Re: meeting network

[Owen DeLong <owen () delong com>]

+1


On Oct 10, 2011, at 10:29 AM, Randy Carpenter wrote:

> I have been at other conference that have triple or more participants, and it has never been anything close to the 
> issues we are having at this hotel. Slightly slower performance is expected. Completely not working is not.
>
> -Randy
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> > In my historical knowledge of this: there are only so many venues
> > that can have 500-650 people and fit.
> >
> > Jared Mauch
> >
> > On Oct 10, 2011, at 1:12 PM, "Frank Bulk" <frnkblk () iname com> wrote:
> >
> > > Then the RFP for the meeting needs to be more specific with some
> > > basic SLAs
> > > that result in a smaller bill if not met.
> > >
> > > Frank
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Randy Bush [mailto:randy () psg com]
> > > Sent: Monday, October 10, 2011 9:44 AM
> > > To: Randy Carpenter
> > > Cc: North American Network Operators' Group
> > > Subject: Re: meeting network
> > >
> > > > I would think that the contract with the hotel for the conference
> > > > would include the specific requirements for the network. Is that
> > > > not
> > > > the case?
> > >
> > > underlying problems
> > >
> > > o no hotel believe that we'll actually be significantly high use.
> > >   they simply can not conceive of it.  ietf, apricot, ... have
> > >   seen this time and time again
> > >
> > > o the hotel does not manage the network, so you have two comms
> > > hops
> > >   to anyone who can do anything.  and anyway, they are not going
> > >   to
> > >   provision more bandwidth
> > >
> > > but the problems of which i spoke were the meeting network.  which
> > > we
> > > do supposedly control.
> > >
> > > randy