We can keep this list usable if used sparingly. We don't need everyone's traceroute. Hardly useful for others anyway unless they're your roommate. Post your outage. Move on with your day. Leave the traceroutes for off list interchange.
On Mon, 23 Jun 2008 22:44:22 EDT, Christian Blair said:
We don't need everyone's traceroute. Hardly useful for others anyway unless they're your roommate.
Actually, you have that backwards. If somebody posts a traceroute from a vastly different network location, that tells you something. In the thread that you're apparently commenting on, Jay Hennigan posted a traceroute that *worked* when going via Level3, which tells us that lightlink.com is in fact up-and-running, and the routing issue is probably Cogent-specific.
On Jun 24, 2008, at 1:15 PM, Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu wrote:
On Mon, 23 Jun 2008 22:44:22 EDT, Christian Blair said:
We don't need everyone's traceroute. Hardly useful for others anyway unless they're your roommate.
Actually, you have that backwards.
If somebody posts a traceroute from a vastly different network location, that tells you something.
I think the question really is - is this list designed for *reporting* and confirming outages? Or is it designed for *diagnosing*/discussing/ troubleshooting outages? If someone reports an outage, there is a degree of working with the reporter to confirm the outage that is necessary. (i.e. "AIM isn't working for me" and others either confirming or saying that it does work for them.) There have, though, been a couple of threads where this exchange has seemed to go on for a bit more than simple confirmation and dived more into troubleshooting. The "reporting/confirming" type of list is a lower-traffic kind of list that's more announcement/alert-oriented. The "diagnosing/ discussing" type of list could be a much higher-traffic list. Both are worthwhile types of lists to have... but they also may attract different subscribers. Based on a couple of comments I've seen here, I think some folks may have signed up thinking they were getting the first type of list and are less interested in the second type of list. They may be more interested in "alerts" and not interested in "discussion". I don't have a great solution to offer... I think the "community" here is probably too new to split into separate "alerts" and "discussion" lists. I also personally don't care which type of list it is. But I would suggest this difference in expectations is perhaps at the route of the original comment and others that have been on the list. My 2 cents, Dan -- Dan York, CISSP, Director of Emerging Communication Technology Office of the CTO Voxeo Corporation dyork@voxeo.com Phone: +1-407-455-5859 Skype: danyork http://www.voxeo.com Blogs: http://blogs.voxeo.com http://www.disruptivetelephony.com Build voice applications based on open standards. Find out how at http://www.voxeo.com/free
-----Original Message----- From: outages-bounces@isotf.org [mailto:outages-bounces@isotf.org] On Behalf Of Dan York Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2008 10:33 AM To: Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu Cc: outages@isotf.org Subject: Re: [outages] List comment
On Jun 24, 2008, at 1:15 PM, Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu wrote:
On Mon, 23 Jun 2008 22:44:22 EDT, Christian Blair said:
We don't need everyone's traceroute. Hardly useful for others anyway unless they're your roommate.
Actually, you have that backwards.
If somebody posts a traceroute from a vastly different network location, that tells you something.
I think the question really is - is this list designed for *reporting* and confirming outages? Or is it designed for *diagnosing*/discussing/ troubleshooting outages?
If someone reports an outage, there is a degree of working with the reporter to confirm the outage that is necessary. (i.e. "AIM isn't working for me" and others either confirming or saying that it does work for them.) There have, though, been a couple of threads where this exchange has seemed to go on for a bit more than simple confirmation and dived more into troubleshooting.
The "reporting/confirming" type of list is a lower-traffic kind of list that's more announcement/alert-oriented. The "diagnosing/ discussing" type of list could be a much higher-traffic list. Both are worthwhile types of lists to have... but they also may attract different subscribers.
Based on a couple of comments I've seen here, I think some folks may have signed up thinking they were getting the first type of list and are less interested in the second type of list. They may be more interested in "alerts" and not interested in "discussion".
I don't have a great solution to offer... I think the "community" here is probably too new to split into separate "alerts" and "discussion" lists. I also personally don't care which type of list it is. But I would suggest this difference in expectations is perhaps at the route of the original comment and others that have been on the list.
