nanog mailing list archives
SECOND CALL FOR AUP MOTION
From: Tim Bass <bass () dune silkroad com>
Date: Mon, 16 Oct 1995 21:44:44 -0400 (EDT)
Ladies and Gentlemen: I think it is fair to say the motion on the table calling for a post NSF AUP is not ready to be withdrawn nor tabled and that there is sufficient support to call for a group to work together to create a rough draft. It will be very challenging to see a diverse and informed crowd such as the cross-section of com-priv and nanog attempt to reach an 80 to 90 percent concensus on what constitutes "Acceptable Usage" of the Internet. Maybe we could begin by trying to faq an "Acceptable Usage of the Internet" FAQ. I volunteer to try to keep the FAQ on track and make the latest draft available on our server. The $1,000,000 question is who is qualified and interested and bold enough to take a first cut at a draft. Second, where should the discussion take place? com-priv, nanog, another group, or a new group? There is a blank page called http://www.silkroad.com/aup/aup.html eagerly awaiting a bold first draft by an Internet Oracle. Internet Oracle, please put your draft forward :-) The alternative is to table the motion and forget about the issue. I believe that a non-binding AUP is a necessary 'first step' that is causal to all other events congruent to the 'spam and son-of-spam' issue. It has been demonstrated that enough people on nanog and com-priv are interested in trying to come to consensus on a draft AUP. What do you say? Shall we table the motion or move forward? Tim -- +--------------------------------------------------------------------------+ | Tim Bass | #include<campfire.h> | | Principal Network Systems Engineer | for(beer=100;beer>1;beer++){ | | The Silk Road Group, Ltd. | take_one_down(); | | | pass_it_around(); | | http://www.silkroad.com/ | } | | | back_to_work(); /*never reached */ | +--------------------------------------------------------------------------+
Current thread:
- SECOND CALL FOR AUP MOTION Tim Bass (Oct 16)
- Re: SECOND CALL FOR AUP MOTION bmanning (Oct 17)
- Re: SECOND CALL FOR AUP MOTION Tim Bass (Oct 17)
- Why not NANOG.... Mike O'Dell (Oct 17)
- Re: Why not NANOG.... Jim Dixon (Oct 17)
- Re: SECOND CALL FOR AUP MOTION Tim Bass (Oct 17)
- Re: SECOND CALL FOR AUP MOTION bmanning (Oct 17)
- Re: SECOND CALL FOR AUP MOTION Perry E. Metzger (Oct 17)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- Re: SECOND CALL FOR AUP MOTION Sean Doran (Oct 16)
- Re: SECOND CALL FOR AUP MOTION Perry E. Metzger (Oct 17)
- Re: SECOND CALL FOR AUP MOTION Cat Okita (Oct 17)
- Re: SECOND CALL FOR AUP MOTION Patrick Horgan (Oct 17)