^ Top

NANOG 51 Survey Results


NANOG 51 Survey Results Miami, Florida (January 30 to February 2, 2011)
1. How did you attend NANOG51? Response Percent (Response Total)
In person in Miami 95.0% (211)
Via webcast 5.0% (11) 
Answered question 222
(skipped this question)

2. How many NANOG meetings have you attended?
This is my first meeting 31.8% (71)
Five or fewer 30.5% (68)
More than five 15.7% (35)
More than 10 8.1% (18)
More than 15 4.0% (9)
More than 20 9.9% (22) 
Answered question 223
(skipped this question)

3. Has this NANOG meeting been useful for you so far?
Very Useful 31.3%( 70)
Useful 59.4% (133)
No Opinion 8.9% (20)
Not Very Useful 0.4% (1)
Useless 0.0% (0)
Answered question 224
(skipped this question)

4. Newcomers Tutorial - Mike Hughes, Program Committee
1. Great
2. Excellent
3. Good overview
4. heard it was good
5. Skipped it.
6. Good. Came in towards the end.
7. Sorry could make it on Sunday.
8. really great
9. Simple and clear
10. Useful, short and to the point.
11. I was not there
12. This was a good intro - perhaps would benefit from a little more local information?
13. NA
14. The information provided at that session was very useful.
15. I didn't attend, but Mike is awesome.
16. Good introduction, quite generic, doesn't bring much more information than what's on the website though.
17. This was useful! Nice to get an introduction - would be nice to have a bit more local information maybe?
18. Good.
19. did not attend
20. Very nicely done.
21. NA
22. Too short--fill the time! There's lots to talk about!
23. Very informative. helpful.
24. It was a very informative tutuorial. I got to get all the information that needed to help me get aquainted with the nanog meeting.
25. I did not attend.
26. Good, quick overview; concise
27. Great Introduction. Thanks for hosting this!
28. Great intro, organized and concise.
29. Was helpful in understanding the meeting flow and alternative name for the BoF (Track) presentations. Also, learned that lightning talk topics could be generated the day before presentations.
30. was late due to traffic
31. Very useful for new comer
32. Informative
33. Missed it but the slide deck was excellent!
34. very useful
35. Useful. Gave some insight as to what can be expected at the conference.
36. Caught the tail end of the session. It would be helpful if this could be a little bit later in the afternoon to allow for Sunday morning flights.
37. Execellent
38. Nice introduction
Answered question 38
(skipped this question) 189 

5. IPv6 Technology Overview Part I - Byju Pularikkal, Cisco Systems, Inc.
1. Glad it was recorded and will be available later via web. Unfortunately, too many good tutorials happening all at the same time.
2. It was good, especially for those who are not familar with IPv6. It was a good introduction of the basics of IPv6, such as how the packet is constructed, how it is compared with the current IPv4, etc.
3. skipped
4. Enjoyed the level of detail provided
5. Great technical info...it was quite hard to fully understand what he was saying even though he was very good and had a very good knowledge. 
6. good job - little hard to understand presenter
7. I was not there
8. great stuff :)
9. NA
10. The information was very interesting but I would like to have more information on transition method, technology as well as description of different transition approach such as the session on monday morning. Also more information on IPv6 product support would be very useful.
11. Audio was poor and presentation was hard to follow because of it.
12. Flow somewhat disjointed
13. Good information. Very good presentation. would like to get all slide. Some are missing.
14. Not engaging
15. Enjoyed very much - very knowledgeable and informative.
16. I had greater expectations from the session. Felt that answers weren't thoughtful.
17. something I knew already.
18. A little heavy on the CMTS details but overall a good intro to ipv6.
19. he was good at what he was talking about. He was able to answer all the questions asked satisfactorily. I got to know about ipv6 from the basics which was a good experience for me.
20. I did not attend.
21. A bit slow and dry; could have been presented in a little more engaging manner
22. Thanks!
23. Somewhat dry, speaker was speaking very quickly through the material. Good slides.
24. I knew most of the information already, maybe could have had more discussion and questions.
25. was good, in depth v6 operational guide
26. Very good. Succint description of v6, which some people might just be getting started on.
27. Very Basic
28. This was a great tutorial.
29. I liked this. The presenter did a good job and it was interesting.
30. very good. nice refresher and primer
31. only attended part - the room was big and the sound wasn't very clear
32. Interesting topic. Difficult to understand the speaker. Would have been very helpful to have the presentation provided as a hard copy on which to write notes.
33. Very dry delivery, not terrifically engaging.
34. Very good
Answered question 34
(skipped this question) 193 

6. A Complete Guide To Peering - Richard A. Steenbergen, nLayer Communications
1. A great refresher for folks doing it for awhile as well as a great intro for new people.
2. Excellent
3. presentation looked good (read the .ppt)
4. skipped
5. Good, informative session. Will refer to this tutorial often in the future.
6. ++ great talk. Good job of talking to the tech and politics.
7. excellent
8. Very useful, practical information
9. I was not there
10. NA
11. interesting
12. great presentation
13. good overview, touched on everything with great detail. nothing new or groundbreaking covered, which made for a little boredom at times, but not the fault of the presenter.
14. Interesting for those who are new to peering.
15. did not attend
16. Great info on peering and very beneficial to someone that is new/interested in peering (me!).
17. Very useful.
18. Presentation was very good and provided a good insight into thought process of a peer.
19. Unfortunately, I did not attend.
20. Very helpful, good review
21. Interesting discussion. I'm not too familiar with peering terminology and types of relationships, so I found that introduction very informative.
22. Appreciated the objective, as-a-matter-of-fact approach. More technical details sought, though.
23. Informative, but I wish it was a bit more in depth.
24. very informative. gave me a good insight into what peering consists of and what the different types of peering are.
25. voice was little low and he read always from script ( little eye contact with the audience
26. much better presentation then what has been given in previous NANOG meetings
27. Comprehensive and well presented. Was stuck near door though and the room was inconveniently laid out so it was hard to hear at times.
28. readt the preso, looked very good.
29. Useful, but expected a bit more.
30. Remarkably well-balanced rather than one-sided for a known opinionated person.
31. great overview
32. I found it very useful
33. Always good to get a nice refresh on the good old topic. Never becomes old.
34. Interesting, and very informative.
35. I found this informative.
Answered question 35
(skipped this question) 192 

7. A Storage Menagerie: SANs, Fibre Channel, Replication and Networks - David Black, EMC Corporation
1. didn't attend
2. skipped
3. I liked this -- it was a nice departure from the standard suite of tutorials often seen at nanog.
4. Very good
5. attended
6. I was not there
7. NA
8. Good presenter and great initiation to those network storage technologies.
9. A lot of information delivered quickly but clearly.
10. did not attend
11. good info. very quick, speaker could have slowed the pace just a bit but good overall
12. NA
13. Coming from someone who has had almost no exposure to SANs and fibre channel, this tutorial gave me the crash course I needed to be prepared for FC/LAN types of convergences in the data center.
14. Unfortunately, I did not attend.
15. Did not meet my expectations. Less word crowded slides and more pictures would perhaps have been more useful
16. Good overview for san and storeage network
Answered question 16
(skipped this question) 211 