My 2 cents, Dan
I like your breakdown. How about a general consensus to preface subject lines with either "Outage" or "Discussion" until there is enough momentum to break the list into two? Regards, Mike
Michael K. Smith - Adhost wrote:
I like your breakdown. How about a general consensus to preface subject lines with either "Outage" or "Discussion" until there is enough momentum to break the list into two? I've pretty much be lurker (not being currently employed, and all) but it appears to me that this list, like others that generate a fair amount of meta-discussion, has two main constituencies:
People that write about that which interests me. People that write about that which is a complete and utter waste of packets. -- Requiescas in pace o email Two identifying characteristics of System Administrators: Ex turpi causa non oritur actio Infallibility, and the ability to learn from their mistakes. Eppure si rinfresca ICBM Targeting Information: http://tinyurl.com/4sqczs
On Tue, Jun 24, 2008 at 10:48:38AM -0700, Michael K. Smith - Adhost wrote:
I like your breakdown. How about a general consensus to preface subject lines with either "Outage" or "Discussion" until there is enough momentum to break the list into two?
That trick *never* works. People who are not interested in discussion -- and those who are, say, forwarding to a Blackberry -- should probably filter out messages whose subject lines include "[Rr][Ee]: ". Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth Baylink jra@baylink.com Designer The Things I Think RFC 2100 Ashworth & Associates http://baylink.pitas.com '87 e24 St Petersburg FL USA http://photo.imageinc.us +1 727 647 1274 Those who cast the vote decide nothing. Those who count the vote decide everything. -- (Joseph Stalin)
When I signed up for outages I was really hoping for something like what Sean Donelan used to do for Nanog. He had an occupation where he knew about every major cable cut or issue and reported it to the Nanog mailing list. I really miss that level of outage knowledge that we used to see. I think that something like outages alert could work even with the current group. The issue is one of is it a real issue that affects a large enough group. For this I think the mailing list with the website could put in a voting idea. Using a footer in the message people could click that to vote and say this is a confirmed issue and select if it's minor or major and regional or larger impact. After a set number of votes hit then the system could send an email to outage-alerts which would be a much lower traffic but a much higher confidence list. That would allow outages to still discuss troubleshooting without imapct the blackberry and pager audience. I have always looked for a way to be alerted to outages but only one's that truly are an issue. Maybe this is one way to accomplish that ? Derrick ________________________________ From: outages-bounces@isotf.org on behalf of Jay R. Ashworth Sent: Tue 6/24/2008 2:29 PM To: outages@isotf.org Subject: Re: [outages] List comment On Tue, Jun 24, 2008 at 10:48:38AM -0700, Michael K. Smith - Adhost wrote:
I like your breakdown. How about a general consensus to preface subject lines with either "Outage" or "Discussion" until there is enough momentum to break the list into two?
That trick *never* works. People who are not interested in discussion -- and those who are, say, forwarding to a Blackberry -- should probably filter out messages whose subject lines include "[Rr][Ee]: ". Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth Baylink jra@baylink.com Designer The Things I Think RFC 2100 Ashworth & Associates http://baylink.pitas.com <http://baylink.pitas.com/> '87 e24 St Petersburg FL USA http://photo.imageinc.us <http://photo.imageinc.us/> +1 727 647 1274 Those who cast the vote decide nothing. Those who count the vote decide everything. -- (Joseph Stalin) _______________________________________________ outages mailing list outages@isotf.org https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/outages
Howdy folks. I don't post much here ,but since this is about the list, here's my two cents. I think there are more than two (report, discussion) topics reltated to an outage. Here's my list, including what I would find informative (useful) vs. interesting (take it or leave it) vs. annoying (leave it). This is assuming that the outage is a major network outage (affects more than a handful of sites). I'm not really interested to know that myspace or facebook is down again…i get enough of that on the nanog list. 1) planned outages. These would be informative if they met the criteria but the fact that AboveNet is doing yet another switch upgrade at boone doesn't really qualify. Also any planned maintenance is nto a planned outage. 2) Current outages (reporting outages as they are happening-e.g. So- and-so is down here-or-there): informative. 3) Troubleshooting. Take it elsewhere. If you want a traceroute from Burkina Fasso, fine a looking glass. On a sidenote, I would be OK with someone actually currently working for an outage asking for some type of help from the list (e.g. a traceroute from specific areas) but replies should not go to the list 4) Ongoing outage discussion. This can be very informative and interesting if there's real data on a real outage (e.g. ordered new parts for X equipment, expect delivery in Y hours, back up in Z time). Better yet, however, the original outage post should have a link where updates are provided for those interested. 5) post-mortem. This is always helpful. At best it helps us learn from our mistakes, at worst it makes me feel better knowing I'm not the only idiot out here. 6) ad-nauseum post-mortem discussion. This can be between interesting and annoying…but if kept within a thread I can delete the whole thread. Mostly these start out interesting and then turn into opinionated banter. However many of these there are, I would still like to see only one thread per outage. If I want to drill further, I can read all the replies. Bottom line: I read this list before I read the news, so things like the issues with florida a few months back, or a network outage, etc, are what I would like to see here. After the outage, a description of what happened is also nice to have, as is ongoing reports for _major_ outages. Anything more becomes noise. Best, Y -- Mickey Panayiotakis - mickey@srtdata.com http://www.grassroots.org/ P Think before you print. On Jun 24, 2008, at 3:28 PM, Derrick Bennett wrote:
When I signed up for outages I was really hoping for something like what Sean Donelan used to do for Nanog. He had an occupation where he knew about every major cable cut or issue and reported it to the Nanog mailing list. I really miss that level of outage knowledge that we used to see.
