IETF, ICANN, IEEE 802, Wi-MAX, ZigBee, OIF, MAAWG and others, all top notch!

8. When I can convince management to do this I will be more than happy to help host it.

9. None.

10. wireless should not be unsecured

11. n/a 

Answered question

11

(skipped this question)

110 

24. Suggestions and volunteers for the NANOG Markeing Working Group and future NANOG Sponsors: (Where or who should we recruit for monetary support in exchange for exhibit area, corporate visibility, and community recognition?)

Comments:

1. akamai

2. we should be sponsored by an alcohol beverage company. They can do market research, or provide libation. A true beer and beer!

3. State fiber network co-ops. Carrier hotels. CLECs.

4. Arista Networks. Any company looking to hire employees (Yahoo gave a plug after lightning talk/before break, they should have paid $500 for that).

5. Charge a vendor for putting their name in the wireless SSID

6. More emphasis on deploying IPv6.

7. See response at 22.

8. n/a

9. definitely, NANOG can get some marketing revenue to support the conference better 

Answered question

9

(skipped this question)

112 

25. Why do you attend NANOG?

Comments:

1. Single best opportunity to meet with disparate network operators, customers, potential customers, fellow IX operators, etc.

2. Hallway business and the occasional interesting talk, tutorial and BoF.

3. For the social networking aspect (I'm a peering coordinator) For the interesting presentation, although I know I could get that online

4. beer-n-gear, networking.

5. I am interested where other companies outside europe are dealing with. We are quite small so also I like to know where bigger ISP's are having issues with. Besides that the NANOG is mainly focused on technical issues.

6. To gain insight into shared problems operators are dealing with and understand how others are dealing with them. Lessons learned, etc... The social network opportunities are very important.

7. To learn about common issues and stay in touch socially with others in the community.

8. The hallway and bar conversations. It would have been nice if they had been in a more pleasant location.

9. Meet with people from other ISP's.

10. technical presentations and social networking

11. Networking - both technical and social

12. meet with lots of folks in one place at one time...so, not so much about the NANOG agenda as the convenience of having them all in one place

13. To take notes, and talk to people. Oh, and the talks--the talks are good too!

14. To meet pee, partners and friends. To learn new stuff and to meet new people

15. to meet customers/prospects to learn about new developments to socialize

16. technical people interesting topics

17. To network with other operators and exchange best practice information.

18. To stay in touch with the networking brains and large operators.

19. To Gain Knowledge. To see what others are doing and how.

20. To renew contacts and keep up to date on what is going on in networking.

21. The NANOG community is an excellent community that appreciates real world challenges. A very nice balance compared to other organizations that are extreme and somewhat out of touch with reality.

22. Build, maintain relationships - the people network is very valuable

23. Great content, great people.

24. Meet Greet and remind.

25. To 'network' and get face time with all the various attendees. Hopefully solve issues for customers, build better relationships, and meet new people.

26. I was invited to speak (the mobile data track). However I would like to attend futures NANOGs.

27. Meet with people; listen to the presentations and give an IX Update at the peering track.

28. try overcome insularity of higher ed networking backwater.

29. peering, meeting peers etc.

30. to connect with other network operators, to see if we as a small operator are following industry best practices

31. -network
-get current with the state of the networking industry
-get current with the technologies being used and future ones coming (like 40/100Gb/s)

32. 1) Meet people personally that I mostly interact with via email or phone, or haven't seen since they changed jobs, etc. 2) Hot deployment topics (DNSSEC, IPv6)

33. To interact with other operators in the region and stay on top of new techniques and technologies. I also use this as a way to do face to face networking to build the relationships I need to build my business.

34. Nice technical subjects being presented, nice opportunity to meet and do "networking"

35. Network with peers, ipv6 info

36. Knowledge and staying on the cutting edge. Networking with others in the community (professionally and personally)

37. I want to learn how my peers are addressing problems.

38. come to learn.

39. Networking with peers mostly. Seeing what others are doing.

40. Because it is adjacent to the ARIN meeting (which I get expensed to go to).

41. Only via Webcast - NANOG is an excellent platform to stay informed.

42. Getting up to date in news, trends, developments, need for incresing peering levels.

43. Getting to know current issues and join the discussion with other ISPs.

44. Learn new/up-and-coming technology

45. to interact with other network service providers

46. starting-up a new ISP; have been following the NANOG list for many years

47. My company makes monitoring software and looking for ideas

48. The social networking.

49. Learn about the community, network with other professionals

50. get away from office.. :-)) Ok on a serious note, i go to nanog for networking and talking to like minded people

51. Already attending ARIN meeting.

52. I often ask myself this question. This time it was agreements to see and work with some specific peers.

53. I'm a first timer.

54. 1) To meet face-to-face with industry peers. 

