^ Top

NANOG 48 Survey

NANOG48 Survey

NANOG48 Survey Results

Austin, Texas (February 21 - 24, 2010)

1. How did you attend NANOG?

Response Percent (Response Total)

in person in Austin

99.2% (114)

via Web - QuickTime

0.8% (2)

via Web - MPEG2 Multicast

0.4% (1)

via Web - Windows Media

0.8% (2)

via Web - HD

0.8% (2) 

Answered question


(skipped this question)

2. How many NANOG meetings have you attended?


35.2% (86)

Less than 5

29.1% (71)

More than 5

17.6% (43)

More than 10

6.6% (16)

More than 15

4.5% (11)

More than 20

9.8% (24) 

Answered question


(skipped this question)

3. Did you use the NANOG Twitter group to share your comments regarding sessions at this meeting?


4.9% (12)


95.1% (233)

Answered question


(skipped this question)

4. Are you a member of the NANOG Facebook group?


27.2% (66)


72.8% (177)

Answered question


(skipped this question)

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


99.6% (245)


0.8% (2)


1. Austin has been great.

2. Twitter is annoying.

3. conflicting with apricot :-(

4. Austin is not an easy place to get to

5. Austin is a great city full of beautiful women!

6. Could have done without the snow...

Answered question


(skipped this question)

6. Overall, was this NANOG useful to you?

Very Useful

38.3% (92)


60.0% (144)

No Opinion

3.8% (9)

Not Very Useful

0.8% (2)


0.4% (1)

Answered question


(skipped this question)

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


92.5% (221)


2.1% (5)

No Opinion

7.5% (18) 

Answered question


(skipped this question)

8.Comments on the Community Meeting:

1. short and to the point...it was a lame time/way to hear about betty's departure though (especially as her replacement didn't bother to even introduce himself)

2. Bring back more political infighting. It's boring now. And bring back Ted asking about $79 dollars! Yay! 

3. Didn't attend

4. I missed most of it due to flight delay

5. wish there were no overlaps

6. Good

7. I believe that the community meeting lacked focus. The presentations were not interesting.

8. Already issued yesterday

9. n/a

10. did not attend

11. Good stuff, useful and practical meeting to help to collaborate with other people!

12. generally pretty good.

13. Good, wished for more constructive interaction but we can't get gripers to be useful.

14. Average

15. Wasn't there

16. Left comments on first survey

17. none

18. good

19. fewer contentious issues than usual - hard to believe that nanogers are mellowing. seed the crowd next time

20. already did

21. Absent - had to work on Monday

22. None

23. Good luck to Betty!

24. Lots of fun. Always a great time. We nerds know how to party!

25. Good spirited discussion. Please keep soliciting people's opinions.

26. A bit dull. That is a good thing, but a lot less fun

27. Good discussion re NANOG format

28. Great opportunity to collaborate with other people, very useful to meet people in person.

29. NA

30. Served as a very nick kickoff to a great weekend

31. Did not attend

32. Good

33. did not attend

34. well organized.

35. good

36. great!

37. Good

38. did not attend

39. NANOG is entering middle age.

40. n/a

41. Didn't go.

42. Good meeting and good discussion

43. Much less formal than i expected, which is a good thing.

44. Great, though I wish we could have found out the issue with Betty leaving.

45. Sad Betty is leaving.

46. nice overview and reset.

47. Might want to tell the old timers to take it easy on new people making suggestions. One question was asked and we got a queue of 6 or more outspoken individuals telling him he was dumb for asking it, even the moderator bumped him. Once is enough, move on. I spoke with several newbies at the Sunday social and they we all very intimidated by the old timers.

48. Sorry to see Betty go.

49. It was a lot quieter than normal

50. Pretty Short, but no problems with that.

51. n/a

52. n/a

53. Did not attend this meeting

54. Good open forum for discussion

55. did not attend

56. Seemed ok. Maybe could be shorter for what was convered.

57. i wish there were no overlaps, so hard to choose. at least there's the web archives. otherwise, great.

58. Did not attend.

59. Thought it went well, no complaints

60. I enjoyed it. Being that it was my first Nanog meeting, I was able to see the faces that put this function together and where the money goes to.

61. did not attend

62. I wasn't very familiar with the issues raised

63. OK

64. Maybe a bit more continuity on following side projects?

65. Wasn't able to attend

66. Some decent dialogue.

67. Interesting, but as a first-time attendee I was a bit lost

68. 1. Despite the fact that most NANOG attendees can get reimbursements easily for the reg fee (and airfare, hotel, etc) and have had management approve that for a number of years; if you're trying to get "new faces" many of them may come from small businesses for whom getting mgmt to approve any sizable cost that doesn't equate to new sales is infeasible, raising registration costs (or even keeping it at the same level) will keep NANOG full of incumbents.

69. did not attend

70. Next time don't forget to bring the drama

71. Did not attend.

72. Fun

73. It was all going smoothly until wbn piped up.

74. did not attend

75. n/a

76. Did not attend.

77. This meeting is very useful--even if everyone does not agree. The only way to keep NANOG relevant is to find out what the community thinks about the meeting.

78. NA 

Answered question


(skipped this question)


9. Comments on the Newcomers' Breakfast:

1. n/a

2. N/A

3. Great way to meet newcomers

4. seemed awkward

5. nice to meet new people

6. N/A

7. It was a great place to meeting people and network.

8. Did not attend - valuable anyway

9. n/a

10. NA

11. Good idea, I believe it would have been even better if there would have been the older members of Nanog there, so you could have introduced yourself to everybody.

12. did not attend.

13. did not attend.

14. Did not attend

15. N/A

16. None

17. n/a

18. didn't go

19. n/a

20. Absent - had to work on Monday

21. Great, very welcoming and a good introduction

22. It was a great idea.

23. In addition to introductions of participants, there should be a formal presentation of what is nanog, how to participate, what can you gain from it.

24. It is always great to meet peers from other companies in our field.

25. Didn't attend

26. Weak. Food needs to be in the room. More dynamic leader needed. Maybe something besides the "introduce yourself" routine.

27. Newcomers breakfast was good, it was nice to get the chance to introduce yourself to the others, so you are not totally unknown to everybody.

28. NA

29. Did not attend as it was my 2nd NANOG

30. More structure would be useful

31. did not attend

32. good material

33. didn't attend

34. na

35. Needed slightly better organization

36. It would be better provide more introduction on NANOG

37. did not attend

38. n/a

39. A very good start for the new kid on the block!

40. Tasty, though I did find a stale croissant! Glad there was no talk about pets. Definitely need to have a better "agenda" for this - like how to get the best out of a NANOG, and set the room up to encourage mixing. It's a bit like it's gone too far the other way.

41. missed it.

42. Didn't go.

43. not applicable.

44. N/A

45. didn't go

46. n/a

47. n/a

48. n/a

49. Did not attend this

50. Informative

51. It was really good

52. Felt a little more could have been done to welcome newcomers and give them a roadmap to get the most of the meetings. I also noted that there were quite a few newcomers and not just for the Texas area.

53. tasty

54. nice to meet new people. i've wanted to come ever since these started but my employers were always too cheap. oddly enough, that was when i lived in austin. now i live in seattle.

55. I enjoyed it but with so many new people, it took some time for everyone to introduce themselves and I doubt any new attendees actually remember them.

56. Was nice to know I was far from the only new comer

57. Good to see where all new people are coming from.

58. It went well. Although I'd suggest having more activity for interaction between the new commers. I noticed that the atendees tend to stick to their colleagues.

59. seemed like a good size group. i would have liked for someone to provide more of an overview of NANOG (history, chater, membership, opportunities for involvement, etc.).

60. did not attend

61. It was ok, the introductions weren't really helpful b/c there were so many of them

62. It was nice to meet others

63. Good

64. Nice to learn who/what companies are attending. Also nice to meet/greet other people.

65. good, interesting to hear everyone's hobby's

66. In addition to self-introduction, better to have some long time NANOG participatants to talk about the organization briefly.

67. Did not attend

68. N/A

69. It was nice. Good to talk to one of the session guys.

70. Very nice, thank you.

71. tasty. should have included introductions that referenced individuals' goals for attending the conference: (peering, new information, etc).

72. I am typically not ready to be sociable at 8:30 in the morning. Perhaps a newcomer's lunch before tutorials would be better?