8. IPV6 Technology Overview Part II - Byju Pularikkal, Cisco Systems, Inc.
1. Good
2. looking forward to seeing the recorded version of this
3. skipped
4. Also enjoyed part 2
5. Great technical info...it was quite hard to fully understand what he was saying even though he was very good and had a very good knowledge. 
6. I was not there
7. thumbs up!
8. NA
9. Same as above.
10. Audio was poor and presentation was hard to follow because of it.
11. Some interesting parts; but dry and did diverge into quite a lot of DOCSIS architecture discussion.
12. Flow somewhat disjointed
13. Good information. Very good presentation.
14. did not attend
15. Enjoyed very much - very knowledgeable and informative.
16. Common DOCSIS 3.0 IPv6 deployment options were nice.
17. Presentation was good, but at this point in IPv6 seemed lacking particularly for a tutorial and the second of 2.
18. Although the DOCSIS portion of this tutorial was quite interesting (and relevant to me), it may have been better to spend a little more time on multiprotocol BGP, OSPFv3, and IS-IS.
19. I did not attend
20. Shared presentation lacking last few impt slides
21. Thanks!
22. Skipped 6rd, which really is more relevant than 6to4. Too specific to Cable MSO's. Should have addressed concerns with traditional business services providers.
23. was good up to DOCSIS 3.0 part. DOCSIS didn't apply to what I was looking for.
24. Dual-Stack not covered deeply
25. This was also a great tutorial.
26. This was good as well.
27. Same comments as other IPv6 session
28. Still good
Answered question 28
(skipped this question) 199 

9. An Introduction to DNSSEC - Matt Larson, VeriSign
1. excellent
2. presentation is still not up on the web site!
3. It was a short but clear introduction of the DNSSEC basics, and how it works.
4. skipped
5. Useful overview.
6. Attended more to get a sense of structure than the complete details, but it was good to see all the details of the DNS records that are used. The discussion of how the keys interact was clear and useful.
7. I was not there
8. This was good. Thanks for presenting this.
9. This was cool...
10. NA
11. I wished I could attend. I guess, I will have to watch the webcast in 2 weeks.
12. Presenter didn't seem to like DNSSEC very much :)
13. interesting
14. good on spec/detail. could benefit from more "howto".
15. useful
16. NA
17. Awesome! Very helpful.
18. I did not attend
19. Very informative; right level of detail for an introduction presentation. Increased my level of understanding of DNSSEC.
20. This was the best operational discussion of DNSSEC I've seen. It approached DNSSEC not from the how-to-validate standpoint, but from the how-to-implement perspective, which is far more interesting to an operations person like me. There were many aspects of DNSSEC that I never really realized "why" to before hearing him approach them from an operational direction.
21. More interactive or real-time look at queries and results would have enhanced the presentation beyond the static PDF/PPT slides. Otherwise, it was a well organized, to the point presentation.
22. I am not a dns person and the information was not clear for me. I did however take away some information and the need to learn more about it and look into possibly pushing my organization into deploying.
23. A good tutorial which I found useful. The slide deck was good, something I'm likely to be referring back to.
24. enjoyed the topic, slide show was unavailable at the time of the presentation, and due to room layout, I had a hard time seeing the screen.
25. seemed to go really quickly. presentation is not up on the web site.
26. Very good presentation.
27. i was clueless, now I understand the basic functionality
28. Very interesting. Learned a lot about DNSSEC that I had not heard of.
29. Very good.
30. On point
31. Informative. Did not fall asleep. :)
32. I found this informative, and even though I had an existing working knowledge of DNSSEC, it served as a good refresher and explanation of some of the more esoteric portions of the spec.
Answered question 32
(skipped this question) 195 

10. Internet Routing Registry - Larry J. Blunk, Merit Network and Manish Karir, Merit Network
1. excellent, saw some of it
2. skipped
3. Another good basic tutorial, very informative and helps the newcomer get up to speed on the how and why the registries work the way they do - doesn't make a lot of sense as a new comer until you see this and the evolution.
4. I was not there
5. NA
6. interesting
7. did not attend
8. Useful information but somewhat dry.
9. NA
10. Not a bad talk or overview, but could have gone over more practical applications of an IRRd.
11. good overall overview, got very complicated rather quickly
12. I did not attend
13. very useful to get an idea what IRR is all about
14. I found the information about configuration generating tools particularly interesting.
15. Heavily focused on the technical aspects,which was very useful for people just getting into IRR's.
16. Good starting point
Answered question 16
(skipped this question) 211 

11. NANOG Community Meeting (5:45-7:00 p.m.)
1. boring
2. Yes
3. good meeting
4. good, well behaved.
5. Great fun.
6. nice state of NewNOG/NANOG
7. Shortest community meeting ever (not complaining).
8. Short session! I was hoping to hear more about the IPv4 status. It looks like I will be waiting until Wed's 0900 session? Last NANOG was all about the IPv4 exhaustion this - not much - much to do about not too much? The meeting isn't over yet though...
9. as always well prepared and interesting
10. Good update
11. I was not there
12. make it morre fun
13. NA
14. Short and sweet.
15. would have appreciated some discussion/heckling. too tame!
16. did not attend
17. Interesting info
18. It was a good overview for first time attender like me.
19. NA
20. Too short! Everyone can say more.
21. Well run community meeting. So fast, no input from the audience.
22. It was interesting to hear from the NANOG community members.
23. nice final presentation
24. Unfortunately, I did not attend.
25. useful
26. The meeting was short and to the point.
27. Short and sweet.
28. ok
29. This one sure went quickly! I barely had time to take my usual notes! ^_^;
30. Should rename this meeting to "Public Report on NANOG Organization activities and Minutes."
31. Would have liked to see more detail on the happenings. Seemed too brief to me, but perhaps was due to the transition.
32. good. shorter than expected!
33. It was short and to the point, perfect.
34. Very quick and somewhat dull this time. I guess that's a good thing which shows things are moving forward relatively smoothly :).
35. good. Very quick meeting, and well conducted.
36. Good information.
37. astonishingly calm. NewNOG looks like a going concern, which is good for the community.
38. Useful info.
39. No controversy? No yelling? Shocker.
40. least controversial so far i've attended
41. Was subdued; either the information was non-controversial or things were rushed.
42. Quick and easy!
43. I felt out of place
44. A smooth meeting this time.
45. Short and to the point.
46. Short and a bit boring. No F-bombs thrown.
Answered question 46
(skipped this question) 181 

12. The Monday morning Newcomers' Breakfast
1. skipped it
2. Enjoyable -- met a few faces.
3. It provided us an opportunity to talk to other new comers in similar areas. But it seems that everyone is new here, so we need some ice-breaking event to encourage people to get more involved in the social. And we are also eager to hear something from the past NANOG attendees.
4. good
5. I had eggs and coffee. Tasted exactly like eggs and coffee.
6. this was good
7. useless for those off-site, eh?
8. Maybe the third NANOG I attend I will make it...
9. Speed dating table thing was confusing
10. n/a
11. Thanks for the breakfast
12. Had a good time and met many nice folks.
13. Very nice
14. Good idea - providing an opportunity to encourage newcomers to meet people who are heavily involved in NANOG is helpful.
15. It was OK
16. Decent. Liked that each table had a seasoned person. Also the card game made it interesting, i dont think anuone had trouble with that
17. This was really good! Nice to have a way to mix people up. Maybe there would be some benefit from shuffling people around a bit during, but lots of interesting information and discussion.
18. Well organized and helpful.
19. Friendly reception and good to meet some new people.
20. Was great - actually got to meet a newcomer from the UK and provide him some intruductions right then.
21. Good networking event.
22. NA
23. OK.
24. Only bad thing was lack of non-decaf coffee, bah!
25. Good selection of food, the randomisation of tables was a good idea.
26. Fantastic - wish it could have continued
27. Very nice
28. NA
29. It was blast. I almost ate a dummy Apple that was put for decoration...Actually I did bite part of it.
30. This was a good experience and a chance to meet fellow newcommers.
31. I did not attend.
32. I was there handing out cards to folks for seating and conversation seemed good.
33. good breakfast
34. Thank you for this. I appreciated the seating strategy; having the committee members at the tables was also highly appreciated, especially for someone coming from a young company without many prior contacts among NANOG attendees.
35. This was very nice, and I'm glad I attended. I met 4 people who provided valuable tips about Nanog.
36. Excellent
37. very good.
38. Attended
39. off site
40. Was invited to go and meet some of the new people.
41. Great!
42. This was great. I met lots of newcomers.
43. Great. And proper British tea available! :D
44. nice way to make me feel more comfortable as a newcomer
45. Nice breakfast. I liked the "know your protocol" exercise. As an attendee coming for the first time with no coworkers to sit with it was nice to have the seating dispersed and to meet new people.
46. Met some cool people
47. nice selection
Answered question 47
(skipped this question) 180 