This is a massive part of NANOG, and I feel that it was not recognised by the way NANOG was run before the rechartering - it was more about the talks than the people. I'm glad that this has changed, and we're not in the ridiculous position we were in 5 years ago of overrunning talks and squeezing coffee breaks into 10 minutes. 

2) To hear about different or novel deployments, innovative ways of solving problems. 

3) To compare how my organisation is doing things against current best practices.

55. To keep up with trends in networking and to meet face to face with people and share ideas.

56. Technical education. Networking.

57. to get an impression what is currently being discussed at NANOG and to see if this is of relevance to the projects I am working on (was very useful for me)

58. For the visibility into what the community (ie, the Program comittee) thinks are interesting technical/commercial developments, and to meet other people with similar interests.

59. Part of my job function and customers are all here.

60. ARIN; peering coordination.

61. presentations and networking

62. Educational / industry context. I'm an end user, not a netop.

63. Information, keeping up to date, to hear what other people are doing.

64. to know what is happening in the industry and meet more people

65. find peering

66. for work 

Answered question

66

(skipped this question)

55 

26. 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?)

Comments:

1. Metro areas, close to subways and some decent restaurants should be standard.

2. It doesn't really matter to me. I like to experience different locations. It may be easier on the organizers to re-use vendors, though.

3. I think it's nice to have changes in venue.

4. I like going to interesting places and seeing new things. Please make future NANOG hotels non-smoking, though.

5. Location generally doesn't matter. My preferences are mostly driven by mild weather, availability of non-stop flights, accessible and large venues.

6. I don't care about anchors. I like nice places, such as San Diego. Not gigantic hotels, like Vegas.

7. I liked the LA meeting at the universal hilton, that was good.

8. consistent location would be nice if $-feasible. flexible connectivity, good mtero locales are wins.

9. Does not matter to me.

10. It doesn't matter to me.

11. Doesn't matter, I feel variety is a good thing however.

12. It's always nice to have the meeting at the hotel since you can easily go to your room to drop of your laptop, change clothes etc but it's not a requirement.

13. Come to Indianapolis!

14. i like how we keep moving it around. more in canada could be nice. (but not in the winter!)

15. Doesn't matter - but meeting venues should be in locations that don't require a car (rentals can be $$$) to get around. Detroit, Scottsdale come to mind.

16. I would prefer future meetings to be in places within 50 mi of a major airport, to have nice weather e.g., maybe the upper midwest in late September, maybe Houston around ~1 Feb, etc.

17. Same hotels makes things easier in some ways, but can be dull for most attendees. Having consistent service providers that understand the group is the real value add.

18. I wouldn't mind some uniformity in hotel chains chosen purely for personal reasons. Most hotel chains have frequent customer programs that I'd like to exploit.

19. I mentioned it above. Something in the middle of the country would be nice. I know Austin is coming up and that's closer. How about KC, Tulsa, Wichita, OKC, or Dallas? Denver? Omaha?

20. my wish for meeting locations:
- non-stop flight (save lots time if I dont have to take connection flights)
- close to airport (more time saving)

21. Does not matter to me, though if we have a great experience, we should probably repeat it!

22. Doesn't matter. Slight preference for Hyatt as I am a gold member.

23. Alaska or Hawaii for next Fall back-to-back meeting? ^.^

24. doesn't matter

25. Does not matter...

26. Does not matter.

27. Having some (but not all) of the same locations regularly - a bit like a RIPE meeting is regularly in Amsterdam - means that it reduces travel stress on attendees, the familiarity is a good thing, you know where to go for lunches and dinners, etc. 

Might it also help with providing connectivity to the venue? 

I would not be in favour of more than one meeting a year being in a repeating location though, as NANOG needs to try and reach more of it's constituency.

28. NANOG could be in the same location all of the time and I would still attend. I would not have a problem with one or more meetings being in the same location on an annual basis.

29. Doesn't matter.

30. n/a

31. it shouldn't be on the same location, I think what you're doing now is good 

Answered question

31

(skipped this question)

90 

27. Are you subscribed to the NANOG mailing list, nanog.org?

Yes, please provide recommendations for improvement.

83.5% (86)

No, why not?

16.5% (17)

Comments:

1. Because there's nothing there that I need to get my job as an operator done.

2. I think the mailing list is great the way it is.

3. snr is very weak

4. the list should be more consistent with the to/cc fields to simplify filter rules. Often times nanog at nanog.org will be in the to field, sometimes in the cc field, sometimes the email address is nanog at \merit.edu

5. The mailing list is very good as-is and has the appropriate level of moderation.

6. I used to be subscribed for years. Now there is too much noise either because it is actually useless noise or because it is something I'm not interested in. Generally threads that go on longer than 10 or so replies become useless and meander off anyway. I suppose I could set up some sort of useful filtering with my MTA, but I don't feel like I miss out much not being subscribed.

7. I get enough email. :)

8. It's fine.

9. hadnt thought to

10. Been on it for 15 years...no reason to change it now. :)

11. Too much noise.

12. people whine about the list way out of proportion of the problems. they need to get over it.

