^ Top

NANOG 52 Surveys Results

 

NANOG 52 Survey Results

Denver, Colorado (June 12-15, 2011)

1. How did you attend NANOG52?

Response Percent (Response Total)

In person in Denver

95.8% (160)

Via webcast

4.2% (7) 

Answered question

167

(skipped this question)

13

2. How many NANOG meetings have you attended?

This is my first meeting

41.7% (70)

Five or fewer

22.6% (38)

More than five

12.5% (21)

More than 10

7.7% (13)

More than 15

2.4% (4)

More than 20

13.1% (22) 

Answered question

168

(skipped this question)

12 

3. Has this NANOG meeting been useful for you so far?

Very Useful

31.0% (52)

Useful

64.9% (109)

No Opinion

3.6% (6)

Not Very Useful

0.6% (1)

Useless

0.0% (0)

Answered question

168

(skipped this question)

12 

QUESTIONS ABOUT SUNDAY'S EVENTS

4. Newcomers Tutorial - Mohit Lad

  1. Excellent
  2. n/a
  3. Nanog Etiquette?
  4. nicely done. Informal, honest approach was nice.
  5. Nice start to the week, although it seems like it could be covered in an email.
  6. useful
  7. did not attend
  8. Very good. It is good to get a little general information on what it happening for the week rather than feeling completely lost, and it was good information.
  9. Informative and humorous
  10. good session
  11. It was a little bit confusing and lackluster. I don't think I got a good insight to what it was going to be like, but I was happy there was a welcome event
  12. This was a great tutorial. Light hearted, funny. A great way to start off Nanog.
  13. Great session. Definitely makes the newcomer know what to expect and how to behave!
  14. Mohit's presentation was fun filled and informative.
  15. Did not attend
  16. Interesting Slides. Got the general idea what to look for as Newcomer.
  17. Very good for the newbies
  18. Good way to introduce things for new attendees. Strongly suggest this for future nanogs
  19. Not bad, funny. Was decent.
  20. It was good information to know for my first time!
  21. Good to learn the basics of the meetings.
  22. Nice to know about the culture of the meeting. Would be nice for new comers to know ahead of time more about the tracks and how it works.
  23. very useful
  24. Did not attend
  25. I appreciated this session; Mohit was personable, brought levity which is a great welcome to this event
  26. Very basic overview.
  27. Very good, funny and informative. Nice to hear all that is happening and how we impact everything.
  28. Did not attend.
  29. good intro session, thanks
  30. It was good, I just wish the audio level were increased a bit.
  31. Good introductory info and welcome.
  32. Perfect welcome. Told us to make the most of it, open up and get involved. His humor helped a lot.
  33. Very useful information for newcomers. This should be a regular tutorial at each NANOG. Perhaps merged with the newcomers breakfast?
  34. Mohit was pleasant and had a few laughs for us. Go start to this confernece
  35. I enjoyed the newcomer tutorial. Mohit described the best ways to fit in and to socialize with all the different vendors.

Answered question

35

(skipped this question)

145 

5. RPKI-Based BGP Origin Validation Workshop - Randy Bush, IIJ; Rob Austein, ISC

  1. Good stuff!
  2. Excellent
  3. n/a
  4. Interesting talk. However, would like to know a bit more background on the system.
  5. Why were these not streamed and archived?
  6. good, practical info
  7. interesting
  8. good
  9. Very cool demonstration of working prototype
  10. Very interesting and presented well.
  11. This went way over my head
  12. important work, very good to organize tutorial with hands-on section.
  13. Did not attend.
  14. Great and lively interactive discussion. good example to newbies on the spirit of the whole meeting
  15. This subject was new to me so I learned a lot from Randy.
  16. Did not attend
  17. Good stuff!
  18. Great presentation with good collateral.
  19. It was good to learn RPKI strategies of RIRs and verify ROA on different ASNs.
  20. I found this an interesting workshop. It was fun to make my boss configure something for a change :)
  21. Useful, but possibly could have been better focussed
  22. good, real-world intro
  23. Great presentation, wish I would have attended the second half.
  24. did not attend
  25. it was good to hear about this developement first hand at a conference than second hand on a tech blog
  26. Randy was very knowegable in this area, but due to the structure of my company, and that RPKI is still in development, I didn't get much out of the session.
  27. Excellent. Community needs on going RPKI/routing security education and discussions. This was a great start.
  28. I would have liked to attend this but I thought from the pre-meeting schedule it might be two different sessions of the same subject based on the descriptions. I found out later it was an all day tutorial and this might have affected my choice of tracks.
  29. very helpful, now i have more work to do
  30. very useful.
  31. Glad this was on the program and useful. Live lab was interesting idea, but stopped discussion while people configured devices.
  32. Randy's interjection of humor, and his style of instruction was fun to listen to, and entertaining. He was able to impart considerable knowledge while doing so.
  33. I had seen some of this material previously (some of it in a Security BoF a few NANOGs back, I think) but it was great to see actual functional code on Cisco and Juniper this time around.
  34. Very Good
  35. Good presentation, could have been a bit shorter.
  36. Good workshop, great interaction with the audience, audience seemed interested in the topic. Excellent example of a NANOG workshop, especially the practical bits.

Answered question

36

(skipped this question)

144 

6. You Can't Do That with nslookup: DNS(SEC) Troubleshooting, Michael Sinatra, ESnet

  1. More dig than I ever new existed. Very useful.
  2. well-prepared and presented
  3. n/a
  4. interesting talk.
  5. very informative and it was nice to have real-world and practical information.
  6. Why were these not streamed and archived?
  7. Good overview of dig functionality in relation to dnssec, a couple of items were pointed out that I had not thought about.
  8. very good tutorial, useful content
  9. A little basic, but good
  10. vary good, liked the presentation and very useful
  11. This was a good presentation, though it was too detailed for me.
  12. This was pretty useful toward the end, the beginnng, not so much
  13. Good tutorial, nice to be able to follow along with interactive commands. Would have been great to have a little on history of dns sec and a review of the basics.
  14. did not attend
  15. did not attend
  16. Did not attend
  17. It had some decent information.
  18. Useful, good info.
  19. Good presentation and has depth of detail with the topic.
  20. Nice set of common dnssec issues and a useful list of tools and recommendations
  21. Michael did a very nice job. One of my favorites so far.
  22. Went from a lot about things unrelated to DNSSEC to DNSSEC with very few explanatory comments on what acronyms meant. RRSIG?
  23. Great tutorial. Very technical but easy to follow.
  24. Great, and was very informative
  25. n/a - did not attend
  26. useful scenarios - actual demos good
  27. I really enjoyed this. It was interactive and very informative.
  28. Good reminder of the use of 'dig'
  29. Great session! I Loved the practical "live" demonstration and experience.
  30. great session
  31. It was good. I wish some DNSSEC basics were covered before the deep dive. But that's really my opinion who are not really into DNSSEC.
  32. Good detail.
  33. He was very knowledgeable. Enjoy the overview of DIG. I will add it to my tool set.
  34. Very useful. Lots of great troubleshooting techniques. USeful for both DNS and DNSSEC and for those of us who only deal with DNS a little bit in out day to day jobs.
  35. Great session! With Google I was able to find and download/install dnsdig, learn more about dnsvis and dnssec Mike is great, perfect flow of info. Can't wait to get the PDF for this session
  36. Great discussion on DNS troubleshooting tools. DIG was a tool that I never used before.

Answered question

36

(skipped this question)

144 

7. RPKI-Based BGP Origin Validation Workshop (continued), Randy Bush, IIJ; Rob Austein, ISC

  1. Excellent
  2. n/a
  3. randy and rob did a great job on this
  4. Very cool demonstration of working prototype
  5. No Comment
  6. Did not attend.
  7. same as above.
  8. did not attend
  9. Did not attend
  10. Hands-on portion was helpful and fairly well-executed.
  11. more fun.
  12. not attended
  13. n/a - did not attend
  14. Excellent. Community needs on going RPKI/routing security education and discussions. This was a great start. The hand on part of the workshop was great too.
  15. I would have liked to attend this but didn't know about what the content would be before I went to the DNSSEC tutorial.
  16. very useful.
  17. See previous.
  18. Good workshop, great interaction with the audience, audience seemed interested in the topic. Excellent example of a NANOG workshop, especially the practical bits.