73. great way to meet new people and do networking

74. Did not attend.

75. Didn't go

76. Be nice to give us some background, history, vision, purpose of NANOG, thanks.

77. Most useful aspect was talking to people. Standing and saying your name and hobbies seemed worthless.

78. did not attend

79. Did not attend.

80. n/a

81. Did not attend.

82. I enjoyed meeting people at it.

83. Missed this

84. Could be more informative on NANOG history, background, etc.

85. Good to see a lot of people from Austin coming in for the first time.

86. NA

87. For the Newcomers' Breakfast, it would be helpful to put there is an introduction instead of just "continental breakfast." That way attendees won't feel awkward if they walk in a little late.

88. great. 

Answered question


(skipped this question)


10. Comments on Monday's General Session:


1. Quality of audio/video for 1st 2 sessions was such that it wasn't possible to have an intelligent opinion about the content. Gave up after that.

2. Liked the FCC discussion

3. Network Neutrality Panel was interesting.

4. the FCC/neutrality talk was very good

5. informative

6. good

7. The FCC panel on Net Neutrality was very interesting.

8. Already issued comments yesterday

9. was good. Sound was terrible though. I know this is difficult to control as it is outsourced.

10. This was an excellent general session.

11. Good session, even tho some things were somewhat fast forward things.

12. Good... more interesting than other days

13. great! loved the fcc panel.

14. Average

15. See last survey

16. Left comments on first survey

17. Interesting topics especially the Network Neutrality Panel.

18. none

19. pretty good

20. n/a

21. Absent - had to work on Monday

22. A bit dull. FCC presentation was almost pointless. Highlights of the day were the lightning talks

23. No apparent gain here. Nothing was covered that was ground breaking other than the Net Neutrality panel; and even that is still a much moving target.

24. The Net Neutrality Panel was great. We need more information on this at future NANOG's.

25. I thought Jeroen Massar's SixXS presentation was good content and well delivered.

26. It would be nice if the speakers could handle their stage fright a bit better. It made for it hard to stay focused on some presentations.

27. Great. Net Neutrality is a big deal, and I'm glad we're being consulted.

28. Variable. No NANOG's strongest but the opening panel was simply great! Some speakers were a bit weak even if the material was good.

29. Good content especially Net Neutrality topic. Very interesting and topical. Route Server topic also very good use of panel since they were all involved in a test effort.

30. General session covered important interesting areas, it was good.

31. Interesting content, as always - Subsea cables and Router Servers track both very good

32. Enjoyed many of the sessions especially interesting to hear about Network Neutrality

33. Needed a bit more time as it was just starting to get interesting.

34. did not attend

35. good discussion topics

36. excellent content and knwledge trtansfer has been very impressive so far.

37. I found it difficult to hear the panel on multiservice networks. I don't know if the HVAC caused too much background noise or if the mics/speakers were the issue. I found it muddled and difficult to follow that.

38. Good

39. less content rich than previous meeting NANOG47

40. Hope to see the presentation powerpoint on line before the meeting

41. Network Neutrality and New Asia IP Backbone sessions were very good

42. Liked the TRILL details, but that seems far away operationally.. ASIA IP Backbone felt a little like a sales pitch. BCP repo would be great.

43. Ok

44. really liked the FCC panel the sound was bad in the session after lunch to 4 p.m

45. good

46. Good.

47. LOVE the FCC!

48. subject timely and relevant.

49. Useful

50. intresting stuff!

51. Network Neutrality panel was useful and well moderated. The allocated time was adequate though another 30 minutes or so of discussion might have been profitable.

52. all good stuff!

53. The netruality session was great. It would be great if they can come with updates. Keep and expand the relationship that allows operators to talk directly to the FCC

54. Excellent discussion on net neutrality.

55. n/a

56. Good

57. General meeting was one of the best that I have been to at a NANOG

58. Informative. Good dialog

59. Very useful sessions

60. Awesome job on the network neutrality panel. Hopefully this leads to real dialog with the policy makers. Really good job moderating too - not an easy task with this crowd.

61. So far, it has been informative. I like the assortment of talks and the net neutrality session was very good.

62. found the discussion on Net Neutrality very informative and interesting

63. good content... the fcc panel would have been a good candidate for a longer slot/bof for a more informal discussion after people woke up

64. Good sessions.

65. Thought the net neutrality discussion could/should have been 2 hours instead of 1.

66. Very good panel with the FCC. More engagement between the regulators and operators is needed. This line of communication should be always open open and in use.

67. Very good

68. I appreciate the Q&A opportunites at the end of each session.

69. Most presos so far were well-intentioned, but very poorly presented. This is typical of Nanog and I am not sure I even bother to come at all. Presenters take no care in making content that can be followed.

70. so far, so good.

71. Really liked the net neutrality debate

72. the fcc an trill and sixxs presentations were good

73. Lacking substance. If TRILL is the most interesting talk of the day, something's wrong.

74. Good

75. So far, this has been interesting. I liked hearing about what is going on with net neutrality and the talk on Rbridge/Trill was quite interesting. I haven't been involved in IPv6 for about 1 1/2 years but it is sad to see that not much has changed since I worked with Command Information on IPv6 training and development. The same Ipv6 issues appear to still be present.

76. interesting

77. Interesting topics especially the Network Neutrality Panel.

78. Good FCC panel, liked the network tapping one

79. Generally useful, though nothing overwhelming yet (12:28pm)

80. Tap'ing session was boring; really enjoyed Sixps tunnel behind-the-scenes

81. Interesting topics. I very much enjoyed the Network Neutrality panel.

82. The Network Neutrality panel was fantastic, but far too short

83. I felt the FCC Network Neutrality panel started ambiguous and ended too early. It really could have been a two hour conversation. I recommend that the conversation continues in the nanog emailing list.

84. interesting.

85. Although I understand and agree with the reasons policy was a taboo in the neutrality panel, it was a fairly large elephant in the room because policy clearly needs a lot of work still

86. so far interesting, network tapping always is ;)

87. Net neutrality panel was very informative.

88. Net Neutrality panel was excellent, very well attended and very well executed.

89. I feel like a lot of the most useful sessions were clumped into Sunday Afternoon and it was very frustrating that certain sessions were scheduled simultaneously so all could not be attended.

90. Great Network neutrality panel. Seemed to deal with the topic in an overall cooperative/productive method, managing to avoid getting sidetracked with disagreements on a hot topic.

91. I think the Net Neutrality talk should have been given more time.

92. Good net neutrality panel.

93. good general discussions

94. FCC conversations were very interesting, technical sessions as well.

95. Interesting panels so far.

96. Would be more helpful to me if general sessions were more focused on emergence of new technology and have the detailed sessions in a break out.

97. NA 

Answered question


(skipped this question)


11. Comments on Tuesday's General Session:


1. HD stream had reliable audio, and restartable video - better, though still not as functional as the video/audio from Nanog47. 

The Add Paths material and MPTLS-TP material was useful - though the Add Paths stuff was in a very strange order. Dave Ward's presentation should have been first not last. The Infrastructure (Craig L, etc) material was no different from the actual report.

2. MPLS-TP session and BGP-TE and add-paths sessions were of my interest

3. Security Survey: excellent
SIP peering: meh
MPTLS-TP: good+

4. great stuff, very helpful to all i think. seems not many people know much about large voip deployments yet.

5. seems to me that there wasn't much discussion in the panels

6. Much more informative than Monday

7. The infrastructure survery was very informative as was the BGP Add-Path discussions.

8. Good quality material!

9. There were some very dense topics presented in the Tuesday session. I am always pleased to see non-fluff topics.

10. The morning sessions were more theoretical but interesting. I can see doing further research on both the MPLS-TP and BGP-TE for balancing outbound links.

11. This was an also an excellent session

12. Interesting stuff, monday was better than tuesday. Mondays security things were extremely interesting.

13. ok... wasn't that interested in topics.

14. great! loved the add-on paths work.

15. Average

16. The v6 numbering talk was very interesting and useful

17. interesting topic. Will need to read report in more detail.

18. Good.

19. More applicable to carriers. No one on ipv6 panel for /126s!

20. Very good, but not as good as Monday

21. IPv6 link addressing and Add-Path discussions particularly interesting.

22. I enjoyed the IPv6 Link Numbering Panel

23. none

24. good dialogue

25. Interesting talks, had a nice time.

26. Sesssion was good, especially on new technologies that can be useful in the future.

27. really good presentations today - add paths session was very good

28. Good presentations, better than monday

29. Better overall meetings. MPLS-TE and MPLS-TP conversations were great, ADD-Path discussions were good, especially Dave's (Juniper) piece.