13. Monday's General Session presentations, 9:45 a.m. - 4:00 p.m. (please name the sessions you have specific comments about, or comment broadly on the content)
1. 3G Mobile/Packet Core Security and Engineering Challenges(11:30am-12): Its good to know how LTE(4G) is evolving. How 3G & LTE fit together, Future road. Operator view.
2. very much interested in sessions related to v6
3. generally good.
4. The two Mobile sections were interesting. Also enjoyed the IPV6 Service Provider section.
5. n/c
6. passive dwdm lightning talk was the best ever ;). Ok im biased.
7. I'd love to see video posted faster -- I missed some things I wanted to see; now I get to wait WEEKS for it? Come on, you can do better.
8. 6th annual... - really informative report with interesting statistics - will use for my organizations. Unmanipulated/scrubbed stats are always useful for future planning and priorities. Attacks against 3G - same. IPv6 - same. L3DSR - not as useful to me now. Panel building the mobile internet.- Very useful.
9. particularly liked the Arbornet presentation 3G Mobile/Packet Core Security and Engineering Challenges. A good view of the differences in paradigms, design assumptions, etc. A wake-up call.
10. L3DSR presentation was very good. The panel on building the mobile internet was also very interesting, though probably not immediately relevant to most of us. It's nice to have a few presentations that are more conceptual than operational.
11. Always enjoy the security report. The 100G deployment presentation from Brocade was interesting and informative, but a little too commercially motivated and slanted. The L3DSR presentation was really interesting and we're already talking about how we can put such a technique to use.
12. The L3DSR presentation was interesting, considering we /used/ to use L2DSR in our business.
13. Great content. The mobile Internet panel was particularly enlightening.
14. the Mobile presentation was really well done!
15. Alcatel guy was strange
16. wide variety of topics, all interesting
17. The L3DSR presentation was very useful.
18. Too bad security was that fast, it was a great report and the speaker should have taken the time to go through it more deeply. 100G meeting should not have started early even though security was already over. This is bad, many people missed the event because of that.
19. Less technical than I had hoped.
20. useful
21. Good talks
22. Overall very good talks. All relevant topics and very informative presentations.
23. I liked very much the panel "Building the mobile Internet", it was insightful, and brought things we usually don't hear of in the ISP community.
24. Enjoyed talks on 3G attacks, L3DSR. Flattening the network was entertaining but devoid of useful content.100G was good
25. Very good. Informative and enjoyable.
26. The talks were too marketing/business focused and not enough technical detail.
27. I found the problem with these to be that the content was a little dry in some places - I really liked the look of the v6 and 100GE presentations as these are relevant to recent work - but I didn't really learn anything.
28. Overall content was fairly week. Deeper technical content might be appreciated.
29. I liked: 100G operational, 3G attacks, L3DSR Did not like: Security report, Flattening the Network, Mobile internet panel
30. Very good - questions not properly ifentifying at the mics. little reminders from the presenters and signs/tags on mic stand in future?
31. Didn't find a lot of it relevant to my situation, though the 100G session was informative.
32. I'd like to see keynote speakers brought back. It was always to see someone of internet fame (ie Vint Cerf) or hear thoughts on the evolution/state of the internet.
33. I enjoyed the session on IPv6 and the one on security.
34. Session topics were good.
35. All sessions were interesting, nothing special to comment about. It was a broad selection of unrelated topics, so probably few people were interested by 100% of the content. And why do we have heavy metal as an ambiance music ?
36. 100 Gb talk was very relevant 3G provided good insight
37. Excelent network threat summary and 100G overview
38. 100 GbE discussion was useful.
39. Opening Speech too short; felt rushed.
40. Very useful security information in the security session.
41. All very nice
42. Very good so far
43. Opening remarks, snapy and iterestng. Six annual Infrastructure Security report. Very informative though dissapointed that Africa is not yet part of it. 100G Operational considerations: It was my first time to hear about it and was interesting to get to know about the developments
44. The room fells real disconnected since it is so wide. It isn't very effective. I have been to one conference like this before and it was teh owrst in my tri decade experiance. Again we started a presentation way before the scheduled listed time. Now i have to watch teh replay. If i wanted to do that I could have stayed home.
45. This is still in progress, I'll let you know how it's going when it's over!
46. We just got started!
47. Enjoyed the security update especially and the detail about the different types of 100G coming.
48. Security report was good as usual. 100G presontation was also good. appreciated the operational side of the talk. Hopefully there will be more meat to that part in the future.
49. Room is a bit narrow and dark. Content was good.
50. Will fill these out on Monday night.
51. Over all, seems to be a nicely mixed program. the first talks are definitely interesting.
52. I'm in the middle of this session now!
53. It's happening now :-)
Answered question 53
(skipped this question) 174 

14. Monday Track Session: Research Forum - Moderated by Lixia Zhang, UCLA
1. How other protocol(Routing, MPLS, application,QOS) evolving, deployed on IPV6. What are comparison chart between IPV4 & IPV6 & their protocols. What are performance/scaling issue Operation facing. Its will dump to critical bug encounter in V6 deployment.
2. Great session
3. Informative
4. with the move to v6 coming it was great to hear others experiences
5. very good, could use more detail on this
6. IPv6 deployment experiences - really good - contacts made for future follow-up.
7. I enjoyed a lot the track sessions on IPv6. That is what I was looking for. I'm still looking to get more information on organization deployment and other transition methods for content/business organizations and less on ISP. I'm wondering if the slides of those presentations are going to be available. Just got it.
8. Really, *really* wish this had been webcast. I understand why the security bof isn't webcast, but next time around, can they put the security bof in a room without the video gear, and put really, really useful content like this in the main room so it can be webcast, especially given the upcoming world ipv6 day?
9. liked the operational detail.
10. n/a
11. This was a great session - Martin Levy and Craig Pierantozzi had great presentations that provided some good insight into two service providers roads to IPv6.
12. Lots of good info in this session.
13. IPv6 is the future - all good talks
14. The ipv6 experiences was very great. The HE guy was great. The LACNIC presentation was pointless in my opinion.
15. helpfu
16. I was not there
17. I was hoping for more detail but there were lots of generalities and history lessons.
18. Very Useful
19. interesting statistics
20. NA
21. Good and interesting
22. very good, have to do essentially the same thing
Answered question 22
(skipped this question) 205 

15. Monday Track Session (4:30-6:00 p.m.): ISP Security - Paul Scanlon, Arbor Network; Eric Osterweil, Verisign
1. Holding 3 tracks at the same time makes it impossible for folks to attend all the sessions. Is there any way to stagger them better?
2. good
3. Excellent.
4. I like the heated Q & A in the talk. But it makes it a little informal and casual. It's better to make it more organized.
5. I caught the tail end of this, very interesting in terms of data analysis.
6. Very informative.
7. Very informative, though I wish the slides were posted on the NANOG51 agenda page.
8. Couldn't assist but I would have like to. Again, is the presentation slides are going to be available?
9. this was the best session yet, imho. found it very insightful.
10. The ISP security BOF was full of very interesting presentations - kudos to the organizers. RPKI is a personal interest. The Wikileaks botnet info proved yet again that malware providers are just as resourceful so it is a continual arms race. And the stats on the Egyptian traffic fall off is another reminder of the cultural significance of what we do. (No pressure!).
11. n/a
12. Very useful !!
13. Really enjoyed this session. Informative, spirited, interesting.
14. very good
15. Interesting discussion, including talks about recent events in Egypt.
16. I liked the presentation about the LOIC variants as well as the ad-hoc update of Egypt.
17. Useful
18. Excellent talks.
19. Many interesting presentations with up to date information specially about the death of the Egyptian Internet
20. Great
21. Mostly good discussions. The LOIC discussion in particular was detailed and useful.
22. Interesting comments on ISP security. Enjoyed the topics on the LOIC and the topic on the sudden drop of spam botnet traffic. I thought that there would be some mention of practices used to protect the ISP network and would like to have seen that.
23. Very informative and relevant, though a little unorganized.
24. Always interesting things to hear here.
25. Excellent presentation. Very valuable information that I can take back to my management team.
Answered question 25
(skipped this question) 202 