Answered question

18

(skipped this question)

162 

8. Best Practices in Network Planning and Traffic Engineering, Paolo Lucente, KPN International; Arman Maghbouleh, Cariden Technologies, Inc.

  1. Got into the weeds a little too quick. Both presenters should spend more time developing fundamental concepts. 6/16/11 9:53AM View Responses Excellent
  2. n/a
  3. The presentation slides had too much information which made it difficult to follow along. I think if the slides had 3-6 bullet points, the presentation would have been easier to follow.
  4. It was helpful to hear what is considered best practice and how they are used by others.
  5. LIked this one alot key tips for what to use to evaluate traffic and capacity in our network.
  6. great!
  7. good, room over crowded, hard to read slides
  8. I liked the 2/3 three presenter approach - interesting content
  9. A very good presentation of a difficult subject.
  10. I really enjoyed this. The diagrams were fantastic and I was intrigued the whole time.
  11. Great presentation, good tool review, excellent information.
  12. there are no microphones in the crowded room and the speaker was not projecting loud enough. the small projector screen was also hard to see from the back. I had to walk out.
  13. Very informative and very well presented.
  14. Did not attend
  15. This was helpful. Although the slides focused on most of the design principles, operational considerations of LFA FRR was interesting.
  16. Difficult to understand in terms of useful takeaway info.
  17. Good presentation but need to have more detail.
  18. Good
  19. Audio was off. Completely inaudible in the back with no room to move forward.
  20. A little bland.
  21. hard to understand throughout, both volume and PA issues, feedback in the mic. They did not have the third member that they normally have and that may have made the difference, lots of skipping over slides etc.
  22. This was good info for a perfect world implementation, but my company upfront cost is ALWAYS an issue that must be fought.
  23. I could not understand the speakers, ended up leaving early because of it.
  24. post the slides, please!
  25. Great stuff, can't wait to try some of this stuff.
  26. Went a little long and the subject matter seemed to jump around and not seem to zero in on any specific planning other than pmacct.
  27. good job.
  28. Good general overview and it was well attended, but very minimal participation from service providers in attendence. Prefer overall the more technical presentations that Cariden and other groups have given during the general session to the tutorial approach, but it was valuable.
  29. Score! Useful for our traffic engineering debate at our company. use TE in MPLS?
  30. Volume was too low and I couldn't hear the presenters.
  31. Great talk. Hard to hear speakers.
  32. Not too useful/practical. Difficult to hear/understand the presenters.
  33. There was a lot of really good information, but it was really hard to hear the speakers. Neither was close enough to the mike, nor did they speak loud enough to hear clearly. This was the only downside. The information from the slides was very useful and informative.
  34. nice session, I liked the idea of having 3 different points of view from the 2 (3) presenters
  35. Very good - unfortunately I found the sound a little quiet at the back, and the font a bit small on the slides - but I'll be able to review these online.
  36. It was good ... again audio level was too low.
  37. Reading slides did not go well for presenters
  38. Very good content. Very worthwhile session.
  39. As most best practices lectures, it was more theory than practical. However the point was made of how important Network Planning is financially, which I will take home to my managers.

Answered question

40

(skipped this question)

140 

9. NANOG Community Meeting (5:45-7:00 p.m.)

  1. Nice and concise download of information.
  2. Please keep the transparency and communication, I appreciated seeing that there is a real desire for inputs from the community
  3. Overall a good meeting - no controversies
  4. Mayb it is too soon, but I'm wondering if there isn't room to move the committee reports and whatnot to a "Member's meeting" and return community meeting to small room brainstorming, compliments, comments & critique...?
  5. n/a
  6. Material in advance, people volunteer topics/questions for dscussion
  7. Good background to where NewNOG is going
  8. sort of interesting, a little long
  9. Very informative about the future direction NEWNOG/NANOG is going as an organization.
  10. good to see the transition NANOG to NEWNOG to NANOG explained
  11. Less details in the meeting itself, more pre-data or online. Don't need the budget details presented in the meeting. Don't brag about "making money" keep it simple.
  12. No Comment
  13. good to see status of changeover
  14. Definitely need to change the format. Like Bill's suggestion to have the financials, etc up on the web a week before the meeting and then let the community discuss. A request to provide questions in advance of the meeting to the NANOG meeting list might help as well. If you want to know what people think, you could also do a point, counter point type of thing to foster discussion.
  15. Excellent meeting, good status updates.
  16. good and informative
  17. did not attened.
  18. Reports on finances good. Do not like presentations being limited to attendees (streaming blocked)
  19. Good concise update on the state of the nation.
  20. Speaker - I thought we did well. :-)
  21. Good to know the status of NANOG from different organizational aspects.
  22. Aweseome to see NewNOG up and running - thanks for the effort guys!
  23. good - i like the 3 meeting format and also think that presentations should be recorded. If they aren't officially recorded, they can & probably will be recorded by the audience.
  24. decent, should be scaled back, good meeting information though.
  25. n/a
  26. Posting the info so we have a chance to review before the meeting would be helpful.
  27. No frowns, looking good.
  28. It should be better organized.
  29. More discussions needed. Slides 1 week in advance.
  30. wpuld like to see agenga a week before so I can think about comments to be made
  31. Excellent.
  32. Low attendance for community meeting. Board could have given overview for NANOG relevance to members and industry (its service providers in addition to individuals who participate in NANOG, what is the relevence to them -- ISC, MEF, ARIN all have institutional membership but also rely on the participation of individuals). I think NANOG as an organization still needs to find its identity.
  33. Went pretty well, I thought. Not too slow. As for the 2/3 meetings question, I think 2 slightly longer and well placed meetings would be good.
  34. good to see how the NANOG -> NEWNOG -> NANOG transition is going thanks
  35. Community meeting was useful. I fully agree that we should send the materials out a week in advance, and spend more time on community discussion after everyone has looked at the materials and have their points ready to go. Less presentation, more interactivity.
  36. (still waiting anxiously for it to be archived onto the website...I had a family conflict on Sunday so had to miss the live event, unfortunately--but will be watching it as soon as it's visible on the site. ^_^)
  37. Useful, but still mostly funny.
  38. I would reduce the number of slides and also put up "proposals" for discussion
  39. Good overview of NewNog transition

Answered question

39

(skipped this question)

141 

QUESTIONS ABOUT MONDAY'S EVENTS

     

10. The Monday morning Newcomers' Breakfast

  1. was good
  2. It was packed! Great to see newcomers eager to join the community. I would welcome a shepherding program linking a newcomer to a regular-goer.
  3. great!
  4. Tasty ! Always very good of the sponsors to provide this, and glad they continue to. Sure it must encourage some out of bed !
  5. Excellent
  6. Good format; letting the sponsor have a sec to talk encourages sponsorship. Room slightly undersized. My table was mostly newcomers, and at least one plainly stated that they were here solely due to location.
  7. n/a
  8. The breakfast was wonderful, and it's always great to meet new like-minded people.
  9. a little uncomfortable as a newcomer
  10. felt a bit out of place as a newcomer, but got over it quickly
  11. Crowded, but had no problem finding a seat. It seemed to start earlier than the published time.
  12. I enjoyed this, a couple of the people I sat with at this breakfast had similar backgrounds.
  13. This was great. Good time to network with others.
  14. good
  15. Good
  16. Busy! Met some useful people.
  17. good although somewhat crowded
  18. Met a few folks, good food, etc.
  19. Great breakfast - thank you
  20. Room Crowded
  21. This was a great event to break the ice with some of the attendees and make me feel more comfortable. I didn't think the card system worked out, however. It was good to have some past attendees there.
  22. good intro
  23. Excellent breakfast, excellent,
  24. Breakfast was good, needed larger room...
  25. great way to network. really enjoyed it and met some very interesting people.
  26. I liked the format fo this meeting where all new comers get to know each other with excellent breakfast
  27. Did not attend
  28. Good idea but ended up crowded and I think old-comers outnumbered new-comers. Was still a decent mixer.
  29. Great turnout with both newcomers and old timers.
  30. Socialized with fellow newcomers, and it was great to hear from the NANOG committee.
  31. Good breakfast. It was good to chat with others in the industry.
  32. I enjoyed meeting others in different fields in the industry
  33. It was interesting. As a new comer, it was good to meet others and get a feel for the what to expect at the conference
  34. food was ok, was ok.
  35. I was able to meet some amazing people and got in contact with a vendor I'm surewe will be doing business with
  36. Good food, little crowded.
  37. great breakfast
  38. Good food, nice intro and talks. Thanks Google. Sasuage was super!
  39. Very nice, I enjoyed this. Met some new people and it was a fun experience.
  40. This is my first time to NANOG, and I was able to talk with several "old timers" at my table to get a full perspective on what goes on "behind the scene" to make this such a success. The food was great, and kudos has to go out to Google for sponsoring the breakfast.
  41. Very nice breakfast. It was good to meet and collaborate with others.
  42. excellent
  43. Newcomers' Breakfast was tight for space, but very good.
  44. Good.
  45. Good session to meet people. Needed more space.

Answered question

45

(skipped this question)

135 

11. 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. The keynote speaker (Milo from Google) was boring. IPV6 world day panel was interesting from an operational perspective. The OCN people were very difficult to understand, but raised some very good operational issues with scaling large networks.
  2. good one
  3. Keynote by Milo Medin was an interesting perspective. It would have been nice to pick his brain on what does this mean for the future. What can we expect? You should invite him again on that topic.
  4. Excellent keynote from Milo Medin - interesting content and well enjoyed. Will be sharing that with folk back in the office. Useful to see the IPv6 Day panel and the experiences.
  5. Excellent
  6. Good stuff. Felt bad for the Sprint guy. :)
  7. At least the FCC dude released the slides; but for remote participants, having the stream turned off was definitely a bit of a slap in the face. :(
  8. Milo's talk was great. Kevin's and Milo's talks should have been spaced apart to evade the content overlap concerns. The V6 day information was good to see. The OCN talk suffered from language barrier in parts. The mini light on the podium fell off a lot during the sessions; this clearly threw off some folks (as in the case of this talk). Lightning talks were of interest - good to promote SIE and the idea of mining query streams for operational data. FCC presentation was good, sad that the tinfoil hat crowd got all spun up over the fact that our current system allows speaker selection of broadcast or not.
  9. The OCN talk on handling traffic growth in Japan was interesting. The presentation from the CTO of the FCC was very interesting. Having John present the ARIN transfer policy was a good idea, and as usual he presented it well.
  10. n/a
  11. As usual I found the sessions to be a decent mix of topics that were of interest to me.
  12. history was interesting, seems like two history sessions was a bit much, though, as es net seemed like history, too
  13. liked the presentations - the history related morning sessions and the policy related afternoon sessions were very interesting. I was wondering why questions were cut off for the ntt presentation before lunch - the session was out of time, but cutting into the lunch break by a few minutes would I think have been possible.
  14. history not my favorite time, seemed more like fond reminiscing, which is nice to do, but maybe not at a conference
  15. Greatly enjoyed Milo Medin's talk, very good pick for a Monday morning keynote. With regards to "OCN Experience to Handle the Internet Growth and the Future"; This was probably in my top 3 of presentations I was looking forward to, prior to this NANOG. However, the speakers where absolutely terrible. Perhaps the PC can assist when speakers are not fit to give a presentation in proper English. This really ruined this talk for me.
  16. It is always beneficial to hear others' opinons and see what/who is offering/using.
  17. The lightening talks are some of the most valuable parts of the program; don't put them right after lunch, when people are prone to be late. Instead put them after the AM or PM breaks.
  18. I enjoyed all the sessions, they were entertaining and informational.
  19. Enjoyed Milo's talk.
  20. liked milo's talk
  21. all presentations were good
  22. History of the Internet was entertaining. World IPv6 Day reports were interesting to look back on. NTT's presentation on the growth of the internet was unsurprising. FCC presentation should have been recorded. ARIN transfer discussion was very worthwhile.
  23. Irritated immensely at being blocked out of seeing the FCC presentation. Very, very unhappy about that.
  24. good
  25. Overall content was relevant and useful.
  26. The ARIN IPv4 Transfer discussion was very interesting.
  27. The history of the internet was excellent.
  28. Keynote was comical and informative. IPv6 talks could have been more specific of what actions they operators actually took to get ready. Good heads up from the OCN talk about the risks of LAGs.
  29. The WIPv6 day panel was useful, and I especially appreciate Jared stepping up and putting real numbers to that discussion.
  30. Great talks on history of net, ESnet
  31. Forgot to add this in the Sunday comments: Is there a "geeks guide to providing a useful nanog presentation?" A little coaching along the lines of "speak clearly and into the mike" and "provide legible slides that each make a point and illustrate that point (diagrams when possible/useful)." Appreciated the history in the keynote and the excellent explanation of why there are research networks from Kevin Oberman. FCC and ARIN presos both very useful.
  32. Really good presentations. good conversations.
  33. Loved Milo's keynote and Kevin's Research Networks talk. Never hurts to remind us of the past and how we got where we are today. The NTT talk was also informative and am interested in hearing what their "Lab" results are in the 100 gigabit trials
  34. Generally approve. Would have like to seen more time allocated to FCC talk(and approved slides...)
  35. the two i liked the most were the history of the internet and about open internet FCC. As a newcomer, the history lesson was invaluable.
  36. did not attend
  37. Very good content.
  38. very entertaining sessions on history of internet. ipv6 meetings amounted to 2 hours of "nothing happened" which seemed like it could have been consolidated.
  39. All good talks and on point.
  40. The opening sessions were fantastic and the rest of the content was spot on as well.
  41. The Keynote by Milo was awesome. It was great to know the history of Internet. Also being aware of the research networks presented by Kevin was good. World IPv6 day experiences were not as I had expected, however looks like it went uneventful. LAG issues, and decision to go to 100G was kind of interesting. I liked the Passive DNS lightning talk. And FCC's open internet order presentation clarified what it was about.
  42. If the FCC is going to be presenting on The Open Internet then their presentation should be Open to he internet... not halted. I can understand while he may not have had the appropriate level of approvals for his talk they may be sensitive. However, at the same time I think it looks much worse on NANOG and the FCC's part to censor the presentation.
  43. thought the sessions were very timely and interesting. Especially like the session on world ipv6 day as well as NTT presentation.
  44. Milo talk was great
  45. Research network: If you are doing research network work you already know the material. If you aren't, you don't care.
  46. Cry informative
  47. Good sessions for the most part.
  48. good presentation. lot of good info on the history of the internets.
  49. Loved Milo and Kevin's history of the Internet sessions :-) great session on Research networks including the mention of CANARIE as I'm Canadian eh ?
  50. Milo's historical perspective shows we've made a lot of progress :-) gotta dig up my acoustic modem...
  51. The talks by Milo Medin and Kevin Oberman were very enjoyable. These types of talks are nice to have every so often,
  52. Keynote and opening were great, the other Internet also awesome.Mile and Kathy did great job. Milo was fun to listen to. Thanks!
  53. For the internet history and research network, it is very informative.
  54. Milo's talk was fun for us old folks.