30. Much more interesting, hard routing and operations.

31. The IPv6 Link Numbering Panel was more interesting than I would have thought and operationally relevant.

32. Same as above. Great MPLS-TP presentation!

33. SIP panel seemed a bit dull, but I don't do VOIP or SIP. Luca was good, as always. /64 panel was fun, but the BGP-TE talk was awesome!

34. So far so good. Like the SIP track and like to see more wireline/wireless Internet convergence topics

35. Very good information in the morning session.

36. Security DDoS survey has good info and trend.

37. Compared to Monday, it was party boring because of the presenter at the starting part of the general session.

38. Good

39. Another day of varied content - (hoping) MPLS talk to be intrestring

40. So far so good! Excited for the Peering BOF this afternoon

41. TBD

42. it is monday so I have not yet attended but look forward to the sessions

43. haven't occurred yet

44. filled out survey on Monday, but looking forward to the peering track.

45. Much better

46. n/a

47. Not yet taken place. Topic seems interesting.

48. it's still Monday!

49. n/a

50. n/a

51. NA

52. hasn't happened yet

53. n/a - monday survey

54. N/A

55. We have not had Tuesday's General session as this is Monday.

56. hasn't happened yet

57. Submitted this survey on Monday - no comment yet

58. N/A

59. Interesting topics for the main hall Tuesday. Particulary looking forward to MPTLS-TP and BGP-TE talks.

60. It's tomorrow!

61. haven't been there yet.

62. N/A

63. n/a

64. NA 

Answered question


(skipped this question)


12. Comments on Wednesday's General Session:


1. arin update should be moved to monday - important information is not being shared by being stuck at the tail end

2. All good content. Audio/video quality same as Tuesday (HD)

3. i forgot my time machine and i don't have a whirling gravity merry-go-round on me to bend space/time.

4. N/A

5. Submitted comments on Tuesday

6. n/a

7. NA

8. Yet to come!

9. has not occured yet.

10. N/A

11. N/A

12. Not yet attended

13. Tomorrow.

14. none

15. n/a

16. None

17. Wednesday is yet to come, but I am looking forward for it, since it will be for sure very interesting like all the other days have been as well!

18. NA

19. Looking forward to the last few panels tomorrow.

20. TBD

21. it is monday so I have not yet attended but look forward to the sessions

22. haven't occurred yet.

23. filled out survey on Monday :)

24. n/a

25. n/a

26. Not yet taken place. Not as relevant/interesting for me.

27. Ditto

28. n/a

29. n/a

30. NA

31. hasn't happened yet

32. n/a - monday survey

33. N/A

34. Have not happened yet so hard to comment.

35. hasn't happened yet

36. Submitted this survey on Monday - no comment yet

37. N/A

38. It's the day after tomorrow!

39. haven't been there yet.

40. N/A

41. n/a

42. NA 

Answered question


(skipped this question)


13. Comments on the Sunday Tutorials:

Optical Networking 101 & 102

64.9% (61)

IPv6 Routing Introduction

43.6% (41)

Video Over DOCSIS (VDOC)

5.3% (5)


1. Yay!

2. NA

3. good

4. good presentation. lots of information I didn't have before. nicely done.

5. Great session....turned into v6 ARIN policy, but was very informative

6. learned several things

7. Very Useful.

8. Session provided very good insights

9. good/useful tutorial

10. Optical was really good - every layer 3 & 2 engineer should read this

11. n/a

12. The presentation help me bridge the gap from IP to transport engineering. At my company they merged the two groups together last year.

13. Optical presentation was great and one of the best presentation, but the IPv6 was not good at all.

14. Interesting and useful stuff, good that IPv6 is getting attention.

15. would like more information... intresting for us.

16. optical talk - good operational talk, think it provides some good q/a to alot of things not easily available/published.

17. n/a

18. Very useful, very good presentation, accurate.

19. Already commented

20. This presentation was great for spanning the IP with Transport world.

21. very informative

22. pretty useful

23. optical actually good

24. Informative, yet entertaining. I would have preferred the questions to have taken place after the presentation, because it caused the end to get rushed and ran over time and missed the first half of the community meeting.

25. The Optical class was very good. RAS gives great presentations. Love to hear more on this side of the network that I am not as familiar with.

26. Educational

27. The content was OK, but the presentation was a suboptimal. Might have been due to last minute presenter changes of course, but the dual IOS/JunOS examples slowed things down.

28. Not clear what the purpose of this tutorial was. It does not appear that the attendees needed a tutorial on configuring IPv6, which is what it seemed to be.

29. Also went to BGP session 101 session.

30. very technical. I thought it was more an introduction to v6....

31. Did not attend

32. i do not see the bgp 101 and 102 listed

33. Tutorial.. This was more like a very fast information for people who actually already know IPv6 configurations. It was interesting, but for people who wouldn't have any knowledge from IPv6, it might be very hard to know whats going on.

34. They did a decent job presenting the data.

35. Very glad to see the presenters roll the talk with the audience input and directions.

36. NA

37. BGP tutorials were helpful.

38. I attended BGP 101 and 102 which were very insightful to me as someone who doesn't work much with BGP

39. The 'drama' part was the most interesting. Config was sorta lame sauce.

40. Did not attend (weekends are bad for this)

41. Very useful and give me information to help me justify to my management to deploy IPv6

42. was not in town yet

43. Attended both, quite useful but would have also liked to have seen the BGP 101/102 sessions as well. I'll have to download them and view them later.

44. awesome

45. Very good speaker. No mumbling. :-) Presentation was clear and on topic and easy to understand.

46. good.

47. Great review. Bring samples!

48. Didn't go, as didn't arrive late.

49. I took the BGP tutuorial, which was good. I think there should be more time allotted between the tutorial and the general meeting where attendees can bring issues to the instructor for feedback.

50. Great presentation as it showed an area of expertise that NANOG is normally not exposed to.

51. Richard is excellent at the data he presents, but is a little monotone while presenting. Will still be happy to go to any presentation he makes!

52. Optical Networking tutorial was very informative. IPv6 Routing presentation was less helpful for two reasons. First, the presenters hadn't worked together to present the material before. Second, possibly because of this, they didn't really keep the discussion focused on the topic.

53. Nice overview but perhaps could be more detailed or focus on a specific topic. Case study or lessons learned type.

54. very quick, would've liked a some examples

55. Good presentations.

56. Great and clear

57. Good overview of fiber optic technology and issues. Good technical depth.

58. Optical Networking: very useful IPv6 Routing: not really Video: n/a

59. I found it very useful.

60. Great quality tutorial, very helpful information.

61. The optical presentaion was excellent, one of the best I have ever been to at NANOGs. The IPv6 Routing presentation was by far the wrest presentation I have ever been to at NANOG or any other show. The presenters were not in tune with the material and I am not sure that they even understood what was being presented.

62. Informative and useful information

63. It was very informative

64. woot

65. Both tutorials were good and covered the basics which is what they proposed to do.

66. Actually BGP 102: really useful information for me. Maybe more question/answser.

67. Very informative, i learned some very useful stuff. i'll be using ras' presentation as quick reference material in the future.

68. Very complete and thorough although a bit high level for 101

69. Another good tutorial from ras

70. Slightly derailed with some addressing policy that should have been taken outside IMO.

71. Optical Networking 101 was very informative and slides were useful.

72. both were good.

73. n/a did not attend

74. A little too heavy on operational notes and not enough on new aspects of protocols and their impact (ex. OSPF v3 felt rushed)

75. I was hoping for more information on translation strategies

76. Great talk..... well done by ras..... alot of operational know-how involved in this talk.... so far into tuesday - is best talk

77. We're current evaluating optical gear for our internal use. Was a good insight into whats out there.

78. N/A

79. I enjoyed listening to this.

80. good sessions

81. Noted very few people attend the VDOC tutorial. In the future it'd be better to check with the community in advance about the tutorial topics.

82. This was a very informative tutorial for me. I'm still an Ipv6 newbie and we currently have a very limited deployment in our network. My biggest concerns are about best practices as far as address allocation and it was interesting to find out how other networks allocate and subnet IP space to customers.

83. A good set every L2 & L3 engineer should read

84. Really nice information

85. Loved this one as well as I have no Optical gear in my network. It's nice to be able to discuss these things with my peers.

86. Way too focused on stuff that's easy to turn up on Google. A number of the slides came down to "This works exactly the same" The discussion, however, was fascinating.

87. the bgp tutorial was quite good, quite fast and full of tight stuff.