13. I've been subscribed long before attending this meeting. I helps to be able to put a face with an email address. I have no recommendations at this time.

14. I think its pretty good.

15. don't want to get so many emails on my cell phone - I would rather configure a trigger that says "send me only threads that have 'xxxxx' in the thread."

16. I think it is great. Archives could use some overhauling with search and threads. An easy way to download mbox's of threads would be cool.

17. Well done Merit

18. Crack down on people who reply with 'me too'. 1 warning and you're out because it becomes annoying :)

19. I subscribe but often don't read because of the noise level. Really, a lot of folks on that list must not have lives. OTOH, sometimes it is invaluable, so, ... 

Maybe somebody could develop an automated filter that would delay by 1 hour messages with little new technical comments, so that people who like to send instant smart-aleck messages would not receive instant feedback. Overall, the list needs to be more technical and skip the childish retorts.

20. No real suggestions. It seems to work ok.

21. Ban Gadi Evron, we do not need him on the list starting trouble, there are other lists he can participate in, NANOG doesn't need his self-promotion.

22. More dancing girls

23. Don't fix what is not broken, :-)

24. Never worked for me

25. Too many posts

26. A little to new to provide input at this point...

27. not aware

28. The volume on the list is simply too high, I do not have time to follow it. Read via USENET when something particularly relevant comes up.

29. Can't keep up with it; already on too many lists.

30. Get rid of the silly net police.

31. Change nothing; there is a silent majority that is satisfied and understands the function of a delete key.

32. I am new to NANOG, I might subscribe after the meeting.

33. More moderation at times would be most useful.

34. Historical S/N ratio has been too poor. Sounds like it has improved significantly with the thread moderation, though, so I might re-subscribe.

35. No real suggestions

36. List is fine IMO.

37. yes 

Answered question

103

(skipped this question)

18 

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

Comments:

1. Please stop asking us about the start time. Whoever is bitching about it needs to stop and get on-board with the rest of us worker peons. We are here representing our employers, not our local pub.

2. Start time depends on location. East Coast, start later so west coast folks can wake up and be functional. West Coast, start earlier, the east coasters are already up.

3. The whole marketing thing is interesting. I've always felt that NANOG could benefit from a bit more commercial involvement if it was done carefully and cautiously. The fact is, there are many vendors out there that I would like to hear about, I just don't want to be smothered by them. Also, if having a water bottle or name tag with a vendor logo on it brings in another $10k to NANOG, that's great. If people have a problem with that, they should get a life.

4. is there a NANOG twiki I could post my notes to, so people could correct errors that I made in transcribing them?

5. My thanks to whoever selected Jonathan Coulton for the intermission music.

6. I think it would be great to have the tracks video and either streamed or uploaded to the site later. Some of those presentation have great content and having it accessible later would be useful. 

I think badgets should have a sticker for first timers.

7. I really enjoyed the Social event on Sunday, very nice venue as nice as any social events I've ever attended, food was very good. However it would have been nice to have some non-alcoholic beer there

8. Seems to be a lot of tension at this NANOG - I can't put my finger on why

9. This hotel was horrible. I called for simple toilet paper 3 times. Hair dryer did not work, room lay out was horrid. Let's not make it a third time here.

10. Very well organized and helpful. It would help to get into a hotel that is within government per diem. We had to stay at the Residence Inn due to cost of rooms here outside of per diem.

11. I prefer tequila (Patron Silver at the moment). Can we incorporate that beverage in the "Beer 'n Gear?" :-)

12. I noticed numerous colours of lanyards kicking around, I think it's great to have multiple colours available. 

one thought was that maybe it makes sense to:
a) have merit staff wear 1 coloured shirt (bright)
b) have the sponsor(s) wearing another coloured shirt (bright)
c) have vendors wearing another coloured shirt 

Maybe a little painful to manage but would make finding people so much easier!

13. I'd like to see more howto topics for smaller carriers. Give them a template for building a RTBH or a Netflow collection and analysis system. Here's a BCP for SP addressing and iACL security. I think there are lots of topics that NANOG could address that are of less interest to the larger carriers but of great interest to the smaller carriers. NANOG tends to lean towards the elitist side of SP networking. Let some of the smaller guys participate and I think NANOG will see some positive growth.

14. I do not know whether people are willing, but some kind of round table on "what is the #1 problem facing you today" would be most interesting to me. I'm pretty sure there are common problems, and people can share solutions, or at least identify the problem so that some people can go off to work on it (especially the academics).

15. No.

16. Never trust a dog with orange eyebrows.

17. is a too well stablished community, kind of hostile sometimes for newcomers.

19. Re: Start times: it depends on the timezone. EDT meetings should start later (10am), whereas PDT meetings can be earlier.

20. n/a 

Answered question

20

(skipped this question)

101 

 

^ Back to Top