Answered question

54

(skipped this question)

126 

12. Monday Track Session (4:30-5:30 p.m.): Panel on Using AMT Multicast for Resilient, Scalable Content Delivery
Moderated by Timothy O'Keefe, AT&T

  1. I like it
  2. Interesting. Lots to think about.
  3. Great session very useful and interesting, good quality overall
  4. n/a
  5. interesting but not my field
  6. Was better than I was expecting, was afraid it would become a pitch, but Scott Brown was able to talk about the tech which was useful.
  7. Very interesting, well brought, great NANOG topic.
  8. Needed some basics on AMT before the deep dives.
  9. The best session I attended so far. Well balanced presentation of fascinating technology.
  10. It was OK
  11. interesting talk. would like to see more on video and multicast.
  12. ATM multicast session was very interesting and informative
  13. Thought this was informative, but seemed too far in the future to be of any benefit
  14. Great presentation.
  15. didn't see the point. then again, i work with a cable provider. :)
  16. did not attend
  17. Interesting but hesitant about bandaid approaches to cdn delivery by ATT.
  18. Very interesting talks. Good match of Content Provider, Network Provider, Technology Provider.
  19. Download13. Monday Track Session (4:30-6:00 p.m.): ISP Security Moderated by Paul Scanlon, Arbor Networks answered question 22 skipped question 158

Answered question

18

(skipped this question)

162 

13. Monday Track Session (4:30-6:00 p.m.): ISP Security
Moderated by Paul Scanlon, Arbor Networks

  1. Good discussion.
  2. Need more tech detail
  3. The Qwest presentation was very high-level and not useful.
  4. Excellent
  5. n/a
  6. hard time understanding edu and englishman, was their microphone on?
  7. The session was not very interesting, would like to hear more talks rather than a discussion.
  8. gentlemen on right (englishman and edu rep) were hard to hear, microphone problem?
  9. It would have been nice to see what the main presentation was going to be about before attending. I did not see where the specific subject was listed.
  10. Paul always has good, interesting topics and has excellent resources to make it helpful.
  11. Nice presentation, and I especially enjoyed the questions at the end of this meeting.
  12. great discusssions
  13. This was interesting but not very apropos to me as my organization does not deal with end users per se, being more of an aggregator.
  14. Good discussion
  15. Did not Attend
  16. Enjoyed, Useful.
  17. Nice group discussion. Excellent look into how different ISPs handle their customer service and how to combat malware on their network. I would like to see more talks like this.
  18. Wide, varied discussion, very interesting.
  19. Did not attend.
  20. this was a very interesting talk. liked pretty graphs.
  21. This ISP security discussion was geared towards users getting viruses and malwares. I did not expect that going into the meeting and it gave a different perspective on how ISPs are dealing this issue.
  22. Did not attend

Answered question

22

(skipped this question)

158 

14. Monday Track Session (4:30-6:00 p.m.): Resilient Protocol Application and Deployment Considerations
Muhammad Durrani, Brocade Communications Inc.

  1. it was ok
  2. n/a
  3. No Comment
  4. Very informative.
  5. Excellent presentation.
  6. did not attend
  7. did not attend
  8. Good presentation.
  9. Did not attend

Answered question

9

(skipped this question)

171 

15. Monday Track Session (5:30-6:00 p.m.): The Carrier Ethernet Exchange
Robert Huey, Equinix, Inc.

  1. it was ok need more detail
  2. I would expect more from this
  3. n/a
  4. Interesting topic but very poor speaker. Could have been much more interesting if presented better. Equinix normally doesn't have a lack of good speakers.
  5. The session was kind of boring .....
  6. Really good information. Would have liked more information on how they implemented MEF ELAN services.
  7. I had trouble following this presentation. There was too much detail and not enough global explanation.
  8. This was interesting at first, then the end really dragged out a lot with information that was not really relevant or necessary.
  9. Already considering this for the company.
  10. Good Presentations.
  11. speaker had a couple erroneous statements. i've worked extensively with this design and he did not seem to be as knowledgeable as I expected.
  12. did not attend
  13. Very interesting

Answered question

13

(skipped this question)

167 

16. Beer 'n Gear!

  1. always fun
  2. Excellent event, with good interaction with vendors. Keep this in the mix!
  3. great
  4. Excellent room for this event. Lots of space to walk around and engage the sponsors.
  5. good as usual
  6. Another excellent session with interesting mix of suppliers.
  7. Good time
  8. Excellent
  9. Fun as always!
  10. Good sized space! Great to see vendors filling the space all the time. Doesn't seem too commercial to me [yet]. Food was usual hotel - 'meh'.
  11. The food was significantly better than at other beer 'n gear sessions. Thank you. There were some interesting displays as well.
  12. n/a
  13. Great event !
  14. the steak tacos were too chewy to eat.
  15. good to see increase in number of participating companies.
  16. Awesome!!!
  17. Carved turkey was awesome as was the Pot Stickers and Spinnacopida (spelling?). The rest of the food was meh. Wish there had been more Pot Stickers and Spinach things passing around during... they were great, but hard to get. Missed seeing any of the major hardware vendors there. Not sure why they weren't.
  18. Excellent! Don't change anything.
  19. Great Job! Good food!
  20. nice job having real food.
  21. enjoyable as always; room layout seemed better than some recently
  22. What can you say, good beer, good gear.
  23. Lots of fun!
  24. It was good
  25. Picked up a sales lead from the event - that alone would justify the meeting.
  26. nice
  27. good as usual
  28. very organized
  29. I had a great time at Beer 'n Gear, talked with lots of folks, met a few new folks, etc.
  30. Always fun
  31. Better personal networking. Vendors disappointed me.
  32. great session - good to see the large number of vendors
  33. Definitely one of the better ones I've attended. Met some new folks, vendors were interesting, schwag was plentiful and actually useful :-) - and even the food was good.
  34. Very good, but could have used more food.
  35. This event was really good to meet people and companies in a social context but to also discuss network issues. And the t-shirts were great!
  36. good event. Lots of chances for networking with peers.
  37. Great food, beer and vendors. It was a great, productive time!
  38. Perfect!
  39. Good as always.
  40. Good vendor selection.
  41. Enjoyed the beer and gear - appreciated the info and toys at the vendor tables
  42. AWESOME! The geer was great, and the socializing was fantastic.
  43. Awesome Event!!! Great give aways, great food, awesome!!
  44. Excellent. Food was decent, enough vendors to find something interesting.
  45. Great event. Network Palooza. Met a lot of new people.
  46. Very well organized informative event !!!! My colleagues and I were able to get 2 excellent leads on new products my company might be interested in. Also, I must metioned the t-shirts and other goodies and good food we all enjoyed. Thanks for organizing this event NANAOG committee.
  47. Good social event. Great setup for mingling and talking to vendors.
  48. Less gear, more beer
  49. looking forward to it

Answered question

49

(skipped this question)

131 

QUESTIONS ABOUT TUESDAY'S EVENTS

17. Tuesday's General Session presentations, 9:45 a.m. - 4:00 p.m.

  1. Enjoyed the debate during the Keynote (Bob from Sprint). Not very interested in the other talks.
  2. Very embarrassed that the keynote had to deal with questions about peoples wireless accounts - he was treated badly.
  3. very informative - especially appreciated RPKI talks
  4. Mobile wireless talk was useful. FCC talk was also useful. Ethernet presentation was excellent - good solid tech info! Bufferbloat also excellent with very good tech info content. BGP sec very useful. Lightning talks excellent.
  5. good one
  6. Very good information. The bufferbloat session was very good. Would be interested to hear more about that. The 0 to IPv6 and measuring dual-stack performance made a good set of sessions, especially with the push for implementation.
  7. particularly liked the discussions of rpki and of ipv6 tunnel performance
  8. Great time excellent and useful presentations
  9. Tuesday's keynote I found (personally) far more interesting that I expected. Useful to have a view inside the mobile world
  10. Geoff Huston totally rocks, as always.
  11. "100GbE and Beyond" was informative. "Dark Buffers" was interesting, but a little alarmist. Sharon and Randy's presentations on BGPSEC deployment and were awesome.
  12. While very informative, and to observe the passion of some people, I was rather shocked at how people personally attacked the presenter from Sprint. Constraints from the spectrum and the over usage of certain people is something that needs dealt with. While I agree his term of "abuse" may have been viewed as inflammatory, it is a real situation that needs dealt with every day.
  13. interesting data, enjoyed both IPV6 presentations and one on buffers provided some food for though
  14. Excellent
  15. Lots of interesting talks.
  16. The Sprint talk was useful. While there were some good points in the Q&A portion, the well-known marketing and product problem had a few too many "me too"s. Yeah it is an iossue, but to grind on it was silly and SHOULD have been beneath us. Good on Mr Azzi for handling it well. 100G updates+futures - good. BGP security back-to-back; good topics and useful to address the implementation & deployment oncernes to bring it home.
  17. Geof Huston's report on dual stack performance was quite interesting.
  18. I think Bob azzi was over ciritrized !
  19. Great Speakers, Sprint and bufferbloat, great stuff!
  20. Overall very good. They were interesting, timely including the lighting talks.
  21. The IPv6 sessions along with the 100Gbe presentations were very informative and educational.
  22. 100G preso was great; Geoff Huston's was informative. BGP security was good.
  23. apnic ipv6 speaker performed well.
  24. again a good mix of material in this session
  25. especially enjoyed hidden buffers talk sbgp talks were interesting as well
  26. excellent topics
  27. Vey useful and interesting talks.
  28. -loved the dark buffer presentation -sprint wireless presenter was pretty high-level for this group, and then ganging up on him for their service plans seemed off point, although the topic of fair-use deserved to be covered, it went on too long -sbgp talks good
  29. Decent keynote. Really enjoyed Greg's presentation on 100G and beyond, was a typical presentation of what I'm looking for at NANOG. Also really enjoyed Randy Bush's presentation, was brought really well and again something I'm looking to hear at NANOG. Lightning talks have been much better at previous NANOGs.
  30. I enjoyed all the sessions, they were entertaining and informational. I especially enjoyed the sessions regarding BGPsec.
  31. Idealized BGPsec: Formally Verifiable BGP - Was awesome, great details. Bufferbloat: "Dark" Buffers in the Internet - Good one, but very fast slide flipping, missed a lot Idealized BGPsec: Formally Verifiable BGP - Good view points but not all are truely valid :)
  32. Goldberg did a great job both from the conceptual perspective and also from a business case perspective.
  33. The Sprint talk was amusing :-)
  34. Good
  35. keynote was OK - the discussion afterwards was fun
  36. tuesday sessions are of good quality!
  37. like the sprint and 100ge presentations
  38. Poor Sprint VP. I don't think he'll offer to come back any time soon. :(
  39. Sprint talk was odd, speaker lacked technical background, got a well deserved beating over sprint's "unlimited" marketing
  40. Sprint keynote was good. It would have been nice if the membership hadn't used it as a bash-Bob-about-bandwidth session and instead addressed some of the technical issues surrounding wireless evolution.
  41. The 100GbE discussion was very useful to have a nice overview of where the current standards are.
  42. I thought the dialog in the session by Sprint was really interesting to spark some questions about regulation of the wireless industry.
  43. Keynote by Bob Azzi was very good.
  44. did not feel sprint presentation was that appropriate given audience and focus. Would have been good to get more technical presentation by one of the major tier 1 mobiles. 100GBE presentation was interesting and learned some new stuff.
  45. Sprint presentation was very good. It was informative, well presented, and good Q&A. Bob Azzi is a very good speaker.
  46. The Sprint thing is a little weak.

Answered question

46

(skipped this question)

134 

18. Tuesday Track Session (4:30-6:00 p.m.): ARMD
Benson Schliesser, Cisco Systems, Inc.

  1. Very interesting panel with good information on current problems in large data centers One thing that was revealed was frustration with lagging clueset in routing/switching WRT large distributed systems vs cluster/cloud software. This topic deserves a closer look as a challenge to networking industry to understand distributed systems knowledge base that is running the large DC clusters.
  2. this was good and we should add more ideas
  3. Not useful to me, but incredibly interesting.
  4. Very informative and relevant.
  5. n/a
  6. Excellent
  7. This was a useful session, and have been particularly useful if it helps move the IETF work in a more fruitful direction.
  8. Very information and an excellent panel
  9. Liked the session from Yahoo. The sessions from Merit were a little less interesting for me personally.

Answered question

9

(skipped this question)

171 

19. Tuesday Track Session (4:30-6:00 p.m.): Peering
Moderator: Guy Tal, Limelight Networks

  1. Guy is great!
  2. Really lke this - breath of fresh air.
  3. The space was pretty compact and it was hard to see the speaker
  4. Guy did a good job keeping things on target and brief.
  5. Great session
  6. was ok
  7. Good set up.
  8. First two-thirds of the peering BOF moved pretty slowly, but thanks for keeping IX updates down to one slide each.
  9. Superb meeting
  10. As ever with the peering part of various meetings, another useful session. Chance to chase peers as needed :)
  11. This session was very interesting as everyone participated actively. Presentation by Martin of U. S. Cellular was very informative. Specifically the information shared by Martin helped understand why rate limiting and quota management is important for mobile carriers. Guy did and excellent job in moderating the session.
  12. I really liked the Peering session - a little different, but still a very comfortable discussion of issues of interest to people connnecting to other people's networks. The peering session is _always_ standing room only, so I don't know why the room was so small. Sometimes, that's hard to avoid, I'm sure, but in this case, there's plenty of room here. There must have been a bigger room somewhere.
  13. Interesting stuff for the most part. Was fun hearing network guys discussing M&A valuations and rationalization
  14. excellent. some good discussion on M&A activity and enjoyed Guy's analysis
  15. Excellent
  16. Why do PC members and even track hosts still call the tracks "BoFs"? Very confusing to the newbies. Content was good; track moderators may want to have an m&a/market update be as regular a feature as peering personals given how few people in the room were clued into some of the recent deals.
  17. useful -- IX updates, 100 gigabit trials interesting

Answered question

17

(skipped this question)

163 

20. Wednesday's General Session presentations, 9:00 a.m. - 12:15 a.m.

  1. Dawn on the terabit age was a well done presentation
  2. Excellent panel on network planning tools.
  3. Okay, wish the capacity planning talk had been on-time - I missed some because it started early.
  4. Loved the capacity planning session. Exactly the kind of information I was hoping to have discussed.
  5. this was the great session
  6. This morning has been pretty good!
  7. Good session on Network planning and need for simulations.
  8. Very useful
  9. Looking forward to the submarine cable presentation !
  10. VS was interesting...but no mention of how v6 would be handled. :(
  11. So far so good.
  12. interesting
  13. waiting for ti to start - will come back!
  14. I am looking forward to the talk by Drew on scaling optical capacity.
  15. Look forward to em'
  16. would of like to see more time on some of the subjects, felt rushed.

Answered question

16

(skipped this question)

164 

GENERAL QUESTIONS ABOUT THE MEETING

21. A few questions about social media:

Have you tweeted about this NANOG meeting?

Yes

17.8% (24)

No

82.2% (111)

135 Responses 

Have you commented about this NANOG meeting at any other social media site?

Yes

27.9% (38)

No

72.1% (98)

136 Responses 

Have you searched for comments about this NANOG meeting at a social media site?

Yes

29.9% (41)

No

70.1% (96)

137 Responses 

Are you a member of the NANOG Facebook group?

Yes

35.1% (47)

No

64.9% (87)

134 Responses 

Answered question

137

(skipped this question)

43 

22. Do you subscribe to the mailing list [email protected]?

Yes

83.9% (115)

No

16.1% (22)

  1. Not enough time.
  2. I was not aware of it until recently. I have since subscribed.
  3. I'll do it shortly
  4. just haven't done it yet...
  5. waste of time
  6. I didn't know about it
  7. This is my first meeting. I may subscribe in the future.
  8. Don't want more email.
  9. still learning about Nanog community
  10. 1st Nanog
  11. I am not the primary NANOG attendee and I don't want to get SPAMMED
  12. Did not know how to join
  13. Others in my group monitor the list for interesting and relevant content
  14. I just now heard of it.
  15. haven't done it yet.
  16. nanog-l is a toxic waste dump of soul crush
  17. I get too many emails as it is.