88. Pure awesome!

89. Refreshing to have something new

90. Very useful information. Working as an Engineer only picking up tidbits of information about Optical technologies, this information helped to fill in quite a few large gaps of information.

91. Great overview of the topic that covered a lot of data in a short period of time.

92. I am actually commenting on BGP 101/102 for which there is no check box. Tutorials were interesting. During the first presentation it was quite hard to hear, but it was fixed for 102.

93. Ron and Merike did their best, but it was apparent it wasn't their presentation.

94. I was curious about the docis presentation, but found it very very dry. Not sure of the relevance.

95. delivered it myself!

96. n/a

97. The optical tutorial was really good!

98. Very good.

99. Richard is a good speaker and material was very useful.

100. The sessions could have used more meat. In particular, the IPv6 session was very generic. I think most people there were bored with router configs and would have preferred a discussion of thorny issues (the best part of this meeting was the sidebar about RIRs and their interactions with the operators). 

I thought the optical tutorial was very informative.

101. Very good high level review of optical networking basics Sunday.

Answered question


(skipped this question)


14. Comments on the Monday Tracks:

ISP Security

38.3% (31)

Video Over DOCSIS (VDOC)

64.2% (52)


1. NA

2. useful

3. liked it. needed more v6 DDoS mitigation talks.

4. Great

5. Very informative, as we were looking into bringing online new route servers

6. good as always

7. interesting, but to compare metrics between different packages on WIDELY varying hardware isn't a good way to present it. it really should have been identical hardware to make the comparissons.

8. Very informative.

9. loved it!

10. Good work on benchmarking, and good background on "BIRD".

11. Went perhaps a bit too long on v6

12. This was interesting in the academic sense, but seemed a bit premature to discuss with the operator community. It was good information though.

13. The ISP Security track was a little miss leading and that meeting seemed off topic

14. Best content of the Nanog!

15. very good analysis on bird, openbgpd, quagga

16. very cool. bird author was very responsive to feedback.

17. Informative

18. Already commented

19. very informative

20. It was nice. But it was still felt short for all the topics people wanted to talk about and ask questions on.

21. N/A

22. Pretty useless. Focused 100% on IPv6, which was not advertised.

23. Very good talk. Learning about better ways to peer is great!

24. This was a very interesting technical presentation on the realities of several real world Route Reflectors.

25. very interesting

26. Liked it.

27. Good to know OpenBGPD and BIRD are the product of choice. thanks. We hope to see some implementation and operational, such as how to do redundancy on route servers.

28. Excellent content, very interesting and important things! I believe that more focus should be given to the ISP security in the future.

29. Great details on the differences in route server s/w and h/w. Bird is the word!

30. good updated info. thanks.

31. Too long for material covered.

32. Interesting presentations/discussion on a area that I'm aware has caused much frustration/late nights for different colleagues. Good to see the benefits BIRD has been bringing to route servers at different IXs

33. Good audience involvement.

34. Great to hear about all the servers that were tested by the group during their research.

35. Good they talked about v6 security, bad they only briefly mentioned lack of v6 DDOS mitigation.

36. Good information

37. Liked it.

38. very informative and something that is widely used by us

39. very detailed and informative

40. Useful, especially the discussion on the issue with IPv6 route injection and the discussion on filtering.

41. Security track was very weak this time. Content wasn't up to par and discussions got off track.

42. Focus was nearly entirely on IPv6, which I wasn't expecting.

43. very good

44. good data.

45. Some interesting parts, but probably needed more discussion.

46. Hope to see the presentation powerpoint on line before the meeting

47. good, but targeted content

48. Surprised to see such brokenness . Enlightening.

49. Nice !

50. Yes. I was awake.

51. Finally a presentation that calls out Quaggas lack of scale.

52. about to start!

53. Very usefull

54. Have not attended yet, but plan to

55. haven't happened yet

56. Haven't seen yet.

57. OK

58. hasn't happened yet

59. Will attend this - this could be expanded a bit?

60. Always an interesting topic.

61. ISP Sec is always a good time. 

Answered question


(skipped this question)


15. Comments on the Tuesday Tracks:

Network Tools

46.6% (27)


55.2%% (32)


1. NA

2. very good

3. very nice. lots of good information. super fun with the drama between bill and patrick :D

4. OK

5. Seemed like a IX promo Why does NANOG (a public forum) allow the peering BOF to promote a private forum GPF - we all get to hear about a party we are not invited to the most useless peerBOF yet

6. Necessary, but not terribly impressive collection

7. did not attend

8. definitely could've had more tools, i have several to suggest. if there was an option to submit suggestions beforehand i missed it. i did like what they demoed, very handy and i'll definitely use them.

9. Good

10. Small(er) crowd, interesting topics

11. Very useful

12. The route server presentation was useful.

13. Very very good set!

14. very good attendance on this one. interesting as usual, this is one of the things i look forward to at nanog.

15. Attending curretly

16. Good update

17. Good stuff, wonderful to see practical examples of tools!

18. good overview from the 3 presenters however this has been done at past nanog's - repeat of info not too handy for repeat nanogers

19. going on right now.

20. We will see how this one goes. That is beginning now.

21. Useful but not overwhelming

22. might expand track to include commercial tools as well (not product presentations) but objective 3rd party descriptions.

23. No spouses guys. No amoureux. No acquaintances. okay?

24. Always fun, nice format. One of my main reasons for coming...

25. Awesomeness as always

26. This is one of the biggest reasons I am able to convince my company to send me to NANOGS.

27. Love peering.

28. Good stuff.

29. Intend to go, haven't gone yet.

30. Interesting content, some presentations were rather boring because of the presenter.

31. SIP talk was painful.

32. NA

33. maybe the presenter was up a bit late?

34. fantastic as always, peter cohen's is brillant

35. Looking forward to it

36. not yet attended

37. Not yet happened.

38. Peering track is going to be very good!

39. have not attended yet

40. haven't happened yet

41. n/a - monday survey

42. OK

43. hasn't happened yet

44. Commented on Monday - did not attend yet

45. I am excited about these tracks.

46. The reason I became a network engineer, I always like meeting with and talking with people about peering.

47. n/a 

Answered question


(skipped this question)


16. Comments on the Informal BOF's:


1. NA

2. didn't participate in any...yet

3. didn't see any postings for any BOF's

4. Did not attend. Anyway, a BOF lot is needed

5. n/a

6. NA

7. All in all good stuff.

8. in the future it would be nice to have the bofs recorded and available online later for review. Some of the info is good...

9. n/a

10. N/A

11. chat roulette bof was GREAT

12. They were all in all good, no bad comments.

13. NA

14. TBD

15. Not yet happened.

16. have not attended yet

17. haven't happened yet

18. OK

19. hasn't happened yet

20. Commented on Monday - did not attend yet

21. n/a

22. What is a BOF? 

Answered question


(skipped this question)


17. Please provide your feedback regarding the NANOG wireless network during the meeting?


1. The usual

2. NA

3. good

4. pretty stable. of course somewhat slow at times, but that's expected.

5. Slow

6. Video Feeds were very choppy

7. no problems

8. working well

9. Generally fast.

10. I liked the availability of the fully encrypted AP. Similar to wireless provided at other conferences I've attended for various organizations, the amount of lag, jitter, and throughput varied. From what I can tell, such is partially due to limitations of 802.11b/g. Despite that, it generally worked and was quite useful.

11. Excellent coverage in the main meeting room.

12. The wireless was fine most of the time, at times congested.

13. Still getting weird MS RPC attacks every 15-30mins.

14. Wireless had very good coverage.

15. some issue with v6 on the first day, beside that good

16. Worked quite flawlessly, some congestion, but OK

17. worked fine. I switched to nanog-x on tuesday afternoon and found it worked fine.

18. Latency was a moving target, but that's to be expected with a room full of power users.

19. Network has been excellent as usual.

20. Encrypted network should be the only possibility, why are you even offering unencrypted wireless, are we not the specialists of the internet, and we could all handle putting a simple password to the fields and use encrypted network...?

21. generally pretty good.

22. ipv6 connectivity got better on tuesday - there were issues monday which happens quite frequent at these conferences

23. used the 802.1x and it was perfect.

24. no issues

25. It worked! What higher compliment can you get?

26. reliable for me. no problem

27. good

28. Already commented -- Rogue Access points are bad..

29. The A was flaky, which is strange. Usually A is good. I should switch to X...

30. Seemed slow

31. adequate for the most part

32. still slow, but understandable with all the geeks in the room on wireless.