16. Monday Track Session (4:30-6:00 p.m.): Operational BCP - Aaron Hughes, 6connect
1. good
2. Skipped
3. Need to focus on content and let the procedural problems present themselves. Otherwise, well moderated.
4. I like the goals of the BCP/BCOP discussions. I'd like to get involved, though there's little to get involved in yet. I'll try not to wait for the chicken/egg problem to get worked out before I start to speak up. Looking forward to this process.
5. I was not there
6. Slow, understandably perhaps since it is a new initiative. Hopefully that will get off the ground soon
7. Thoroughly enjoyable - very interesting, open and encouraging of feedback! Aaron was a great moderator for this.
8. Good topic - needs help moving forward
9. NA
Answered question 9
(skipped this question) 218 

17. Beer 'n Gear!
1. Good showing, would like to see more vendors in the future.
2. One of the best sponsor turnouts we've had in a while, with a good room as well, plenty of space to move around and mix.
3. skipped it
4. good
5. Yay beer.
6. Good.
7. disappointing. We have had a hugher concentration of female attendees here than ANY other such technical conference, but the "entertainment" was not at all gender neutral. At least I saw nothing before I left. I don't drink, but the food was good. I'm not a prude, was not offended by the dancers, but found nothing entertaining worth staying for. Quite a shame actually, [NOTE: This comment refers to an evening off-site social event.]
8. Good social event.
9. the food was bad for this whole event
10. too loud
11. Drank way too much. Yikes.
12. Great event; allows me to do personal networking and get face time with vendors, partners, and even competitors. Good food and drinks.
14. good!
15. Good gear, good food and drink and wonderful networking and learning opportunity. Thank you!
16. Great but I was hoping to see a kios for google and yahoo....... I found it very easy to approach different vendors that way without going the a person directly.
17. Lots of interesting vendor booths - seemed like more than before. Good room also.
18. Beer is good.
19. Fantastic !
20. Had several really valuable conversations with a couple of providers we work with. Great food and drink... though some standard liquors would be nice to have behind the bars.
21. Great food & beverages. Would have liked to see some more gear from mainstream (ie, Cisco, Juniper, Brocade, etc.) vendors. It was neat seeing Alcatel's 100GbE card, though.
22. better room layout than Atlanta, but more crowded
23. Very good as always!
24. Awesome! Need more vendors though.
25. Cool
26. great as always!
27. Well organized and fun.
28. I was not there
29. I liked this. Food a plus
30. Seemed like fewer booths than I'm used to seeing at nanog.
31. Fantastic! Lots of useful discussions - nice to catch up with some vendors. Networking like this seems to make NANOG really useful!
32. more vendor swag
33. Lot's of food, good discussions with the sponsors and lots of drinks. Excellent.
34. Nice ...
35. YAY!
36. Very good - nice vendor diversity in the reseller space.
37. Not enough gear.
38. duh, free beer and schwag!
39. Love it!
40. Great time.
41. Awaiting it eagerly!
42. Always a blast!
Answered question 42
(skipped this question) 185 

18. Tuesday's General Session presentations, 9:45 a.m. - 4:00 p.m.
1. good. really liked the global ipv6 day presentation. Liked the ones with dnssec focus (even the one that said "this is really hard"). Did not much care for the flap dampening discussion. hard to follow - how this helped without creating such burden (same comment people make about rpki). isn't there an easier way? is the need strong enough, frequent enough?
2. It was good to know BGP many problem & deployment scenario/issues. Now most of problem address in detail at ITEF. I think it will be great to mention in brief what all activity/idea IETF team working on to solve the problem. This will help to be syn for folks who don't attend IETF very regularly.
3. Really liked the BGP error handling presentation, and the route server discussions too.
4. good in general. a bit heavy on some of the theory ones.
5. Lightning talk on the hot topic of the Egypt network takedown was excellent. Enjoyed the Route Servers presentation.
6. Informative
7. Good Content ..
8. The World IPv6 Day stuff was interesting, as was some of the BGP stuff. Mozilla's DNSSEC preso was a little redundant with the DNSSEC stuff from Sunday.
9. I enjoyed these - the BGP session was interesting - in particular the UPDATE background noise evaluation. (Full Disc: I was presenting in this bit!)
10. Great stuff! Good bgp segments, timely lightning talks.
11. good, nothing stood out for me. The Egypt analysis was interesting.
12. Liked it all.
13. Thanks for the info on Egypt from Jim Cowie. Very insightful. Look forward to more details on BGP enhancements for dealing with error handling brought up by Rob Shakir. Appreciate Chris Malayter sharing on route registry innards.
14. I enjoyed the morning session on IPv6. It is very helpful in understanding where IPv6 is at in the world and what are the different issues.
15. loved the world v6 day panel; so far, tuesday is shaping up to be another good day! Can't wait to see today's lightning talks! :)
16. Thanks for the World IPv6 panel, it's good to see the community finally trying to get adoption going. 

Same for DNSSEC.
17. Liked the morning session .. good coverage on IPv6 Day. The DNSSEC/Mozilla presentation had a good overview of DNSSEC at the beginning, but in a few places the oversimplification for the crowd got a little too far on the wrong side of the accuracy line.
18. IPV6 great meeting !!
19. Great info. from Akamai in the World IPv6 Day session.
20. Good stuff.
21. Informative
22. ipv6 day, attending right now. Cool stuff. We really want to be part of it this year and we're looking forward to this and the presentations helped us make the final decision, we'll be part of it.
23. Can't tell - had to leave early to catch a flight...

Answered question 23
(skipped this question) 204 

19. Tuesday Track Session (4:30-6:00 p.m.): Peering - Interconnecting Outside of the NA Region Andy Davidson, LONAP
1. This was a really interesting twist I quite enjoyed. It would be nice to have this track continue to evolve and change.
2. It was useful, but the slides were hard to read because of the room, and they are not published normally, so my take-away was lower than something official would have been. There should be a way to have a formal side for this BoF at the beginning, then the informal standard afterward that people depend on the privacy of. I say this because it was obvious that a lot of work went into those Peering presentations this time.
3. I'm not sure what the Peering Track has become, but its not exactly peering but more or less an interconnection track. That's not bad, but I think it should incorporate more themes, such as buying internet connection services. Things such as IP transit, paid peering, transport and such. Maybe the Peering Track should really be extended or broken into two sessions and divide the "here is IX updates" and "here are network operators who want to peer" along with people giving their input on transit and transport services.
4. some interesting stuff but not dynamic - more like presentation
5. Good to have a different perspective in the Peering track - it had previously been threatening to get a little stale, but this has changed in the last few meetings.
6. This was good, and interesting
7. a nice refreshing break from how it is usually done. I quite liked it.
8. This had nothing to do with the "NA" part of NANOG, and would have been MUCH better if NA based providers were asked to tell their stories on expanding into other countries instead of other countries exchanges telling how to come there. The only one really useful was the Japanese presentation.
9. Good
10. Enjoyed this and it was useful to hear the point of view from outside of NA
11. This was very good. Exposure to the international IX peering environment was great.
12. Interesting
13. did not attend
14. Good
15. This was good, and really well attended. I think it brought up a bunch of interesting points and was informative and well moderated.
16. Very well done. Nice to rotate focus of the session.
17. It was good that a lot of operators from different areas outside NA shared their statistics with us. But it is more like a advertisement for peering then a real technical talk.
Answered question 17
(skipped this question) 210 

20. Tuesday Track Session (4:30-6:00 p.m.): DNS - Mehmet Akcin, ICANN
1. This was a great session with details specific to DNSSEC deployment available only from those who have been throught it.
2. Audio issues in that room made it difficult to hear presentors for the first ~30 minutes. Information was good, though a lot of focus was on DNSSEC; this is understandable as DNSSEC is a hot topic, but non-DNSSEC discussions might not be a bad thing to talk about.
3. Very informative track - I hope this becomes a regular occurrence.
4. Very useful information from all speakers. Enjoyed the DNS track.
5. did not attend, wasn't interested in another "wg" session
6. Awesome, found this panel very informative and interesting.
7. Solid.
8. did not attend
Answered question 8
(skipped this question) 219 

21. Wednesday's General Session presentations, 9:00 a.m. - 11:40 a.m.
1. Really good presentation about the ipv4 runout even though quite contentious. Every side of the argument must be known in order to decide how to proceed
2. I really enjoyed Dan and JC debating about the business impacts of the operational practice of v4 resource exchanges. I think there should be far more intelligent debate such as this. We are no longer only operators and we would support scope growth of content.
3. The DNS presentation by NTT was good (and detaild), but felt they could have added more detail about the infrastructure affects seen as a result of pre-fetched DNS queries, and perhaps a little less on the actual query-per-user analysis. 

On a different topic, the constant banging and knocking on the grand ballroom doors as people enter and exit (apparently unaware that the doors make noise when they open and close?) can be pretty distracting to those listening to the speakers.
4. Dan's talk was a useful reminder for this community. Thanks!
5. nice morning
6. Good IPv6 panel. Just wish folks would listen to the community on this! :)
7. Good
8. all good sessions, information on Egypt was good.
9. So far, so good...
10. Very important information from ARIN
11. Good
12. not yet happened

Answered question 12
(skipped this question) 215 

22. A few questions about social media:
Have you tweeted about this NANOG meeting?
Yes 18.4% (30)
No 81.6% (133)
163 Responses 
Have you commented about this NANOG meeting at any other social media site?
Yes 31.1% (51)
No 68.9% (113)
164 Responses 
Have you searched for comments about this NANOG meeting at a social media site?
Yes 25.6% (42)
No 74.4% (122)
164 Responses 
Are you a member of the NANOG Facebook group?
Yes 34.5% (57)
No 65.5% (108)
165 Responses 
Answered question 166
(skipped this question) 61 

23. Do you subscribe to the mailing list [email protected]?
Yes 86.1% (143)
No 13.9% (23)
1. read it from the archive
2. I answered yes, but do procmail it.. It's way too bloated to follow at this time and not sure how to suggest resolving it.
3. Need moar ban hammer. Got to keep the people in line.
4. SNR is out of control.
5. Coz I'm lazy and have to go join :)
6. I probably should...
7. Too much e-mail
8. nasty, personal attacks, just garbage
9. so many mails, so little time :)
10. If this is same as newcomer mailing list, then I am on it, otherwise not. I ned to check.
11. ML has too much traffic, I prefer having more targeted ML that I have time to read.
12. I've subscribed twice in the past and unsubscribed due to the poor signal to noise ratio. I will try it again.
13. Overloaded with e-mail already
14. I didn't know it existed.
15. Didn't realize there was an FB group, and nothing tweet worthy yet.
16. switched email addresses and didn't bother to re-sign up, also a few people tend to dominate all conversations
17. noisy, but it has been quite awhile since I unsubbed
Answered question 166
(skipped this question) 61 

24. Please provide your feedback about the NANOG wireless network. If you had problems, please be specific about what they were and how you resolved them, or about suggestions for future improvements.
1. nanog wireless was great 2. The IPv6 is finally stable, thanks for taking the time to treat it as well or better than the IPv4. The wireless was great in the meeting, but horrible in the bar. It is important to remember that meetings there are VERY important so please make sure to test the bar area in the future.
3. Worked great.
4. Didn't work well from the balcony.
5. Great!
6. NANOG wireless network is good.
7. The network worked okay on 802.11a, but 802.11b/g was hopeless as usual. Need to encourage folk with .11a capable devices to associate with the 802.11a ssid. There wasn't good wifi access in the hotel bar, it was only visible in certain areas of the bar. 

Not too sure about the upstream connectivity out of the hotel, seemed a bit lumpy at times. Not sure why the IPv6 connectivity needed to be tunneled.
8. Was strong
9. wireless was generally good
10. Works great for me (nanog-a)
11. At the conference the connectivity was very good. In-room it was not so good.
12. Awesome
13. Excellent.
14. very good
15. Excellent
16. nanog wireless was great, however hotel wireless network was unusable in many rooms.
17. Worked well.
18. Seems the A network had some form of interference or was "lumpy" -- maybe too many A users on the APs with which I was associated. Nice to see N experiments.
19. The wireless network is mostly stable, but kind of slow when I connect to remote machine.
20. Works decently well.
21. hotel rooms too expensive
22. Great stuff.. Working well.
23. Worked fine, no issues.
24. NANOG wireless is great
25. The wireless works fine
26. Wireless network was great, as usual for the past few years, and worked better in the lobby than the last time we were here.
27. no troubles here.
28. It would have been nice if IPv6 was native, not tunneled. The Intercontinental's Wi-Fi network was /horrible/, so it would have also been nice to extend the NANOG Wi-Fi up to the rooms.
29. great network, no problems
30. Sunday, I tried configuring my netbook (ubuntu 10.10) to use the nanog-wpa2 network, and it did not work. I used the nanog network instead. Tuesday, my netbook automatically tried and successfully got onto the nanog-wpa2 network. No idea what happened. I did upgrade the kernel last night to get the built-in SD card reader working.
31. No issues.
32. works great for me (nanog-a the whole time)
33. Much faster/better than the hotel wireless network.
34. the hotel is very cold
35. decent
36. Using nanog-a with my laptop and working perfectly. We had connections issues monday to our offices. Looked like a BGP issue with ATT, nore sure why yet but it resolved itself within in the first few hours of the meetings.
37. Very good
38. A bit flaky in the far edges of the atrium
39. Has worked great.
40. Yay IPv6.
41. Had problems connecting back to my company on Monday morning from the main hall. Not sure whether the problems were in Miami or on my company's end.
42. Had issues connecting to nannog-wpa2. Had all my config correct but wouldn't authenticate
43. No problems.
44. Decent at conf hall, unusably slow in room (26th floor)
45. No problems
46. Seemed to work fine.
47. 802.11a option was good - less crowded
48. Wireless at the Meeting is good !
49. great performance
50. A few routing issues but otherwise fine.
51. Worked better than the hotel network.
52. pretty good
53. So far, I don't find it very reliable. Monday Jan. 31.
54. I was pleased with its coverage and speed.
55. no problem so far
56. wireless works great, the hotel network really doesn't from the rooms
57. Works fine on my iPad
58. A bit strange to see the ipv6 on a tunnel, also v6 appeared to have a performance issue but I've not tried to diagnose yet whether that is just my laptop being funny.
59. Works great
60. The free wireless from the hotel was nice. Too bad that it was horribly slow! But free is good!
61. No major issues...
62. solid hotel, good wireless
63. Excellent service
64. smooth sailing so far
65. Seemed to work well.
66. Working fine so far
67. Working great!
68. It has been fine with me. No problem at all.
69. wireless network has been quite stable
70. Had no issues.
71. Great!
72. The Intercontinental Hotel Networks are pretty bad. The NANOG network seems fine so far.
73. No problems... using the nanog-a network.
74. Works great.
75. No problems. Using the nanog-wpa2 SSID
76. Wireless was great! Good job!
77. nanog-wpa2's dhcp server wouldn't give me an IP address.
78. It looks like rdns is setup on the fly, which I've never seen, but was certainly interesting
79. Very good
80. Good
81. It's been OK - which is actually a good thing for a network meeting with a high density of wireless devices. Performance across the wireless network has been a little variable, but by the same token it could be a lot lot worse.
82. nanog wifi works. hotel wifi does not seem to work in my room
83. no complaints so far (Monday morning)
84. the wpa password should be printed on something given out to all attendees (like the agenda)
85. Works great, as usual.
86. Wireless network just fine.
87. Worked good. Once I read the directions correctly on "unchecking" the server security box.
88. nanog-wpa2 did not appear to be available in the Grand Ballroom
89. Seems to work as expected
90. I had no issues
91. Having some routing issues, but otherwise it's been speedy.