I think that something like outages alert could work even with the current group. The issue is one of is it a real issue that affects a large enough group. For this I think the mailing list with the website could put in a voting idea. Using a footer in the message people could click that to vote and say this is a confirmed issue and select if it's minor or major and regional or larger impact. After a set number of votes hit then the system could send an email to outage-alerts which would be a much lower traffic but a much higher confidence list. That would allow outages to still discuss troubleshooting without imapct the blackberry and pager audience.
I have always looked for a way to be alerted to outages but only one's that truly are an issue. Maybe this is one way to accomplish that ?
Derrick
From: outages-bounces@isotf.org on behalf of Jay R. Ashworth Sent: Tue 6/24/2008 2:29 PM To: outages@isotf.org Subject: Re: [outages] List comment
On Tue, Jun 24, 2008 at 10:48:38AM -0700, Michael K. Smith - Adhost wrote:
I like your breakdown. How about a general consensus to preface subject lines with either "Outage" or "Discussion" until there is enough momentum to break the list into two?
That trick *never* works.
People who are not interested in discussion -- and those who are, say, forwarding to a Blackberry -- should probably filter out messages whose subject lines include "[Rr][Ee]: ".
Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth Baylink jra@baylink.com Designer The Things I Think RFC 2100 Ashworth & Associates http:// baylink.pitas.com '87 e24 St Petersburg FL USA http://photo.imageinc.us +1 727 647 1274
Those who cast the vote decide nothing. Those who count the vote decide everything. -- (Joseph Stalin) _______________________________________________ outages mailing list outages@isotf.org https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/outages
_______________________________________________ outages mailing list outages@isotf.org https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/outages
Derrick Bennett wrote:
When I signed up for outages I was really hoping for something like what Sean Donelan used to do for Nanog. He had an occupation where he knew about every major cable cut or issue and reported it to the Nanog mailing list. I really miss that level of outage knowledge that we used to see.
I think that something like outages alert could work even with the current group. The issue is one of is it a real issue that affects a large enough group. For this I think the mailing list with the website could put in a voting idea. Using a footer in the message people could click that to vote and say this is a confirmed issue and select if it's minor or major and regional or larger impact. After a set number of votes hit then the system could send an email to outage-alerts which would be a much lower traffic but a much higher confidence list. That would allow outages to still discuss troubleshooting without imapct the blackberry and pager audience.
I have always looked for a way to be alerted to outages but only one's that truly are an issue. Maybe this is one way to accomplish that ?
An outage is an issue if you're on one side of it trying to reach resources on the other side. If not, then it's not. I was chastised for posting a traceroute here in an attempt to resolve the question as to whether a route loop was within Cogent or at the destination AS. IMNSHO this type of thing helps to define and isolate the outage. -- Jay Hennigan - CCIE #7880 - Network Engineering - jay@impulse.net Impulse Internet Service - http://www.impulse.net/ Your local telephone and internet company - 805 884-6323 - WB6RDV
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Dan York wrote:
On Jun 24, 2008, at 1:15 PM, Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu wrote:
On Mon, 23 Jun 2008 22:44:22 EDT, Christian Blair said:
We don't need everyone's traceroute. Hardly useful for others anyway unless they're your roommate.
Actually, you have that backwards.
If somebody posts a traceroute from a vastly different network location, that tells you something.
I think the question really is - is this list designed for *reporting* and confirming outages? Or is it designed for *diagnosing*/discussing/troubleshooting outages?
If someone reports an outage, there is a degree of working with the reporter to confirm the outage that is necessary. (i.e. "AIM isn't working for me" and others either confirming or saying that it does work for them.) There have, though, been a couple of threads where this exchange has seemed to go on for a bit more than simple confirmation and dived more into troubleshooting.
The "reporting/confirming" type of list is a lower-traffic kind of list that's more announcement/alert-oriented. The "diagnosing/discussing" type of list could be a much higher-traffic list. Both are worthwhile types of lists to have... but they also may attract different subscribers.
Based on a couple of comments I've seen here, I think some folks may have signed up thinking they were getting the first type of list and are less interested in the second type of list. They may be more interested in "alerts" and not interested in "discussion".
- --------------------------- Great feedback. Lot of times the outages that are being reported could be specific to one's local PE which may or may not impact others. In others words, the outages that are being reported may not be confirmed until we have some sort of feedback from user community confirming the same which I agree could lead into outages discussion. Until we establish that relationship/openness between network operator community and providers we may have to rely on operator community feedback confirming outage(s) and at the same time keeping it to a minimum. Now if providers could be little more forthcoming and start reporting their maintenance and outages then sure I can see those alerts being filtered into something like 'outages-alerts' but until that happens I think we may need to feel the list further. Thoughts? regards, /virendra
I don't have a great solution to offer... I think the "community" here is probably too new to split into separate "alerts" and "discussion" lists. I also personally don't care which type of list it is. But I would suggest this difference in expectations is perhaps at the route of the original comment and others that have been on the list.
My 2 cents, Dan
--Dan York, CISSP, Director of Emerging Communication Technology Office of the CTO Voxeo Corporation dyork@voxeo.com Phone: +1-407-455-5859 Skype: danyork http://www.voxeo.com Blogs: http://blogs.voxeo.com http://www.disruptivetelephony.com
Build voice applications based on open standards. Find out how at http://www.voxeo.com/free
_______________________________________________ outages mailing list outages@isotf.org https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/outages
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFIYTwUpbZvCIJx1bcRAvlPAJ9IORHlF/ABtRTLntAn/bDCqMGIKQCg6qZY pEPL6TxqEPBLbNkF8Y6lLTI= =W5re -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
On Tue, Jun 24, 2008 at 11:25:24AM -0700, virendra rode // wrote:
Now if providers could be little more forthcoming and start reporting their maintenance and outages then sure I can see those alerts being filtered into something like 'outages-alerts' but until that happens I think we may need to feel the list further.
That trick never works *either*. I suspect what we're going to have to do is set up an outage-notify list, with a companion -post (as nanog does), and let people volunteer to summarize from the discussion list to -notify once some actual facts have been gleaned from the discussions. So, for last week, we might have seen Service: AIM Problem: Clients won't connect Scope: Nationwide Since: 1015 Reporter: jra@baylink.com Confirmed: 12 users Official? No Service: AIM Problem: Netsplit Scope: Certain servers; correlation unclear Since: 1015 Reporter: up@3.am Confirmed: 6 users Official? No Service: L3 transport USA:NE Problem: Routing loop; link backhoed Scope: AS 18467 Since: 1330 Reporter: somebody@somewhere.com Confirmed: L3 ticket 772893-338 Official? Yes each in an email from whomever did the summary. Would this serve? Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth Baylink jra@baylink.com Designer The Things I Think RFC 2100 Ashworth & Associates http://baylink.pitas.com '87 e24 St Petersburg FL USA http://photo.imageinc.us +1 727 647 1274 Those who cast the vote decide nothing. Those who count the vote decide everything. -- (Joseph Stalin)
Unless we have our own NOC or staff it with volunteers like SANS, it's going to be hard to make sure that such notifications are timely. Unfortunately, e-mail is where it's at, and I think adding and outages-discussion listserv would solve about 75% of the noise concern for those who want to know *just* about outages. Frank -----Original Message----- From: outages-bounces@isotf.org [mailto:outages-bounces@isotf.org] On Behalf Of Jay R. Ashworth Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2008 3:32 PM To: outages@isotf.org Subject: Re: [outages] List comment On Tue, Jun 24, 2008 at 11:25:24AM -0700, virendra rode // wrote:
Now if providers could be little more forthcoming and start reporting their maintenance and outages then sure I can see those alerts being filtered into something like 'outages-alerts' but until that happens I think we may need to feel the list further.
That trick never works *either*. I suspect what we're going to have to do is set up an outage-notify list, with a companion -post (as nanog does), and let people volunteer to summarize from the discussion list to -notify once some actual facts have been gleaned from the discussions. So, for last week, we might have seen Service: AIM Problem: Clients won't connect Scope: Nationwide Since: 1015 Reporter: jra@baylink.com Confirmed: 12 users Official? No Service: AIM Problem: Netsplit Scope: Certain servers; correlation unclear Since: 1015 Reporter: up@3.am Confirmed: 6 users Official? No Service: L3 transport USA:NE Problem: Routing loop; link backhoed Scope: AS 18467 Since: 1330 Reporter: somebody@somewhere.com Confirmed: L3 ticket 772893-338 Official? Yes each in an email from whomever did the summary. Would this serve? Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth Baylink jra@baylink.com Designer The Things I Think RFC 2100 Ashworth & Associates http://baylink.pitas.com '87 e24 St Petersburg FL USA http://photo.imageinc.us +1 727 647 1274 Those who cast the vote decide nothing. Those who count the vote decide everything. -- (Joseph Stalin) _______________________________________________ outages mailing list outages@isotf.org https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/outages
I like it - be careful, Jay - you are close to making sense Aaron D. Osgood Streamline Solutions L.L.C P.O. Box 6115 Falmouth, ME 04105 TEL: 207-781-5561 FAX: 207-781-8067 MOBILE: 207-831-5829 PAGE: 2078315829@vtext.com AOLIM: OzCom1 ICQ: 206889374 AOsgood@Streamline-Solutions.net Blog: http://streamlinesolutionsllc.blogspot.com/ http://www.streamline-solutions.net http://www.WMDaWARe.com Introducing Efficiency to Business since 1986. -----Original Message----- From: outages-bounces@isotf.org [mailto:outages-bounces@isotf.org] On Behalf Of Jay R. Ashworth Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2008 4:32 PM To: outages@isotf.org Subject: Re: [outages] List comment On Tue, Jun 24, 2008 at 11:25:24AM -0700, virendra rode // wrote:
Now if providers could be little more forthcoming and start reporting their maintenance and outages then sure I can see those alerts being filtered into something like 'outages-alerts' but until that happens I think we may need to feel the list further.
That trick never works *either*. I suspect what we're going to have to do is set up an outage-notify list, with a companion -post (as nanog does), and let people volunteer to summarize from the discussion list to -notify once some actual facts have been gleaned from the discussions. So, for last week, we might have seen Service: AIM Problem: Clients won't connect Scope: Nationwide Since: 1015 Reporter: jra@baylink.com Confirmed: 12 users Official? No Service: AIM Problem: Netsplit Scope: Certain servers; correlation unclear Since: 1015 Reporter: up@3.am Confirmed: 6 users Official? No Service: L3 transport USA:NE Problem: Routing loop; link backhoed Scope: AS 18467 Since: 1330 Reporter: somebody@somewhere.com Confirmed: L3 ticket 772893-338 Official? Yes each in an email from whomever did the summary. Would this serve? Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth Baylink jra@baylink.com Designer The Things I Think RFC 2100 Ashworth & Associates http://baylink.pitas.com '87 e24 St Petersburg FL USA http://photo.imageinc.us +1 727 647 1274 Those who cast the vote decide nothing. Those who count the vote decide everything. -- (Joseph Stalin) _______________________________________________ outages mailing list outages@isotf.org https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/outages
Extremely useful - as much as discussion is interesting and informative, for pager/blackberry/smartphone usefulness, Jay's format is probably most useable day to day. A lot of work though for someone(s). Thus, the two list idea -notify and -post or -discussion is very appealing. Aggregated posts as laid out below could come later (probably on discussion) Jay R. Ashworth wrote:
I suspect what we're going to have to do is set up an outage-notify list, with a companion -post (as nanog does), and let people volunteer to summarize from the discussion list to -notify once some actual facts have been gleaned from the discussions.