33. worked great, especially compared to the hotel net which is pathetic

34. Excellent!

35. worked very well!

36. Perfectly done!

37. Solid. A bit of latency but that's to be expected

38. Adequate.

39. Very stable and fast! 12ms ping times to some of the WOW servers based in Austin! :)

40. great idea.

41. Some disconnect probs, particularly on nanog-1x, could have been client specific though. nanog-a seemed to work reasonably OK.

42. I have been using nanog-1x. Mostly it has worked well, but intermittently response time fell through the floor.

43. wireless was really stable. Thanks!

44. Excellent

45. Good

46. Wireless worked well/without issue.

47. virus attack all the time.

48. Good that you are now offering encrypted connections, but why in earth you ARE still offering open wireless network....?!?!?!

49. some problem with ipv6,

50. Worked fine.

51. Good as always - nice to see IPv6 in use which lacks at some other conferences (I recall one with a IPv6 talk with no IPv6 available at the conference)

52. Works for me.

53. has been working great so far

54. Worked well, no problems

55. seems to work ok.

56. too many options...

57. very good

58. It worked very well!

59. worked well

60. It's been great

61. Works great so far

62. Very good

63. very good.

64. Very good

65. spent most time on Sprint Wireless service. (only used NANOG to fill out the survey)

66. Apparently there were Rogue Accesspoints. We should find a way to track this down and stop this from happening.

67. Seemed very reliable. Good to have negotiated inclusive network access in the rooms as well. Nice job.

68. The Hilton's wireless sux, NANOGs was great.

69. worked well for me.

70. Was great, was baller.

71. Very reliable and useful.

72. No complaints. Reliable and worked as expected.

73. It is working quite well

74. Rockin!

75. Hunky-dory! (and IPv6!)

76. I don't have any hard evidience, but it felt like it had lower perforance within in the main room.

77. Excellent

78. Pretty good. 802.11g gets slow in the afternoons. My small, lightweight laptop doesn't have a 5GHz 802.11a radio. Oh well.

79. very good

80. It worked fine!

81. 802.1x is a good idea, definitely simplifies rollout of encryption

82. Wireless network was great

83. Worked well.

84. it is good but I keep getting attacked

85. Working great.

86. so far not too bad

87. Worked fine

88. Worked well enough, seemed a little sluggish at times.

89. signal seemed good though there seemed to be a rogue/misconfigured ra on the v6

90. working great, no problems. for peap had to specify ver 0 instead of auto, but that was all.

91. Provided excellent service.

92. So far so good

93. Was definitely faster than the hotels

94. Awesome. Can I sleep here instead of my hotel that has no IPv6 service?

95. Works great for me!

96. works fine

97. Excellent, I enjoyed the v6!

98. ipv6 instability part way through tuesday - ended up using ipv4 mostly after this proved to be unstable..... re-occuring theme at most conferences as conference goes on

99. No issues encountered so far with the NANOG-A network. Its good to see support for A is still provided even though there is an obvious lack of users with cards to use it.

100. OK

101. I keep getting weird MS RPC attacks. Other then that it is working pretty well.

102. good so far

103. So far so good

104. The NANOG wireless network performs well to my satisfaction. It's a hell of a lot better than the wireless access that the hotel provides. :)

105. Works without any problems - good work!

106. Generally quite good, though you're sending the deprecated site local address prefix advertisements ;-)

107. Was disconnecting my VPN tunnel earlier this morning, but that is just nit picking.

108. Occasionally a little slow, but expected with the amount of people working in the rooms during the talks.

109. works like a dream

110. It works for me!

111. works fine with my laptop & N900 phone, great. even the x-network.

112. Where is the 802.11n?

113. Worked well/without issue.

114. works fine, just that there are lot's of virus around.

115. No issues.

116. Seemed to work well, although there as a rogue (intentional or no?) RA on the v6 network.

117. wireless was solid, as usual (nanog-a)

118. works fine

119. Good so far!

120. Good quality this time!

121. The native IPv6 access is a bit flaky.

122. It worked very well. I used the standard nanog link. 

Answered question


(skipped this question)


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


1. had to pay extra for gym access

2. Worked fine for me. Good hotel. Close to restaurants.

3. Loved being near all the action.

4. sketchy audio in the meeting, too cold outside

5. the main meeting room, H, has been waaaaaaayyyyyy too hot. very uncomfortable until the doors are opened.

6. The sound in the main room was bad. Comming and going

7. Great location for a winter meeting.

8. Liked learning what big operators do in their networks and up and coming new ways to deal with scaling issues.

9. all good

10. Good, compact enough

11. snow! wth? plan the weather better next time please ;)

12. Great location.

13. very close to entertainment and dining.

14. Venue was god, cannot complain.

15. austin... good food... weather well not so

16. good meeting venue

17. vendor room needs to be closer to the main action.

18. Networking, Beer and Gear was great but needs more gear.

19. Good BBQ close

20. convenient to after hour activity.

21. snow

22. Snow in texas == bad

23. The bar closed too soon and opened too late. But proximity to 6th street was nice.

24. expensive, nearby cheap food outlets, but great meeting space and off-line chat corridor spaces

25. it was in Austin

26. Split floors not great. Forgot to go to the fourth floor.

27. no nearby coffee

28. Nothing, great overall

29. Building lined with lead; unable to get adequate cellular coverage.

30. No airport shuttle. Nice conference and guest rooms. Not enough cheaper food options.

31. very nice venue.

32. Austin and the Hilton were near lots of food and nightlife. Seems like a good overall neighborhood.

33. Venue was amazing!

34. Nothing - great hotel and Austin even with snow is a very nice location.

35. Good location. Poor wireless coverage in building for both ATT and Sprint.

36. Like

37. Venue was good, cannot complain about anything. ISP security and IPv6 stuff were the most interesting things.

38. Facility was great.

39. t-sips. saw 'em off.

40. Venue centrally located, however by the time my travel was confirmed the NANOG rate was full and so I stayed at a local hotel (Radisson - about 120USD/night less than the standard Hilton rate). Hotel of high quality/facilities good

41. Good location, easy to get to places to eat

42. Too many pushy salespeople with no idea whatsoever what they're talking about and who they're talking to

43. good location. good downtown.

44. expensive hotel

45. It was too expensive!

46. Liked the meeting. It was a ncie environment with friendly staff

47. location, closeness to restaurants and bars.

48. Yes

49. College town was overwhelming. I prefer wide meeting layout to narrow..

50. The sound in the ballroom wasn't great. Very echoey. Lots of problems with sound reflections. There should be tighter control over the PA system in the main ballroom, proper sound checks done at set up and at the start of each day. Apparently the guy doing the sound was an arrogant cocky a**hole too, and wouldn't take feedback from attendees. Hope this means that some money can be knocked off the hosting invoice.

51. It was very convenient.

52. Austin is neat.

53. nice location and close to after hours stuff.

54. It was fine.

55. Actually nothing - this is a nice hotel and nice setup

56. Seems fine. Could do with some tables for laptops on the Sunday tutorials.

57. Great City

58. Hotel was great and walking distance to great entertainment and dining.

59. Venue was fine, easy to access and close to entertainment

60. Great location. Nice to have enough table space in the meeting room.

61. good restaurants within walking distance

62. Location convenient to dining, entertainment, etc.

63. Good location.

64. Good location, nice hotel.

65. traffic to/from my brother's house where i'm staying :)

66. I thought the venue was really nice -- no complaints.

67. Well laid out, easy to get to.

68. Dislike the rolling shadows on the projectors.

69. Right in the heart of Austin. Downtown evening fun easily accessible. :)

70. i like the various small meeting areas in the atrium on 6th floor

71. I liked all the restaurants and bars.

72. great meeting venue.... no complaints here

73. Limited seating

74. N/A

75. Doing fine so far

76. Good package - does not need to be any fancier place.

77. Simple elevator ride from room to meeting space ... no complexity, a plus!

78. Great hotel. Staff has been really nice.

79. Nice place.

80. I like the nice central location, with alternative hotels nearby. I dislike the music between talks: the speaker placement was right next to the natural place to hold post-talk conversations


82. wheater forecast! i left canada to avoid snow for a bit

83. hiltons are always good quality hotels, many ++'s for the downtown area!

84. Like: Austin Dislike: location in Austin, room cost.

85. Hotel was a little sub-par, rooms were pretty nasty for the price. You wouldn't think Austin would have that problem.