Answered question

137

(skipped this question)

43 

23. 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. wireless worked well overall, one of the better ones 6/20/11 5:28PM View Responses Wireless worked well and I was impressed at how many clients were being supported by only four model 1232 APs in the ballroom. I noticed that there is a bonded 40MHz 802.11n config on channels 48+44 on a linksys AP (seen on my laptop at -77 RSSI) and there is also a separate cisco APconfigured on channel 44 (seen at -73). This causes increased co-channel interference on channel 44. The Cisco AP should probably be moved to a different channel to avoid the channel overlap.
  2. was great!
  3. It was fantastic, worked in all rooms. No issue at all.
  4. Good Job
  5. Great network. Would be nice to have white paper on how it was achieved. May help with other conferences.
  6. worked well all the times.
  7. great network, no problems
  8. Very good wireless network. Having run a large network in a public place (The O2, London) I fully aware of the challenges and always pleased to see it works as expected :)
  9. Worked great.
  10. flawless
  11. Has worked great for me. nanog-a is what I'm using.
  12. reliable
  13. The wireless network at NANOG was awesome! I have attended Cisco events that were not nearly as clean as this network.
  14. Very reliable and especially liked the IPv6 connection
  15. Excellent
  16. Network was great, as usual!
  17. Worked great. NANOG's wifi net is always impressive.
  18. It worked very well.
  19. Excellent
  20. I had no issues with wireless during the meeting.
  21. The wireless network was outstanding.
  22. brilliant!
  23. worked well
  24. Meeting wifi works. Hotel wifi is mediocre.
  25. works great
  26. The wireless was buggy at times, but that may be general interference. In general it worked pretty well.
  27. Network was fine, no complaints, appreciate native ipv6.
  28. Wireless was still working well on Tuesday.
  29. Worked splendidly!
  30. wireless worked fine, no issues with any of connections I used.
  31. Excellent and robust!
  32. excellent so far. Hotel wireless has held up surprisingly well too.
  33. The wireless was very good, no issues were experienced.
  34. fantastic wireless network :) Loved it.
  35. works well
  36. was excellent
  37. wireless network has been fabulous
  38. Been working great for me so far (NANOG-A). Even the hotel wireless has been pretty reliable in my room.
  39. excellent
  40. wpa2 is great
  41. no problems.
  42. It was perfect.
  43. worked well.
  44. It worked fine. The encrypted wireless is a nice touch. I'm not sure why there is an 802.11a-specific SSID though
  45. No problem
  46. The NANOG network great!
  47. Wireless network was generally functional but it would be nice if it had extended a little better to the lobby in the Plaza building of the hotel.
  48. good, but no free wireless in hotel room was a bit of negative. Overall no major issues.
  49. No problems. Thank you.
  50. No problems. Wireless works excellent for the PC as well as for my black berry device.
  51. connectivity was easy and fast.
  52. Local resident
  53. Fantastic - I've used the N and WPA2 networks
  54. Had to statically put on DNS servers, and it worked.
  55. wireless worked without a hitch.
  56. ok
  57. good, took a little bit to set up the WPA2 but the instructions were clear
  58. Works well.
  59. It's been great!
  60. Speed is great. Possibly setup unique username/password combinations in the future instead of a universal community username and password for wpa2 access
  61. excellent so far
  62. Works great
  63. Awesome, very fast which is nice compared to other conferences with limited bw.
  64. Wireless network was great, loved the IPv6 connectivity and the WPA2
  65. Good. Adequate.
  66. WLAN works well.
  67. great
  68. Using WPA enabled WiFi... it works.
  69. The wireless was great and provided all that was needed.
  70. No issues; instructions were well prepared
  71. works very well
  72. Very stable, great job!
  73. So far, working great.
  74. Been very god so far !
  75. It is working good so far.
  76. No complaints about the WiFi. It is functional.
  77. SOLID! Working IPv6 ++ :)
  78. Excellent, native v6 is very much appreciated.
  79. Could not find at first, then right in. Have not tried secure VPN to my network yet.
  80. Works well.
  81. Very fast!

Answered question

82

(skipped this question)

98 

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

  1. meeting venue was great, downtown Denver is fantastic
  2. Thought the facility and location were excellent. Nice to be close the 16th street mall. Conference rooms, food and meeting spaces were close together so very easy to run across the folks we wanted to chat with.
  3. The hotel has lots of good and inexpensive places to eat nearby on the pedestrian mall, which is appreciated for the "on your own" lunches and dinners.
  4. There wasn't nearly as much technical content as in the past. Liked the 9:30 start on Mon/Tue. Power outlets near the end of rows would be a good idea.
  5. The scattered meeting rooms for breakouts or for events. A very confusing hotel to navigate
  6. like it
  7. In a great part of town - lots of access to restaurants, bars, etc.
  8. Needs more power connections - e.g. sitting on right side of table, there are no power outlets.
  9. The Hotel is not the best in the world but the venue is very convenient and works well overall
  10. lots of space outside the meeting room for breaks and side conversations
  11. Found the hotel wifi a little slow, but to be expected....
  12. Tons of space, some stuff was too spread out, yet peering BoF was still crowded?
  13. room was very cold
  14. Dislike the hotel rooms. Tower rooms had tiny bathrooms, the phones received but wouldn't dial out, the plumbing/pressure was junk.
  15. The venue was quite suitable.
  16. Meeting venue was nice and close to hotel rooms.
  17. the catering staff didn't always keep mugs, coffee, tea replenished.
  18. I liked the tables that were setup for attendees in the Grand Ballroom. It made it easier and comfortable to follow along with some of the presenters.
  19. The grand ballroom was *freezing cold* all day every day.
  20. food choices close by, good hotel facilities
  21. like location and services
  22. The club lounge for a quiet breakfast before the storm
  23. Very nice, open venue.. not too "tight"
  24. Great location, lots of good places to eat in the near vicinity. Denver is a great location due to it's overall location and large number of available flights to and from here.
  25. Food selection was excellent right on the walking mall. Great choices!
  26. I thought it was a great venue. Easy to get to.
  27. good location, great sound and facilities.
  28. I liked having a variety of alternate hotels in walking distance. The fact that the Sheraton didn't have rooms Tuesday night and wouldn't offer the block rate after the deadline persuaded me to stay elsewhere.
  29. good location, nice that the hotel is large enough to accomodate everybody
  30. The only thing I disliked is that I signed up too late to stay at the hotel. The surrounding area made it easy to quickly get lunch.
  31. good rooms, good hotel
  32. I like the meeting rooms and space in general. no complaints about the hotel
  33. I like Denver. I like the hotel choice. Lots of space - almost too much, but won't complain about that. The presentation screens seemed a little dull/blurry. It seemed there was a shortage of power strips in the center/front of the grand ballroom seating.
  34. elevators require you to use your key each and every time..
  35. Great hotel, although pricey
  36. I like the room accommodations, they suit my needs just fine. I wish there was an event where we got to go into the mountains and explore the surroundings. The food is pretty good but need to be more accommodating of people who have special dietary needs like gluten free or vegetarian etc... Some healthier options would be good. I liked the trail mix offerings.
  37. Nice hotel, nice location, as usual we overpowered their in room internets.
  38. The location has worked well and there's lots of stuff to do around here.
  39. good sized rooms
  40. Venue was fine. No issues except the debutante ball and its participants being noisy on Saturday night at the hotel
  41. I liked every topics in the agenda. There are some topics that do not directly interest me but that ok.. we should not expect that every topic will be relevant to everyone.
  42. disliked "windows" meeting room. the grand ballroom setup worked well for the size of the audience.
  43. Close to home
  44. It's okay, but not great. The room layout was fine though.
  45. It was good.
  46. very walkable location. Great weather doesn't hurt either.
  47. Some of the chairs weren't too comfortable
  48. Free INTERNET!
  49. Great venue
  50. It is chilly in the general session, but the conference provided vest was a great solution!
  51. to be honest, the room is way overpriced for what is offered. 200 a night for a room that is comprable to a Super 8 is horrible. Super 8 even offers more free or included amenities for a third of the price. ie, free parking, intenet, breakfast, etc.
  52. Denver downtown is a nice, lively, enjoyable place.
  53. It is very convenient. The rate is pricey.
  54. nice hotel
  55. couldn't get a room two weeks out, when asked for nearest hotels ended up far away.
  56. Now power at ends of rows and I see 3 power strips nearby which are full (actually full, wallworts blocking ports, etc).
  57. It was a good location for the meeting. Plenty of room, and able to feel comfortable.
  58. Great venue and location, haven't found anything to dislike yet.
  59. It was fine. Seems a little tight in the ballroom.
  60. I liked it.
  61. More power outlets in Windows room.
  62. Denver is nice. The Sheraton booked full pretty quickly, but there are lots of hotels around, so no issue.
  63. Nice hotel, nice location, plenty of activities and things to do.
  64. Prefer venues closer to airports. There is nothing wrong with the specific distance between the current venue and the nearest airport, but in general the closer the better.
  65. Like the venue
  66. Parking prices are extreme per day, $24 Long walk to rooms, elevators at other end of rooms.
  67. Complicated hotel layout.

