nanog mailing list archives

Re: Hi, we're from the government and we're here to help


From: Patrick Greenwell <patrick () cybernothing org>
Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2000 22:19:02 -0800 (PST)


On 12 Mar 2000, Sean Donelan wrote:

On Fri, 10 March 2000, Patrick Greenwell wrote:
I believe this to be such a common communication protocol and procedures
for handling issues to be of great necessity and desireability. If 10% of
the vast number of people that have expressed their opinions on these
issues were each willing to put up a little money, we could solve this
problem once and for all.

I used to work for a company which spent several hundred thousand dollars
every year on memberships to various groups, and more money to send
people to various meetings.  My question always is when somone proposes
forming yet another group, which groups should I drop my support so I
can join your new group?

If all the existing groups are broken, CERT, CIX, CNRI, FIRST, IETF, IOPS,
NANOG, RIPE, etc, can any of them be fixed?  Or is a new group the only
option.

I don't belive I ever stated that any of the existing groups were
"broken" nor would I make the claim that they are. I would however
question the efforts(if any) that any or all of the above organizations
have made towards sastisfactory addressement of these issues. If the
problem of NOC<->NOC communication and event handling had been
"solved" then we would all be sitting around exchanging email about
hypotheticals, would we?
 
In reality money isn't the biggest issue. 

I would humbly suggest that you are very much mistaken. In my
experience, money is the gating factor in many non-profits, and Internet
trade associations are no exception. 

VCs were willing to give me lots of money.  The real problems were time,
people and information.

Money solves at least two out of three of those issues(people and
information.) 

Companies are more than willing to join new groups, and add their logos
to the membership page. 

Which is perhaps where this group might differ a bit. There would be
reasonable preconditions to joining such as "you must maintain a current
contact list where a human can reach someone 24X7X365" or somesuch. It
isn't as simple as paying a fee and slapping a logo on your site. This is
seemingly the common view of "industry self-regulation" which is a very
poor joke.

But too often their engineers are told they are not allowed to
contribute or acknowledge any issues or problems.  All they can do is
say "Here" when roll is called.

One problem at a time.... I'd look at the value proposition: if I were to
sign up with an organization that guaranteed access to member information
and a defined set of processes in event handling, I could reasonably place
some value on that capability.....
 
I can start setting up the infrastructure tommorrow, but until something
happens to permanently scare the heck out of the boards and stockholders,
any new group will just be a shell.

Either the industry stops playing lip-service to self-regulation or
various governments will do it for them....


/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
                               Patrick Greenwell                          
                       Earth is a single point of failure.
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/




Current thread: