Re: Peering BOF/Peering social @NANOG69?

[Dave Temkin <dave () temk in>]

Thank you, that's great feedback and great ideas.

Regards,
-Dave

On Mon, Feb 6, 2017 at 9:51 PM, John Kemp <kemp () network-services uoregon edu
> wrote:

> I would like to see the session continue in some form.
> Social was close to good.
>
> The peering presentations weren't as useful to me personally.
> They sometimes made the time for actual peering conversations
> too short.
>
> The extra food and drinks were not important to me personally.
>
> ...
>
> Perhaps an "extended break" 45 minutes, with typical
> break food, and no presentations.  Or if you want, a *silent*
> rolling slide show on a screen, with 1-slide per submitter,
> for peering news items or general peering requests...
>
> Cheaper... quieter... shorter...  But having all the people
> in the same room at the same time for the same purpose, usually
> pretty useful.
>
> 2 cents,
> John Kemp
>
>
> On 2/6/17 9:17 PM, Dave Temkin wrote:
> > Hi Bob,
> >
> > This was inadvertent and we will bring this back for NANOG 70.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > -Dave
> >
> > On Feb 6, 2017, 6:58 PM -0500, Bob Evans <bob () fiberinternetcenter com>,
> wrote:
> > > I suggest in the future NOT to get rid of something because a new method
> > > is attempted. I.E nanog had a nice method of identifying potential and
> > > existing peers with a simple green dot at registration to indicate an
> > > individual was involved with BGP in their company. That went away and
> > > today there is nothing. Cost of implementation was less than 5 dollars
> at
> > > any office supply retailer.
> > >
> > > Just a thought.
> > >
> > > Thank You
> > > Bob Evans
> > > CTO
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > The Peering Personals has been shelved while we try to figure out a
> better
> > > > option.
> > > >
> > > > There was no peering content submitted to the Program Committee that
> > > > justified a separate track, and so they chose to include the content in
> > > > the general session throughout the program.
> > > >
> > > > Regards,
> > > >
> > > > -Dave
> > > >
> > > > On Feb 6, 2017, 8:12 AM -0500, Matthew Petach <mpetach () netflight com>,
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > I'm squinting at the Guidebook for NANOG69,
> > > > > and I don't seem to see any peering BOF or
> > > > > peering social this time around. Am I being
> > > > > blind again, and it's on the agenda somewhere
> > > > > but I'm just overlooking it?
> > > > > Pointers in the right direction would be appreciated.
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks! :)
> > > > >
> > > > > Matt