Answered question

67

(skipped this question)

113 

25. What worked well at this meeting?

  1. Can't think of any problems so it all worked well. Networking performance was excellent and appreciated the free (and usefully fast) wifi in my hotel room.
  2. Wireless was great.
  3. The layout provided for many small and private gathering spaces and that was a very nice feature.
  4. everything
  5. Kept on schedule. Very little rushed sessions or cut off questions.
  6. Great attendance and so great opportunities to socialize and meet others very good presentations
  7. webcasting was good. hotel net had no problems.
  8. Size of hotel / location within Denver
  9. wireless, schedule, content, food, Denver weather... all around good.
  10. Meeting flow.
  11. closeness of all the events, great hotel and other staff assistence
  12. Better than usual density of useful content.
  13. social gathering, network, location
  14. logistics
  15. Overal everything worked well, the socials where very good and in close proximity to the venue.
  16. Good flow for main sessions.
  17. I thinking everything worked well for this meeting.
  18. facilities were excellent. sound was good, for a change.
  19. I liked the rafting trip
  20. The social aspect, talking and networking with the people in the industry.
  21. Wireless network worked well. The schedule stayed pretty well on time.
  22. no issues
  23. I thought the social events encouraged people to talk to one another. The general sessions were executed very well to cater to a diverse audience.
  24. Excellent hotel/venue. Good food choices for breakfast/lunch break. Chocolate chip cookies ++
  25. Connectivity generally seemed to work well; aside from sporadic DNS resolution issues.
  26. Moderators did an excellent job of keeping things on time and on track.
  27. Meeting place !!!! Amazing location and amazing facility.
  28. so far, it's a great conference. no complaints.
  29. Hall correctly sized and sound/video performed.
  30. The wireless network, the NOGLab.
  31. don't necessarily need a car to get around.
  32. Nice venue
  33. liked the food options and the newcomers breakfast
  34. Seems like everything -- talks, social, workshop, hallway discussions.
  35. Some good topics are covered.
  36. good hotel, good price
  37. The participants...
  38. Everything. You could hear the speakers well, see them, and enjoyed the humor.
  39. The website is excellent as always.
  40. Everything has worked well so far.
  41. Need to see more LAB Gear
  42. cool local stuff close by, meetings also close by. Good setup.

Answered question

42

(skipped this question)

138 

26. What should be improved for the next meeting?

  1. Include more diverse topics. Operators are _not_ just T1/T2/IXP.. With current scales, anything from CDN to multi-national Enterprise, R&E/BigScience to Fed, etc..
  2. Let people know that the sessions are resuming. Time to extend the mailing list AUP to in-person interactions. We need to publish and promote an Attendee Desirable Behaviour Etiquette: the rants or attacks at speakers are unprofessional and have the potential to scare away high profile speakers. Everyone deserves respect.
  3. more tech idea and detail
  4. Hotel room block issues. Obviously - we as individuals bear a lot of responsibility for not making reservations earlier - but it would be helpful if the hotel didn't oversell capacity or double book events so that there are nights we can't get a room reservation in the middle of the conference.
  5. I like the idea of a vendor demo lab, but the hours didn't really work for me. Having it only open opposite the tracks means I have to miss something to play with it.
  6. nothing comes to mind
  7. for the non social night provide some kind of assistance or sign ups for solo attendees to hook up if they don't have dinner plans
  8. Somehow making sure questions are not done in such a way as to personally attack the presenter. While a person may not agree with what the presenter is stating, there should still be a respect for that person, and a respect for the topic they are covering.
  9. Video/audio submissions along with the abstract to help gauge presenter's quality. Allow video upload, etc but keep the low-tech option of digitally-recorded phone call to allow folks with limited resources to participate.
  10. The breakfast was very poor in general. On Tuesday there wasn't even cereal. More choice in food and something warm to eat would be appreciated. At this rate I will skip the sponsored breakfast and get something myself.
  11. It would be nice if food/drinks could be left out longer. Hotel staff seemed to be in a hurry to clean up. Drinks could have been on tap instead of in cans/bottles too. At least they had recycling nearby, but it's still wasteful.
  12. host needs to keep better control of Q&A session; Sprint VP didn't need to get crucified like that.
  13. how about delivering the schedule information as a .ics file for incorporation into our calendar - all events in a single download, we can delete the ones we want or leave them if there
  14. Food variety.
  15. Some format changes for the Community meeting to get more input from the Community rather than "lecture".
  16. I would like to see more "mobile wireless networking" discussion.
  17. Earlier start time
  18. Add badge dot for first timers.
  19. keep up with timely topics. More diverse topics.
  20. Vet these presentations. "How interesting is this?" should be the primary question.
  21. More power strips on the tables, water pitchers on the tables
  22. Hold the meeting twice a year with more sessions.
  23. Nothing
  24. More free stuff!!!! :P
  25. Please keep rotating the meeting schedule between East-coast and West-coast locations, people tend to get travel approval based on the distance. Would love a NANOG on Hawaii !!
  26. Need to see more LAB Gear, Comcast IPv6 Quake server was a great demo.. Showing true IPv6 over the network.

Answered question

26

(skipped this question)

154 

27. Do you have suggestions for topics and/or speakers for future meeting presentations?

  1. We should discuss the FCC rules around 'net neut' as a group. The idea would be to provide a safe/public forum for each interested party to express their perspective on the matter and in turn provide a chance for everyone to gain an understanding of the other's view. It would be nice to have a professional moderator, some tier1's, some content providers, some technical folks who can speak on behalf of non technical broadband/eyeball customers, some cell/wireless companies, etc. It could involve a pledge toward kind discourse. The idea is that if we understand eachother better, we can help eachother prosper (win/win) instead of spending significant energy eating eachother alive with periodic (win/lose or not unlikely, lose/lose). The unique thing I've found about nanog is that when we all get together, we generally are interested in helping each other out. Yet, the posture back at the office is different.
  2. Hardware info on Ethernet and fiber optics always good to know. Network management information is always appreciated.
  3. Carrier ethernet exchanges, which was only brief in the track session (30m!?!!?).
  4. More mobile operators content. This attendance has limited knowledge of mobile operators' reality and their perspective is limited to that of an end-user. The Internet is going mobile and we need to include the mobile operators into our community. Their constraints need to be understood to find an appropriate operational solution. Best practices among operators: create whiteboard sessions where operators create best practices and implement them.
  5. always bring back geoff huston! I'd love to have another round of the tools bof; we've done a bunch of stuff since the last time we had one.
  6. Data Center
  7. I'd like to see a little more sharing between the community about how they're solving operational issues. Topics like change management processes, effective IGP metric strategies, configuration management, etc, would be very interesting.
  8. no
  9. more IPV6 transition stories for smaller type networks.
  10. alex rousskov, the measurement factory
  11. No
  12. Nope.
  13. John @ Comcast for More IPv6 rollout details.
  14. I would like to see more "mobile wireless networking" discussion.
  15. more on space/power and vendor NG boxes. Seems to be a topic for discussion among major providers. also, more about network analytics and telemetry.
  16. Deep caching CDNs
  17. "1 Year after World IPv6 - where are we now" - I'd be up to doing that at NANOG 55 in Vancouver
  18. More mobile topics should be included.
  19. I think the program committee has been doing an excellent job. Additional international content is good....
  20. No
  21. A slightly higher level of workshops would be appreciated. We've seen and heard all the basic stuff a lot of times and sure there will always be people for whom even the simplest of things is new, but something of a higher level would be really appreciated. Especially topics touching base on MPLS.
  22. Gaming and IPv6?

Answered question

22

(skipped this question)

158 

28. Do you have suggestions and volunteers for future meeting Hosts, who work to locate the venue, provide connectivity and staff the meeting?