86. I liked to location of the hotel in proximity to the Austin local cuisine and nightlife.

87. I like the facility and thanks for getting the power bar easily accessable.

88. The temperature indoors was perfect! (not too cold as it often is) Nice hotel.

89. i like the space as it offers many small meeting places in the atrium area.

90. Meeting venue was convenient to downtown, and very nice.

91. No complaints.

92. In all, pretty good!

93. Venue was perfect

94. Very nice venue. Decent air fare and hotels. It was also my first opportuniy to get to Audtin.

95. Great hotel - nice rooms, close walk to great restaurants -- excellent choice overall!

96. Great location

97. I thought the venue was wonderful. Good hotel choice; able to walk to many different venues; nice weather :) 

Answered question


(skipped this question)


19. What worked well at this meeting?


1. The tables outside of the ballrooms. That is where I got to talk with lots of folks

2. gravity

3. The food

4. Meeting new peers

5. All logistics were really on spot

6. the beer & gear went well. The socials were easy to find.

7. nice that all of the meetings were close together

8. Almost everything, tho it is weird to see that sound system had so much problems. Also it was hard to hear people every now and then.

9. everything went off pretty well.

10. frequent breaks

11. nice location and sessions.

12. nice layout

13. panels worked better than usual - panelists were more prepared

14. net, breakout rooms, places to meet/work

15. Schedule, gatherings, location

16. Pacing.

17. The great amount of space where the presentations were held.

18. I would say that almost everything worked well, the only thing to complain about is that it was sometimes hard to hear what the presenters are talking about, volume was too low.

19. nice having everything in one place, close, easy accessible. thanks.

20. Location / locality of external events - easy to walk to / stumble (!) from

21. I enjoyed the power set up at the desks here, it was much nicer than the setup in Philly.

22. Wireless

23. good facility

24. It was nice that internet access was available free in the rooms.

25. yes

26. good power outlet distribution, always a tough one.

27. community input

28. meetings

29. i liked the panel system.

30. Big area to walk around.

31. topics and accessibility of speakers.

32. Proximity of rooms made it easy to find everything.

33. fruit at the break!

34. everything

35. The flow of the meeting seems very good sao far

36. Open communication, networking opportunities

37. easy to find spaces. like the tables and areas for groups to get together and talk.

38. everything

39. It's my first nanog, but I thought it all went very well and very smoothly

40. the new format for the schedule/agenda handed out with the credentials is excellent. The flyer format is nice.

41. So far everything is OK

42. Beer 'n Geer as always!!

43. All the logistics seems to flow really nicely

44. Great talks on the IPv6

45. I think you did a good job of scheduling; there haven't really been any cases where I desperately wanted to be in two places at the same time

46. The mediation of FCC conversation was right on.

47. meeting people ive only seen on the 'net and organizing works quite well too. the later starting schedule is really good, i flew in from Europe and was totally jetlagged.

48. So far, staying on/within agenda times is much improved over past meetings.

49. hotel, downtown, surrounded by resturants and shops.

50. Wifi, check in...

51. Overall, good so far!

52. It us very well organized and I appreciate the frequent breaks and opportunites to network.

53. NANOG wireless

54. Thanks for the healthy food options!

Answered question


(skipped this question)


20. What should be improved for the next meeting?


1. Some people need to exhibit better manners. The immaturity of a few folks (we all know who they are...) takes away from the value that everyone else brings.

2. Am hoping to come in person to the next meeting; for other remote attendees it'd be interesting to compare what was done for this meeting compared to Nanog47 in Detroit, at which ! had a much better remote experience.

3. meet other attendees

4. ventillation.

5. Real-life technical experiences with configuration snippets will be great.

6. The survey needs to be broken up per day, instead of 1 big survey.

7. Survey - split into parts BOF ideas should be asked already before the meeting

8. meeting places. Please make some numbered meeting places in the atrium, 3 or 4 should be sufficient, where people meeting for the first time can rendezvous easily.

9. Improved predictive meteorology.

10. better topics and not re-doing recent presentations

11. Sound systems, and no presentations where the presenter is not interested about the presentation!

12. some of the presenters could be more exciting

13. snack selection during late tuesday break was better - lose the cookies, junk IMO..... maybe have actual breakfasts rather than continental

14. little warm in here, turn on the air!

15. A list of close restaurants

16. expand topics based on what operators are experiencing. More parallel tracks.

17. More veggies.

18. snow, in texas?

19. content. it basically sucked.

20. The audio was terrible

21. More update information from IEEE and IETF

22. Not having to share facilities with people in suits.

23. More stuff from the R&E community.

24. Don't bring the FCC folks again. They were not very great representatives of the FCC stance.

25. Lots of audio problems in the General Session room.

26. Maybe add actual tutorials, since the ones on this Nanog 48 were more like fast forward stuff for people with a lot of experience and knowledge already.

27. Improve or institute the call for papers process. Talks ranged widely in content quality. A peer review would help ensure presenters meet a minimum quality level.

28. Shorten boring stuff. Fill with lightning talks.

29. Nothing think of - generally very happy with content / layout

30. NANOG should probably be twice a year instead of 3 times a year and both times with ARIN. Seems a bit excessive at 3 times a year.

31. the wifi seemed a little flaky/slow

32. less expensive lodging

33. not yet know

34. better content, more usefull presentations (slides) vs. talk

35. nothing

36. Please put in the brief for the catering that only putting half-and-half or cream out for breaktime coffee is not acceptable. Need to put out lower-fat options like 2% milk too. Half-and-half/cream also tastes crap in tea. Milk please :).

37. too early to say till wednesday

38. more sessions, perhaps lengthen meeting.

39. more fruit!

40. n/a

41. Not pushing peole to take the survey on the first full day of the confrence.

42. power supplies in the other conference rooms in addition to the main.

43. No complaints here for improvement

44. Presenters should be encouraged to do a better job. 9 out of 10 are basically worthless.

45. more guests from key external agencies of the government, such as DHS or various LEA representatives.

46. I would recommend pairing technical folk with speakers more adept at presenting to large audiences. We don't want to loose the 'brain', but some folks could use some assistence moving a presentation along.

47. Perhaps don't encourage people to fill out the survey at the very beginning of the meeting before we have anything to comment on. :)

48. Will notify you by Wednesday (by the end of NANOG 48)

49. Audio setup didn't work too well on Monday. Speakers should be provided with wireless lapel mics

50. Registration closed too early on Sunday. Lots of folks come in late Sunday and want to get their badges if at all possible.

51. Talks on up and coming technologies

52. I felt that there was some confusion about social events, and am a little unhappy at lunch being scheduled kinda late on Monday

53. The informational sessions on Sunday should be broken up so that all can be attended by one person.

54. Tkap should fix the HD video stream.

55. Breakfast! There is only so many pastries one can eat. Okay, some people seem to be fine with the sugar rush :)

56. More sessions dealing with core transport networks.

Answered question


(skipped this question)


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


1. Get people other than ARIN to describe their experience with IPv4 addresses - can they still be obtained and how much scrubbing is needed ..

2. it'd be nice if we could have some large-scale video streaming providers discuss their issues and how they've addressed them.

3. What to do when you get a bad customer -talk

4. I'd like to see more operational VoIP discussions, in particular regarding QoS and codecs, on-net vs off-net services.

5. More details on economics of peering and relationships

6. More security related things, as internet security is increasing trend!

7. it would be nice to get more info on worldwide networks... overseas... fiber routes paths available.... what is going on in the asia / europe market.

8. Egor is awesome!

9. More FCC guys. More of the compare / contrast, pro/con presentations

10. as always - the latest global routing/internetworking problem, who was hurt least and what they did, who was hurt most and what they did

11. More dynamic presenters. It is very difficult to get behind a presentation if the presenter themselves seems disinterested.

12. too new to have anything constructive to say at the moment

13. A route filtering panel, if done like the IPv6 link numbering panel I think might be worthwhile.

14. Maybe more stuff about IT security and more ideas how to bring the North American networks together to be real part of the futures global Internet, since right now it is seemingly very hard to see as North America to stay in the drive with the rest of the world.

15. NA

16. Would be nice to have smaller groups for labs for those of us who don't do certain things in the industry to be able to try out and mess with a config on.

17. IPv6 DDOS mitigation and new DDOS attacks (IPv4 and IPv6).

18. Would be interesting to talk about multidomain services and issues surrounding that. It would also be interesting to see more focus on the way the NOC is supposed to fit into the operations and how NOCs can cooperate better.

