Re: New Peering Point Mailing Lists

[Sean Donelan <sean () donelan com>]

On Sun, 08 October 2000, Simon Lockhart wrote:
> Where I see benefit in having independant lists about NAPs (in general, I 
> think it's a bit premature to have separate lists for each NAP) if for 
> gaining preliminary information about the NAP, for those people 
> considering joining.

Historically, NAP disccussion took place on a relatively few mailing
lists.

In The Beginning.... all the public discussions took place on com-priv () psi net
com-priv has been pretty much defunct for a few years.

Later the discussions migrated to various regional mailing lists such as
nanog and ripe. Later they seperated into different groups, for "big" isps
and for "tiny" isps.  Small ISPs generally ask the questions on the mailing
lists they already use, such as inet-access.  Big ISPs have private mailing
lists, but they don't say much.

The problem, such as what happened when someone set up a whole bunch of
new york colo lists, is the subject areas really aren't that different.  So
people start cross-posting to all the lists, which means subscribers such
as myself who subscribed to all of them, receive the same message over
and over and over again.  Just like when the first message in this thread
was cross-posted to multiple lists.

If you feel there is a need for a public nap mailing list, please create
one.  Please don't create lots of new tiny lists.