So, for last week, we might have seen
Service: AIM Problem: Clients won't connect Scope: Nationwide Since: 1015 Reporter: jra@baylink.com Confirmed: 12 users Official? No
-- This message has been scanned by MailScanner
On Tue, 24 Jun 2008, Dan York wrote:
On Jun 24, 2008, at 1:15 PM, Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu wrote:
On Mon, 23 Jun 2008 22:44:22 EDT, Christian Blair said:
We don't need everyone's traceroute. Hardly useful for others anyway unless they're your roommate.
Actually, you have that backwards.
If somebody posts a traceroute from a vastly different network location, that tells you something.
I think the question really is - is this list designed for *reporting* and confirming outages? Or is it designed for *diagnosing*/discussing/ troubleshooting outages?
If someone reports an outage, there is a degree of working with the reporter to confirm the outage that is necessary. (i.e. "AIM isn't working for me" and others either confirming or saying that it does work for them.) There have, though, been a couple of threads where this exchange has seemed to go on for a bit more than simple confirmation and dived more into troubleshooting.
The "reporting/confirming" type of list is a lower-traffic kind of list that's more announcement/alert-oriented. The "diagnosing/discussing" type of list could be a much higher-traffic list. Both are worthwhile types of lists to have... but they also may attract different subscribers.
Based on a couple of comments I've seen here, I think some folks may have signed up thinking they were getting the first type of list and are less interested in the second type of list. They may be more interested in "alerts" and not interested in "discussion".
I don't have a great solution to offer... I think the "community" here is probably too new to split into separate "alerts" and "discussion" lists. I also personally don't care which type of list it is. But I would suggest this difference in expectations is perhaps at the route of the original comment and others that have been on the list.
I think you covered it best. While outages does have some operational troubleshooting and peer-support going on, it is under the same threads. While imperfect, I agree completely that the community is too new to split. I think peer moderation and mail filters worked pretty good for us so far. Let's see if it keeps working, then I guess we can turn to meta-discussion.
My 2 cents, Dan
-- Dan York, CISSP, Director of Emerging Communication Technology Office of the CTO Voxeo Corporation dyork@voxeo.com Phone: +1-407-455-5859 Skype: danyork http://www.voxeo.com Blogs: http://blogs.voxeo.com http://www.disruptivetelephony.com
Build voice applications based on open standards. Find out how at http://www.voxeo.com/free
_______________________________________________ outages mailing list outages@isotf.org https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/outages
On Jun 24, 2008, at 1:32 PM, Dan York wrote:
I don't have a great solution to offer... I think the "community" here is probably too new to split into separate "alerts" and "discussion" lists. I also personally don't care which type of list it is. But I would suggest this difference in expectations is perhaps at the route of the original comment and others that have been on the list.
Sheesh... can you tell I was doing presentations about VoIP all day at a conference? Let's try "is perhaps at the ROOT of the....". Dan -- Dan York, CISSP, Director of Emerging Communication Technology Office of the CTO Voxeo Corporation dyork@voxeo.com Phone: +1-407-455-5859 Skype: danyork http://www.voxeo.com Blogs: http://blogs.voxeo.com http://www.disruptivetelephony.com Build voice applications based on open standards. Find out how at http://www.voxeo.com/free
I don't have a problem with discussion because I use a mail client (mutt) that nicely threads discussion. So if I see a reported outage (and subsequent discussion/analysis) that I care about: I read it all. If I see one that that I don't care about: it's trivially easy to ignore. So as long as the "Subject" line is apropos (and is modified if it becomes apparent that the actual outage doesn't fit the orginally chosen subject) then I'd have no problem keeping up with this list even if volume increased many times over. And while the wiki is nice, I think it best to keep outage-related discussions in a text-only forum that can be read and written by people on alternative/slow/low-bandwidth connections -- because they may well be compelled to use those *because* of an outage. ---Rsk
participants (16)
-
Aaron D. Osgood -
Christian Blair -
Dan York -
Dan York -
Derrick Bennett -
Frank Bulk -
Gadi Evron -
Jay Hennigan -
Jay R. Ashworth -
Laurence F. Sheldon, Jr. -
Michael K. Smith - Adhost -
Mickey Panayiotakis -
Rich Kulawiec -
Rich Parker -
Valdis.Kletnieks＠vt.edu -
virendra rode //