  1. Washington DC -- not Virginia, not Maryland, but the District. You won't get shot, it's not that bad (anymore).
  2. Possible airport transportation, especially at end of conference as more people may be heading to airport at same time.
  3. no
  4. Provide a list of local restaurants to folks and interesting things to do in the area. Denver is a great location with lots to offer but most of the visitors I talked with knew very little.
  5. No
  6. Nope.
  7. I have already given my suggestion to Betty Burke.
  8. None
  9. John Van Oppen - Spectrum Networks.
  10. MIT, Tufts,
  11. No
  12. AOL/Time Warner Cable/Verizon should co-host in Reston, VA again.

Answered question

12

(skipped this question)

168 

29. What are your suggestions for the NANOG Development Committee? (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. Sponsored lunches. Could also be 'lunch box lunches' where a sponsor can have one hour to present new products or network with existing and prospective customers.
  2. I'd like to see more future research/prototype technology in the NOGlab. It's cool to see what some vendors are doing, but I really liked seeing what Comcast was _going to do_ with IPv6. It gave me a chance to ask about what's coming and how they were going to deploy it, rather than just look at what's for sale and read a brochure.
  3. not sure
  4. Akamai has only sponsored once, ever. Seems a company who makes money as a middleman in an industry otherwise devoted to disintermediation should share back for good will.
  5. I'd like to see the NOGLab show off more cool stuff. Maybe some coming research project demonstrations more so than just what vendors are selling now. I'd like to see stuff I can't see in brochures.
  6. Support from businesses in the industry
  7. In terms of webcast, you could make a deal with a company to provide those services in exchange for a sponsor designation. I've worked on other annual meetings where we have done this successfully. They provide all their gear and staff. Less headache than trying to find volunteers for this. It is a monumental effort to pull together "teams" each meeting to support something like this.
  8. Haven' reviewed contributor detail on web page, but plan to.
  9. I think you should explore institutional membership for service providers. Perhaps offer training or NANOG credits.
  10. Nothing

Answered question

10

(skipped this question)

170 

30. Why do you attend NANOG?

  1. To meet with other people at other companies that do what I do for them.
  2. Except for the 3 meetings I've attended in person, I listen to segments that seem interesting via webcast, but this one was in Denver where I live so decided to attend in person. Nanog is a good incubator for good ideas and some of the fundamental-ish things I do are sourced from that setting.
  3. To find out what is happening in networking and to keep current with the latest issues that are challenging the community. To meet with like-minded people and learn from them.
  4. To network with other operators, keep up with the industry, chat with vendors, map current trends, and hopefully learn something.
  5. meet people
  6. To learn about new technologies and techniques, to put faces to names, to catch up in person with contacts.
  7. To meet face to face with colleagues and coworkers. Because I deeply care about this community and want to make sure the operators continue to build and expand their collaboration. This is precious in our industry, it cannot be measured but it keeps the Internet an open space.
  8. Network with my peers, learn about new technologies, understand how some other folks are solving the same problems we are grappling with
  9. Connections and education.
  10. To meet new potential members for our exchange and to keep an eye on the latest development in the NA region
  11. to meet operators to see what their important problems are and to see how features and services I'm working on will fit in their operational environment.
  12. Technical content, Building relationships with others within community
  13. General sessions, socializing.
  14. Keep up with the industry trends, industry contacts, meet more people in the community.
  15. interesting relevant topics. peering discussions to understand how the peering market is evolving
  16. I wanted to see if there was enough information being presented to start sending individuals from my group to the NANOG events for a "real world" flavor, and not just a vendor specific event like Cisco-Live.
  17. suggested by peer, opportunity to network with other groups within our own company (meeting host) working with IPv6, and evaluate the value of attending future meetings
  18. Ideas & stimulation, connect with like-minded people, business networking, seeing far-flung colleagues in a common location.
  19. I attend NANOG to understand what the operator's concerns are, and what solutions the operators care about.
  20. Boss asked me to so I can report if other members from Mediacom should come next time
  21. Exchange ideas and practical information with peers in the industry. Learn about new technologies.
  22. To learn from others in the industry and see where the industry is headed.
  23. To participate in the larger community of networking professionals.
  24. to listen, talk with other attendees and to present
  25. to learn about cutting edge applied networking
  26. Participation in the community and meeting new people.
  27. information on v6
  28. Would like to understand more about the operations side of the Internet.
  29. Tech talks and peering
  30. Attended for the sessions and to meet with customers/potential customers.
  31. its the best environment to meet with people of all the networks we work with and peer with and put faces with names and voices. With the conversations that the subjects invoke when socializing at night.
  32. breadth and detail of current, technical information.
  33. This time I was just finding out what the conference was about.
  34. Because its very very thought provoking.
  35. fun
  36. I was invited to speak
  37. To stay up to date on current issues the community faces and to network
  38. Learn about the industry, what's happened/happening/going to happen. See more people I only interact with online otherwise. Become more active/knowledgeable in the networking community.
  39. work related
  40. Information on what other people are doing in the industry. Seeing networking friends and meeting people.
  41. meet people, discuss ideas, find out whats happening and where we are going
  42. I attend NANOG to get connected, absorb a little industry atmosphere, and to learn form other people what is going on.
  43. I'm a network engineer at a GigaPoP.
  44. It was local to me this year so it was a good chance to check it out.
  45. Many people are here, good for side-meetings.
  46. Education and networking.
  47. For the general session content, and hallway conversations.
  48. New to Industry in US, so a good way to interact with local players
  49. Suggested by a co-worker, I work at a major ISP.
  50. In person meetings with vendors, colleagues -- see presentations on new services/features as well as discussion of existing issue and possible mitigation strategies.
  51. Broaden my experience wrt how networks interoperate.
  52. My company - U. S. Cellular - experiencing tremendous growth in data usage so data capacity and performance planning is very important for us to delive "quality of experience" to our customer. Also, the mobile carriers will become "ISPs" for many users going forward. My purpose of attending this meeting is to learn about "traffic management" on the Internet and also to learn about IPV6.
  53. want to get more industry exposure.
  54. Social interaction on how others are performing and addressing traffic growth/demands.
  55. Education and connections.
  56. To network with other professionals, to server the community and to learn something new.
  57. First timer for NANOG. Had attended SANOG before, so to me it was a good compare.
  58. To find out the latest in the industry, from regulators, as well as discussions with industry peers.
  59. learn what my peers are doing and also to meet new peers!
  60. meet folks
  61. to learn
  62. To gain knowledge and network
  63. Requested by my client
  64. for the presentations, to stay current. :)
  65. Keep up to date on the industry.
  66. To further the never ending study that is network technology
  67. networking , ideas, future ideas for our network, ideas , to get a picture of things to come
  68. Interested in Internet infrastructure security, routing security, routing scalability. I get to learn and share about all these. Plus learn much else.
  69. To better understand what the community is all about. See some new Lucent Tech stuff.
  70. touch base with people
  71. To see colleagues which I have known for many years and see relevant presentations.
  72. I am used to venues that are "product specific" and wanted to compare with "real world" none proprietary standards with how it would impact my network.
  73. Looking at network design options.
  74. Local to Denver. Good information about IPv6. Good collaboration with colleagues.
  75. IPv6 understanding and networking
  76. Networking with peers.
  77. Industry contacts / technical content
  78. Meet, update and continue to learn
  79. To learn and make connections.
  80. Keep up to date, our customers are small ILECs and really don't have a presence at Nanog so they like to get updates.
  81. Work pays for my interest in Networking. It is a great chance to get my head out of my own sandbox and see what else is going on in the community.
  82. Meeting old and new friends/peers/colleagues and to stay in touch with operational developments.
  83. check it out, first time here, to report to company bosses if worth the expense for the benefit.

Answered question

83

(skipped this question)

97 

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

  1. no
  2. n/a
  3. Should have two meetings per year, not three.
  4. I like the idea of 2 meetings a year. 3 is difficult to keep up with and it seems like one will always be a little shy of content.
  5. So far, so good.
  6. I would like to see a posting board where service providers and others can post job offerings. That way those who are interested can go there and look, those who are happy just don't look.
  7. No

Answered question

7

(skipped this question)

173 


 

 

 

 

 

^ Back to Top