19. architectural direction

20. still new and observing

21. More controversial topics.

22. Please put the presentation powerpoint before the meeting

23. Building a network using TRILL/RBRIDGE once some vendors have actually implemented it, so probably not until 2011 :).

24. Chatroulette. CAT MAN. Someone from Microsoft to talk about XBOX Live and Modern Warfare 2 on the Internets.

25. more studies focused on case studies how carriers are doing something.

26. n/a

27. More IPv6 with some common knowledge and not going back over old presentations.

28. Layer2 vs mpls Ethernet across the core.

29. not sure if this would be possible, but i'd love to see different tier1 providers describe their architectures and possibly even equipment. i'm curious if they're all doing it the same, and if not, why.

30. More tutorial-type presentations. The BGP presentation was nice. Something like that on differing topics that newcomers can get something from.

31. I'd like to see the FCC stay on as a routine guest, along with the net neutrality panel until the Net Neutrality guidance is published. This is a very important topic, and may serve to drive ongoing attendance. I'd appreciate some VoIP topics at the next meeting, in particular from a former PSTN carrier network.

32. Would like to hear more about trill, datacenter switching, virtualization/cloud issues (nexus 1000v, vmotion), vPC, the Nexus platform, and just things in general revolving around Cisco's "datacenter 3.0" technology (as well as competitors).

33. Futures of Ethernet connectivity (40G / 100G).

34. Will notify you by Wednesday (by the end of NANOG 48)


36. There is a high possibility that MPLS will be deployed in our network in the near future, so more presentations or even a MPLS 101-102 tutorial would be cool to have in future NANOGs.

37. "When a ISP/hosting provider turns out be to be a blackhat operation - what to do". Consult ISP Security track hosts for speaker ideas

38. Maybe some more talks about network tools. But again, that is content nit picking.

39. It would be interesting to hear from the Twitter folks, and if you could get ahold of someone able and willing to speak to the subject of Internet usage in Iran right now, I'd attend just for that.

40. I'd like to see the net neutrality discussion, with participation by the FCC, be a regular event until the FCC issues final guidance

41. n/a

42. Opportunites to create operations leverage through service vendor partnerships. 

Answered question


(skipped this question)


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


1. i can't think of any, they did a really great job.

2. Denver, Vancouver, Seattle, WA

3. Unfortunately, I cannot help here!

4. venues have been pretty good so far. just keep the winter sessions in warmer climates ... ie not snow... great job!!!

5. akamai

6. N/A

7. Had forgotten about free in room wifi, and was coming down to lobby at night when I could have worked in the room. :(

8. airport shuttles to the hotel would be nice or choose cities with great mass transit

9. I would be open to being a volunteer.

10. Aliant (Canada), Qwest (Denver), somewhere in New England. If there is space and decent flight connectivity, options outside of Boston might be Manchester, NH, Providence, RI and Hartford CT.

11. Unfortunately, I cannot help here.

12. NA

13. NA

14. Important to choose cities with many direct flights. It is also important to have sponsored socials/mixers/parties each night. (This NANOG was great.)

15. Tap Amazon up, let's go back to Seattle. I think we're also about due another visit to Canada?

16. I would be interested in discussing hosting a meeting in Canada (either Ottawa or Montreal) (Brandon Grant // Momentous.ca)

17. n/a

18. i wish there were more tracks and no overlapping

19. terrific location!

20. Will notify by Wednesday (by the end of NANOG 48)

21. Denver with Qwest? Canada (Vancouver, Ottawa). Seattle, Wash?

22. Nashville @ Gaylord Opryland

23. n/a

24. Merit did a terrific job. As good as I have seen. 

Answered question


(skipped this question)


23. Suggestions and volunteers for the NANOG Marketing 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?)


1. maybe some of the commercial IXes? then again, i guess if you're here you already know them.

2. arista

3. Unfortunately, I cannot help here!

4. arista blade network technologies

5. N/A

6. Unfortunately, I cannot help here.

7. NA

8. NA

9. n/a

10. to me it would seem like equipment vendors would have a higher chance than service providers. everyone likes network diagnostic/monitoring/configuration packages.

11. Not know.

12. n/a

13. You might consider service vendors. 

Answered question


(skipped this question)


24. Do you subscribe to the NANOG mailing-lists?


84.4% (184)


16.1%% (35)


1. How do I do so?

2. It sucks.

3. Subscribed in the past, but removed myself due to list volume (several years ago). May re-subscribe soon as is more relevant to me now than it had been.

4. no real reason, but will,

5. have not signed up but will.

6. too much drama

7. I get enough email as it is

8. I'm on too many mailing lists already. I subscribe sometimes.

9. Too many emails.

10. too many things to keep track already. thanks.

11. New to the community, plan to join.

12. Don't read it much, though - S:N ratio has become too low, and even necessary threads (e.g. the one with Bennett) get 'moderated'

13. Already subscribe to too many others

14. first time but would join in the future

15. I read the archive on the web regularly

16. Too much noise. Too much Randy Bush. Why cant the MLC drop the hammer and just tell him to shut up?

17. maybe later

18. Planning on it.

19. too many emails already

20. Too chatty. I prefer to read the indexed threads for relevant topics.

21. This was my first Nanog.

22. I read the archived mailer.

23. To many email

24. I was unfamiliar with their existence until just recently

25. verbosity. I am still adjusting to many other mailing list I have recently joined, and have left NANOG for later to avoid getting overwhelmed.

26. not personally, our team receives the nanog mailinglist.

27. Gadi Evron

28. too much noise

29. Too much crap

30. Just haven't signed up yet, probably will. 

Answered question


(skipped this question)


25. Why do you attend NANOG?


1. Learn and meet.

2. To conduct business with people that are there and to catch the occasional presentation that is worthwhile.

3. Network infrastructure is important.

4. meet new prospect for our IX

5. more knowledge, community interaction.

6. To see whats new in Internet life.

7. To meet other networking professionals and discuss operational topics

8. I was a presenter and also wanted to network with people as I haven't been to a nanog since 2002.

9. to stay current, sometimes to present, to meet colleages

10. free wifi, and i consider this like the house of representatives and senate of the series of tubes.

11. the topics on the agenda as a whole

12. To meet with other networking Peers, share network experiences and learn about new technologies

13. participate and learn

14. To continue learning and improving my skillsets.

15. To catch up on latest technology, and meet with associates.

16. To learn about what is going on with other big providers and how they address certain issues.

17. To understand what the latests trends are in the ISP industry.

18. unmatched mix of technical/operational/research/more generic on all things ops along with peering - social

19. To keep myself professionally up-to-date

20. stay current with best practices and current pricing in the market for various services. meet with peers and stay acquainted.

21. get information and network

22. To learn from peers what they are doing to run their networks. We also come for peering opportunities which help justify the cost of attendance to management.

23. I like it when Randy makes the whole room feel awkward during Q&A. - or - I'm an NMS architect in the CDN space. I care about network behavior, performance, and standards.

24. networking and gaining technical knowledge.

25. Working on a related subject, spam analysis, and wanted to see the people that we collaborate and co-operate with.

26. discuss with peers and get updates on what is going on throughout the world

27. community, insight into other real-world issues, implementations, etc...

28. technical topics of depth. access to actul spec authors. people with whom i can relate. job opportunities.

29. Networking and education, personal and professional development

30. To meet with colleagues

31. Find out what's going on and pain points.

32. Speaking, and general sessions.

33. cats

34. Meet peers, learn more.

35. Meet people in person that I usually only talk to on phone, over IRC, e-mail, etc. Presentations Strip clubs

36. Contacts, peering, and learning practices from other ISPs that we can apply in our network

37. To learn what other network operators do in their network....bounce ideas...and learn something new.

38. The talks are always interesting and relevant + networking opportunities within the community

39. Learn more about my field and the challenges that are faced by the other operators. Make new contacts and have meetings with other people I don't see very often.

40. to hear latest operational technology, to hear controversy, to hear what other operators are doing, finding problems with, succeeding with, to meet other operators

41. To be better in my field

42. In this case it was convenient.

43. work with peers. sure ain't the program.

44. Networking, learning about how others solve the same problems

45. Meet friends

46. Make connections

47. Socialization, discussion panels, vendor meetups

48. To hear what the operators are saying abou tthe Internet.

49. For a great look into the commercial internet and the great tutorials and talks on a wide variety of routing topics.

50. professional development professional networking

51. Networking opportunities, learning from some of the talks

52. To hear what the operators are interested in, what problems they are facing, and what solutions / features they need. The goal is to actually build solutions that meet the needs of the operators.