Answered question 91
(skipped this question) 136 

25. What did you like/dislike about the meeting venue?
1. Hotel room was in the expensive side. The hotel wireless/internet was bad. It was too slow.
2. Nice weather, decent hotel, good central places to meet, rooms are nice. I like this venue.
3. Location (weather), large spacious hotel.
4. Nice, ample space - Difficult to get a room (sold out because of marathon)
5. Great venue
6. The internet access provided in the room was terrible. I heard quite a few people complain that there was a charge to use the gym. 

The banqueting staff seemed to be impatient to clear away coffee, etc., at the end of the coffee breaks. It looks pretty rude when they do that.
7. wish there were better lunch options
8. Need more light on presenter. Some panelists hid behind a monitor screen - were not visible to left half of room.
9. Meeting room was pretty cold. rooms had NO hot water for showers. Would like more restaurants/watering holes nearby.
10. Would have been nice to have a screen in the middle of the grand ballroom. Tough to read screens when sitting in the center of the room. Sound was a little too feedbacky on Monday.
11. hotel shows dont have hot water and it would be easier to see the preso's with a screen behind the podium
12. Hotel restaurant sucked.
13. Great hotel.
14. the location, very warm
15. Awesome venue! Hats off to whomever decide to have NANOG 51 at Intercontinental Hotel in Miami!!!
16. hotel was a bit expensive
17. Nice venue, close to local eateries.
18. Hotel layout; over the river & thru the woods to get to newcomer's & b&G.
19. The venue is quite good, especially the weather here.
20. AC is too cold
21. Liked it all.
22. Venue is great; good, large hotel, great weathe and location. The projectors in the grand ballroom could have been a little more focused, though. They could be difficult to read from the back sections of the room. 

The air conditioning seemed to be on too much; I often left the grand ballroom freezing cold.
23. nice location/hotel, a little cold in the grand room at times
24. Hard to get rooms at meeting rate (or offsite at sane rates)
25. I like because is a relax environment but I don't like that there is almost not interaction between the public and the presenter.
26. Marathon made it a nightmare to get here Sunday. Other than that it's great location and venue quality wise.
27. Miami is great, but accommodations are a touch expensive this time of year.
28. liked by the ocean.
29. Miami is a great location. It was unfortunate that the marathon coincided with the time most attendees arrived, though. This presented major logistical issues.
30. expensive rooms. a bit too prompt about taking coffee away (horrors!)
31. Parking has been a bitch. I'm not staying at the hotel. The marathon Sunday made it extra fun to get here. The metered lot just outside the hotel is kind of pricey and will only sell you 5 hours at a time...so I keep having to set an alarm to remind me to go "feed the meter".
32. the newcomer breakfast and beer-n-gear is far away. Otherwise, it's been a great venue. Signage could be better, but once you know where the rooms are, it's not too bad.
33. Like: Location, location, location. Kudos on not having a Feb NANOG in Canada eh! 

Dislike: hundreds of geeks melt hotel wireless network.
34. Everything is perfect so far.
35. Somewhat confusing layout and finding the beer n gear
36. The hotel is good, but the price is too high
37. Location and climate are wonderful. Public transit is ok (it would be nice if it only took 1 vehicle from the airport to the hotel instead of 3. Hotel facilities are good.
38. Great spot, nice hotel
39. MIAMI :-)
40. Nice hotel and meeting space.
41. Love the location. The best nanog location I've been to.
42. need more parties
43. A little difficult to find good food options.
45. Wireless at the Hotel was not good ...
46. everything was perfect
47. great venue, love being near the water and plenty of interest nearby.
48. Hotel staff needed customer service training, but not really NANOG's fault.
49. it large and wide open space good venue
50. traffic was very difficult on Sunday.
51. no comments. The venue is good.
52. Finally a meeting room that is not too cold
53. Nice area.
54. Very nice presentation rooms and nice hotel
55. Not enough hot water. Cold showers are not fun.
56. Good, but expensive location.
57. lack of rooms in the hotel room block; could use more power in the room
58. Planning to have the event start on the same day and lcoation as the Miami Marathon was not exactly convenient. It could have started on the day before or beeen at another location.
59. The hotel is nice but not in a very central location. To get to good dining/night life areas it is a $20 cab ride each direction. I would think a hotel on Miami beach, like the Loews, might have worked better.
60. I liked there wasn't a lot of overlap between presentations, that is, I could attend just about all the presentations I wanted to without having to worry about timing.
61. Conference rooms a bit cold for me especially yesterday. Today, itis all good so far.
62. price
63. Location (weather), great hotel
64. Love the venue. Great location
65. The room is okay - not great. Lobby is good, Stabucks is a plus. Location seems good.
66. It's big - not too well signed, but roomy and comfortable.
67. Having made my hotel reservation late, I was distressed by how high the room rates at the meeting venue were.
68. Noisy outside the hotel. Only valet parking
69. Like: Coffee; proximity to Miami d/t tram; overall nice facilities; ideal location for a winter event (because Miami doesn't have a winter).
70. The ballroom had plenty of space, and there were enough projectors to see the slides. Most importantly, the audio was great.
71. Had lukewarm shower two days in a row, front desk is trying to 'help'. The room layouts are strange, narrow for small groups, and wide for the main meeting room. Not terrible, just annoying on the small rooms when you're a short person.
72. hotel wifi does not work. water at the hotel is cold. they ran out of hot water for the shower.
73. great location by the ocean
74. Difficulty getting rooms at meeting rate or lower
75. Hotel wireless does not really work. Wired does but it's for a fee...?
76. tram
77. Like: location Dislike: costs
78. Yes, except for the mandatory valet parking.
79. parking is very expensive...$34 each day for people who stay overnight
80. Great location
81. The venue was convenient and fun
82. no food places in walking distance. Sun, Jan 30, 2011 8:00 PM Find... 83. Great venue

Answered question 83
(skipped this question) 144 

26. What worked well at this meeting?
1. The venue was good. It was spacious inside the conference room and outside. There were lots of tables and chairs for individual meetings.
2. Sufficient space for all attendees, wireless connectivity, A/V quality in grand ballroom was overall pretty good.
3. The weather. Safe area, no shifty criminals around.
4. The wireless
5. some good talks, some good hallway discussions
6. The five audience microphones were well positioned
7. Most everything, very well put together
8. kept to schedule pretty well.
9. the power strips were on the tables were very useful
10. Everything
11. session flow
12. The meeting is well organized, and topic has a great variety.
13. Good location and logistics. Nice weather!
14. So far... everything.
15. large, spacious grand ballroom. overall, A/V quality was good.
16. most everything, no real issues
17. The organisation is perfect
18. Generally things seem pretty well put together at this point, and all services work.
19. the fact that it was in miami when the north was in the snow :)
20. The logistics for the sessions were done well.
21. Other than the wpa2 issues, the network has worked well. I did my first real connectivity using IPv6 here.
22. schedule was good and accurate.
23. So far: everything.
24. From my point of view, everything is great.
25. Spacious meeting rooms.
26. The four screens are very good.
27. There was plenty of space to sit and the tables with power worked well.
28. Hotel serviced by Metrorail.
29. The Weather ;-)
30. everything
31. so far so good
32. Network!
33. multiple screens
34. everything
35. Majority of talks are all on the same floor of hotel.
36. Sound
37. registration and meeting logistics
38. wireless at the meeting locations was great.
39. wireless
40. Everything seemed to function quite well
41. Venue, location, wireless availability, topics were good.
42. wireless... cookies... screens are everywhere in the main room, making it quite easy to follow slides.
43. Registration; punctual start times of sessions.
44. Pdf for presentation very usefull
45. I like the meeting room layout - lots of room.
46. the weather
47. need more open socials
Answered question 47
(skipped this question) 180 

27. What should be improved for the next meeting?
1. I think the entertainment (female dancers) in the Terremark social (Monday night) made the female attendees feel unappreciated. The entertainment seemed to just cater towards male attendees' interest. This type of events seemed to send a message that women didn't matter in this industry. I understood that women are still in the minority. However, women did make significant contributions to this industry. If nothing was done to make us feel appreciated, at the minimum, I hope, organizers and sponsors wouldn't do anything to make us feel insignificant. In the future, if a sponsor provides adult entertainment in a social event, I hope it will be disclosed ahead of time so that attendees can use their individual judgement to attend or not. 
2. Breakfast could be better and bigger. I would certainly pay more attention with more energy... Speaking of.. Please please please have the coffee stay longer.. They always remove it as soon as breakfast is over, but we still step into the halls for refills and end up leaving the meeting to find local starbucks etc.
3. Grand ballroom should have quieter entrance/exit so not everyone can hear when someone leaves or enters through the doors.
4. Organized information for spouses/families on area activities- organized meetup times for them.
5. NANOG & IETF should come together. So anyone who attend NANOG but doesn't attend IETF often, should know where & what to look in IETF
6. I wonder if some panels would be better done in tracks to improve interactivity (smaller audience)?
7. better food, healthier options
8. more details about how to transition large service provider networks to ipv6
9. Not plan it alongside a marathon
10. I would question whether it would be feasible to help spur interaction further -- a lot of us are quasi-anti-social. It would be fantastic to have more scheduled after-hours events, or even 'group' lunches (again, just spur them, no need to cover costs) to help us decidedly less social beings interact. :)
11. more social needs to be done, because after this meeting, I still found myself knowing very limited number of people.
12. would be nice to have a way to connect to others in some automated fashion with linked in, you don't always exchange business cards, but may want to add a contact. Possibly have a nanog irc/chat channel locally for people to communicate as well, would be interesting to see what ideas and conversations would come about. This may be a good idea in general as another communication path for Nanog/Newnog folks, and maybe not just for meetings. If there is an "official" nanog irc channel, not aware of it.
13. I'd love to see video posted faster -- I missed some things I wanted to see; now I get to wait WEEKS for it? Come on, you can do better.
14. I would improve the presentation to enter in more discussions .
15. Social events at least 2 of the nights. Tshirts were ugly and looked cheap.
16. I'd like to see more audience participation. Perhaps the presenters could create some number of questions relating to their presentation and then have a "straight man" or two ask those questions from the audience area. This might have the benefit of prompting further questions from the audience by them not having to be the first one or two up at the mic.
17. Careful avoidance of conflicts with other large gatherings at the venue would be helpful. Obviously this isn't always possible, so in the cases where there is going to be strong contention for hotel rooms, some sort of obvious notice on the meeting registration web pages would be a good idea so that people know they must book early.
18. Easier/more available parking. 

Suggest the sponsors provide some snacks that are more friendly to people with common food allergies.
19. My only real *complaint* was the Tracks on Monday (4:30 to 6:00) where all 3 tracks were essentially geared towards ISP's. In situations where there's more than 1 meeting at a time, it would be nice for them to not all have the same audience.
20. Make stubborn late-adopters use ipv6 only.
21. 2 evening partys - no need for fancy justa reason to get everyone together and have fun.
22. No idea
23. I think you should drop the wednesday presentations and squash them into monday/tuesday.
24. More Socials
25. Bring back keynote speakers!
26. Some topics discussed need more back ground to build a foundation for the discussion. 

Maybe discussions could involve more audience participation.
27. no suggestions
28. more rooms in room block
29. Eliminate overlapping tutorials. Most of the useful information comes from these tutorials and it's very frustrating that they over lap.
30. Involvement of Africa in the Surveys
31. Slightly cheaper location with more "block" rooms
32. Microphones.
33. Pdf upload prior the presetation
34. more things in walking distance.
35. We should always have a joint NANOG/ING marathon ;-)

Answered question 35
(skipped this question) 192 

28. Do you have suggestions for topics and/or speakers for future meeting presentations?
1. DoS/DDoS presentations. Arbor presentations are always good, but perhaps managed security companies and others within the DDoS space can come forward with some interesting findings.
2. A panel or debate on "Do you really need to run QOS?".
3. v6 networking
4. The topics are quite good this time.However, as we can see, there are quite limited number of people are being involved in the discussion. It's better to divide people into smaller groups, and get more people involved in the discussions.
5. Maybe a theme per meeting would help with eliciting talks and getting more participation
6. More DoS/DDoS related topics/presentations
7. more ipv6, seems to be a trend, possibly in lieu of the recent world happenings, e.g. Egypt, now Jordan, probably Syria, a focus or topic on governments shutting down communications, think the U.S. was even proposing an Internet "kill switch" as well.
8. Caching technologies. We see Akamai, Google and maybe others caching content. What are others doing? How about for a provider to do?
9. I'd love to see video posted faster -- I missed some things I wanted to see; now I get to wait WEEKS for it? Come on, you can do better.
10. I would improve the presentation to enter in more discussions . more interaction with the public.
11. At this point, more v6 and DNSSEC operational topics are probably warranted (Yes, we've had a lot, but it's clearly going to be an issue for a while.)
12. More practical talks about service provider IPv6 deployment and issues they've run into.
13. No
14. I would like to see last mile operators describe how they will deploy IPv6 and what equipment they need at the CPE that they don't have right now.
15. Someone talking about the "future" ... i.e. talking more about the coming problems (as IPv6 is not a problem any more ;-)
16. Keynote speaker!
17. maybe a peering, birds of a feather lunch/meeting/etc
18. IPv6 multicast
19. rpki
20. Probably inviting CEOs some top companies.
21. None that I can think of, though if I think of anything, I'll sign up and speak on it myself.
22. More DDoS related topics/speakers.
23. We need to nail down this IPv6 subnet size issue, once and for all, for the sake of the mailing list sanity--let's have a v6 subnet size panel shootout next time around; I'll show up to be on it, if we do.
24. Define categories to help distinguish the technical level of discussion between track sessions that are held simultaneously. For example: *Overview/Concepts-only (like the Sunday peering tutorial) *Protocol technical dive (would include the Sunday DNSSEC presentation). This would help choose between tracks that are held at the same time.
25. more about issues at the "edge" of the network: mobile infrastructure and mobility in general, policy-based routing (i.e., application-aware routing)
Answered question 25
(skipped this question) 202 

29. Do you have suggestions and volunteers for future meeting Hosts, who work to locate the venue, provide connectivity and staff the meeting?
1. I'd like to see a NANOG in the northeast somewhere
2. None.
3. One of our designers can help design the next tshirt
4. No
5. NA
6. no suggestions
7. I'd recommend Vegas, it's the cheapest place to fly into in the country, and quite obviously setup to handle conventions.
8. None.
Answered question 8
(skipped this question) 219 

30. What are your suggestions for the Marketing Working Group? (What features would make meetings increasingly valuable for sponsoring organizations? Whom should we recruit for monetary support in exchange for exhibit area, corporate visibility, and community recognition?)
1. sell more after meeting parties, there was only 1 day with a after party.
2. akamai
3. It would be good if they can also suggest potential intern opportunities for students.
4. None.
5. I would talk to Brocade.
6. none
7. A ThinkGeek mini-store would be fun (and probably even profitable)
8. No
9. NA
10. no suggestions
11. None.
12. None.
Answered question 12
(skipped this question) 215 

11. Why do you attend NANOG?
1. FTF with prospects and customers. Nice to bang out a bunch of meetings all in one place. Staying current on others issues and lessons. Bettering of the Global Internet.
2. Personal networking, making contacts, technology presentations.
3. Technical interest
4. to get customer view/Operator view. See what are current problems & mindset.
5. To meet industry colleagues, exchange useful information, and make new connections.
6. maintain relationships, find out what is going on
7. good information, and networking opportunities
8. becoming more familiar with the global networking community
9. technical content and social interactions.
10. see whats going on in the industry, and talk with our customers
11. Hot topics information, and human networking.
12. keep up to date with the community, establish/keep relationships.
13. I came to pick up some new knowledge
14. to obtain latest information on the transition to v6
15. spend time with like-minded people.
16. To meet people.
17. Because it updates me with the most important networking trends, problems, and techniques.
18. The quality of technical talks has been very high at NANOG for me, I like the mix of practical and theoretical work. I also attend to meet with others in the industry, have long conversations, and exchange ideas.
19. Relavent info. Meeting with peers.
20. personal networking, DNS or DDoS presentations
21. It is a valuable gathering to meet others in our industry, and get industry information, BoF says it all.
22. Broaden my knowledge. If I can make it, meeting with other attendees.
23. Professional development and interaction with my peers
24. Meet the key players on the market and see what they are up to.
25. interact with other operators and see what others are doing in terms of IPv6 deployment and DNSSEC
26. To meet all the other people who are here. Attendee list was what got me to come.
27. The quality of the general session and of course, the hallway conversations.
28. I participate because it has everything to do with IPv6 transition and security, which are fundamental to my job. Liked the peer interaction.
29. To gain insight into new technologies that I'll eventually have to implement in my line of work!
30. To meet partners and vendors face to face.
31. contact with network operators, to find out what common procedures and problems are, to explore specific topics/issues with those who are directly involved.
32. Meet other network engineers...hopefully pick up some IPv6 knowledge.
33. learn/meet
34. Professional development, community support and familiarity.
35. Meet with colleagues, get a feeling for current trends outside my ecosystem.
36. Community support.
37. Networking (social and professional), to learn about new things, to see how other people are solving problems, etc.
38. to get smarter, meet friends and peers
39. establish/keep relationships
40. Mostly because of IPv6 this year but the usual main reason is to meet with provider and talk with them about transit and peering oppotunity, We also meet with vendors regarding their products. We're a live media streaming company and therefore we always need good interconnections to our listeners.
41. Peet peers and partners
42. Good place to meet industry experts and understand what's happening now
43. Meet people, watch presentations
44. Keep up with current happenings and talk to our peering partners
45. Speaker.
46. Learning
47. Good exposure current practices and R&D in routing, security, architecture, DNS, IPv6, and operations.
48. to meet with customers, learn info that can only be found here and to find new customers.
49. Learn what is being implemented and operational experiences
50. To present and network
51. To keep up with network operators needs.
52. for the fine dining during the breaks
53. Hallway conversations mainly.
54. It's a useful Resource for current topics in the industry - and a place to meet people
55. to keep up to date with the industry
56. business networking and keeping up with trends in the industry
57. Networking with others as well as getting any new insight into what others are doing in regards to our jobs.
58. meet new people in the field and to get idea about these new technologies and real issues with these technologies
59. Networking with Peers
60. As a Sr. Network Engineer working with a group of engineers to support a global network NANOG helps me to keep an eye on the big picture.
61. learn, see what industry is thinking about and doing
62. the value from the presentations and face to face networking
63. Starting to move career from enterprise networks to service provider networks. I've always wanted to attend (lots of interesting talks).
64. To meet people
65. Having been part of the internetworking community for a number of years, I've felt I should go to more of these types of conference. It also happened to be in a warm place during winter.
66. To learn more about the current trends in the industry.
67. Updates on Best current practices for SP's, meet my customers and potential customers, great technical content
68. Keep up on new technologies; meet other tech people.
69. To network, get ideas on implementation issues, technology specifics.
70. To meet with Peers, Customers.
71. peering connections, institutional knowledge
72. Networking
73. ppl networking, talks, community
74. Keepup to date on what service providers are thinking.
75. Information and networking
76. Meet people, social networking, beer
77. To know more about the current deveopments in the network world, for educational purposes and meet new people who are interested in the same field.
78. To learn, and meet others in the industry.
79. Personal networking; information about new/upcoming technology
80. Peering, meetings with Industry contacts, info updates.
81. Become more acquainted with the networking community
82. operationally signifigant to my job.
83. Learn about new offerings, new technologies, and meet people.
84. To understand what problems the operators are facing, and what they are looking for.
85. Our company is planning to have a significant Internet presence that requires interconnecting with more than just transit services. We need to be more familiar with the network world, and also planning for the future of IP-networking infrastructure.
86. It was suggested by a colleague. So far its been great, getting to meet people in the field and attending interesting discussions
87. To keep myself up to date
88. Social interactions with peers and presentations.
89. To learn about specific topics and network with peers.
90. peering discussions. Connectivity discussions. Understanding upcoming technology.
91. establish/keep relationships
92. Knowledge
93. Present and network
94. meet with coworkers meet with peers meet with customers
95. Mostly for peering
96. to meet my peers and arrange peering
97. Meet w/ peers, learn new things.
98. To learn new skills and meet interesting people.
99. learning
100. To learn about trending topics in networking and to get new ideas about how others are handling issues.
101. 1) learning about deployment issues and concerns around new technology 2) meet people and socialize with old friends
102. Networking
103. Introduction to the community
104. Meet people. Exchange ideas. Extend relations.
Answered question 104
(skipped this question) 123 

32. Is there something you would like to comment on that does not fit into a question above? Please leave your comments here.
1. I gave a presentation, the projector had some kind of brightness issue which made many of my slides unreadable.
2. I've been to more Defcon, Cisco Networkers, and Internet2 conferences than NANOG. I've run regional tech forum's and helped put together/run and I2 conference. Since my last NANOG before #51 was #34, I don't really see a big difference between then and now. It may be due to a lack of content/user base participants, but I would combine some of what I've seen at Defcon, Networkers, and I2 conferences and perhaps add the addition of separate tracks/sessions, break out sessions at different times, in addition to the larger session. This gives a broader choice of flavors for participants to choose, and perhaps can allow for some more in-depth concentrations on certain topics, e.g. IPv6, as well as allow for more less formal communications, and networking by participants in area's of interest.
3. wish I could have seen a return of the hi-def VLC video stream you had available at the san francisco nanog (49, i think it was) -- that made the slides and screen demos *so* much more readable!
4. great job!!!
5. Nothing
6. NA
7. none
8. If the agenda says a presentation starts at 10:30, don't start it at 10:00
9. None
Answered question 9
(skipped this question) 218 


^ Back to Top