53. NANOG is a great way forum for business networking. I really enjoy meeting other people in our field. The extracurricular activities at NANOG are always a blast as well.

54. Learn more about the field; had a table at Beer 'n Gear

55. To make ocntacts with peers and potential peers and to learn what others are doing.

56. Meet customers, learn industry topics, peering

57. Networking

58. Learn about current and emerging technologies and best practices.

59. Catch up with customers and peers.

60. For the opportunity to meet other peers

61. my first time, people said it is the ISP network geek place to go.

62. Wanted to meet people that our project team has worked with, to hear comments and feedback in-person from the co-operators.

63. Conference was local, no travel required.

64. Information, Networking with folks, etc.

65. updates on current issues facing network operators.

66. I attend to meet with others in the community and for continuing education.

67. Content / Meet with colleagues/peers

68. To progress in my field.

69. To further my knowledge about what is going on in the networking community and to expand my connections with others in the industry.

70. Of general interest, and proximity to other business in area

71. To learn more about what the networking community was doing moving forward with new technologies.

72. peering, networking, general sessions etc.

73. meet network peers, get an industry scoop

74. To see how opeartions is done and organisazed in North America to see if there is any experiences that I could bring back home to Sweden.

75. Information sessions and meeting other industry professionals.

76. to get the pulse of the community and interact with them

77. Networking

78. Get info on the state of the Internet and understand issues and challenges facing operators.

79. To learn from peers

80. meet industry peers and exchange general information

81. DIRECTV is becoming a ISP and require peering relationship growth

82. understand the industry and what the challenges are and how technical staff are addressing and solving them

83. Human relationship, operational information

84. Networking, learning, exposure to new technologies

85. Meet people and network, and sometimes attend talks that are interesting

86. networking and some excellent presentations

87. To understand problems service providers are facing

88. Keep in touch. Keep informed. Remind me of things I should spend time on.

89. speaker

90. To see what the latest is going on and see how our company can help meet others goals.

91. To network with industry peers, meet customers and suppliers, distribute and collect clue, while drinking to excess.

92. I was interested in discussing topics that were relevant to my industry.

93. to improve personal network and to hear the technical talks as part of training plan. To meet peers and vendors. to challenge self by presenting and making comments from floor

94. wanted to see what it was about.

95. The people, the cat man.

96. Good opportunity to learn about evolving best practices for large networks.

97. Get a pulse of what people are doing and what the need is.

98. Receive information and talk to other colleagues

99. so I can learn

100. Technical presentations and social networking

101. Network operations trends, topics, peering.

102. To gather input from the operational community.

103. Because!

104. I find the information useful

105. To meet my peers

106. To help stay up to date on technical issues and find out what the latest issues are and what the rest of the world is doing.

107. Networking, Education

108. To gain needed technical knowledge as well as to network with industry peers. Also develop peering relationships.

109. Introducions to new network partners

110. Networking with other peers in the networking industry, learn and share network issues and experiences.

111. Keep up with industry. Talk with customers.

112. Hear interesting talks, meet peering coordinators, meet vendors or potential vendors, resolve issues (if any) with other networks

113. Presenter

114. technical training and meet people

115. People networking, and current networking topics review.

116. Social networking, meeting with peers, discussing directions of industry.

117. content, social connection w/ providers and peers

118. i love this stuff

119. Face to face networking.

120. I attended this, my first NANOG, to publicize TRILL and distribute copies of my resume to selected attendees.

121. Networking, Learning, ..Drinking

122. Information and social networking

123. As a "heads up" out of the hole to see what others in the industry are working towards.

124. Personal networking with industry peers.

125. We are extending our network to the US and therefor like to meet the ISPs

126. To get acquainted with the people of the network engineering industry and to learn about the latest news.

127. Hallway and panel discussions.

128. wanted more insight on what the operators are doing.

129. To keep up with new topics, as well as meet up with fellow operators to discuss the state of our networks.

130. Primarily to stay abreast of current operational concerns and new tech. Secondarily to stay acquainted with my peers in the industry.

131. To get information on current trends and practices.

132. Learn about new technologies and experience with it. Also meeting the people in the industry.

133. To make contacts

134. Socialize with others in the industry, learn about upcoming technology, and learn about how others solve the same problems I run into.

135. visibility into other operational aspects of other companies/communities. stay up to date w/ current practices, etc...

136. Neutral ground to meet with other network pros from other companies - exchange info and knowledge without the politics of business getting involved.

137. NANOG provides allows us to network with potential peers, and also gain insight into upcoming technologies.

138. Learn more

139. learn and meet people

140. To network with other engineers across the country. I usually learn something new. Also, it's good to get away from the madness of day-to-day work at the office. The host cities are usually good and I double it as a vaction. :)

141. To keep myself updated on IP network operations issues.

142. 80% for interpersonal networking, 20% for the actual presentation content

143. Professional development Professional networking

144. Hallway track, meeting with vendors, friends.

145. To keep up to date on the challenges that my fellow operators are facing. To learn more on about my field. And to meet up and network with my engineer friends.

146. My company develops network software and wants to develop a closer relationship with the community, and get a better sense of what the issues of the day are

147. Professional curiosity and to mix with people whom I have working relationships. I also like meeting more people from the community.

148. Learn, network (socially)

149. get some ideas and new clues on tools related to networks and BGP protocol

150. Keep up with technology, network with other network operators.

151. Connect with peers. Learn about new industry directions

152. Drinking

153. Networking

154. To learn current best-practices for running a successful network. To learn about new and emerging technologies. To meet and maintain relationships with colleagues in the networking field.

155. industry contacts, technical discussion/presentations

156. As a vendor representative for Beer & Gear and to get a better understanding of what issues are important to the network operator community.

157. I heard it is where ISP exchange info and ideas.

158. Opportunity was presented to attend for free, so I took it.

159. To stay current on what's happening.

160. Networking, information exchange, visibility

161. Primarily to refresh on current issues affecting the operator community and get a look at upcoming concerns and technologies. Secondarily to reacquaint myself with my peers in the industry.

162. Panels and social interaction with peers.

163. I'm a student and interested in learning about NANOG.

164. Networking, learning

165. To learn and contribute.

166. It is a great source of information about operating networks.

167. 1st time attendee. Came for the education and opportuniy to meet network operators.

168. Learn about cutting-edge technology relevant to network operators and to stay in touch with my friends in this space that I have met over the last 20 years.

169. Interesting Stff, Nice People

170. Wanted to attend in the past, but budgets limited my travel.

171. Updates on all the variety of topics covered.

172. To experience the whole view of networking

173. networking, knowledge 

Answered question


(skipped this question)


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


1. Great format and execution. It still has the feel of a user driven event.

2. there was talk earlier in the week about fund raising for nanog. you should sell shirts from your previous meetings or even other stuff like mugs and hats. i think several people would be interested in showing their support for the group and voting w/ their $.

3. !!! As a student, this was extremely great opportunity to meet the people from "real world" that I will most likely be working in the future !!!

4. Dyn rules for offering the boss giveaways!

5. N/A

6. Please name the talks and presenteer as opposed to call them 'general session Monday'.

7. Excellent chance for a student to build contacts with the "real world"!!!

8. NA

9. Commenting quickly for contest deadline. More later.

10. NA

11. Accidentally submitted on the vpn before, and I want a chance to win a laptop. :)

12. I better win the macbook pro!

13. Great Experience!

14. wish it was in austin sooner, but now i wish it'd come back to seattle. thanks!

15. Peering meetup!!! Why isn't there one here in Austin?

16. may have filled this out twice, as I followed the link off the nanog48 webpage vs the fancy url. Please improve the online survey for next time. Perhaps a daily survey with any incentives given away on the following morning session. This would encourage both completion of the survey at the end of the day, and early attendance ;)

17. Will notify you by Wednesday (by the end of NANOG 48) By the way my name is: Ali Karimi

18. NANOG is a really undervalued as the current source of IP network operations & engineering practices. You provide the best value for the money spent. Networking at NANOG events is great. Keep up the good work!

19. I love what you guys are doing. I enjoy the community very much and enjoy being able to talk with my fellow peers. Thanks again for a great NANOG!!

20. Good luck Betty! We will miss you.

21. n/a

22. Just a thought: I wonder how many people will feel comfortable filling out the survey, knowing that their MAC address is being used to track them? I am sure you are being fair, but it probably makes a lot of people wonder how anonymous the survey is.

Answered question


(skipped this question)



^ Back to Top