Sad state of affairs

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

It is indeed a sad state of affairs when I see so many operations people
caught up in DNS and IP portability religious wars that our very reason for
existence is forgotten.

Lest anyone not know what I am referring to, our primary purpose in life is
to operate our autonomous networks in such a way that our subscribers can
*easily* and *transparently* participate in the global cooperative
collectively know as the Internet.

The evolution of this entity has progressed so rapidly that it is sometimes
difficult to remember the sheer numbers of ordinary citizen/corporate
subscribers that ultimately pay our salaries. Our duty/task is to provide
them with *easy* and *transparent* access to the Internet and to prevent
instabilities that threaten that access. If we fail to do that we will
intimately find ourselves without a paycheck.

We may disagree with the way certain things are implemented, but we must
always remember that our subscribers provide an enormous amount of inertia
against major change. Change must be CAREFULLY thought out, meticulously
planned and scheduled. It cannot be allowed to disrupt subscriber
service... Not if we want to keep subscribers paying us...

I was there in the old days... When we could test a new idea online in
production mode and announce it in a week or two... Unfortunately those
days are long gone.

Tim

"Timothy R. McKee" wrote:

It is indeed a sad state of affairs when I see so many operations people
caught up in DNS and IP portability religious wars that our very reason for
existence is forgotten.

Lest anyone not know what I am referring to, our primary purpose in life is
to operate our autonomous networks in such a way that our subscribers can
*easily* and *transparently* participate in the global cooperative
collectively know as the Internet.

Haven't you already said this once in the past week?

I think you're missing a point... a lot of people here seem to think
there ARE operational issues involved with implementing what new.net is
implementing.

Of course, I'm not sure you're interested in a real debate. You only seem
interested in jump-starting the debate when it appears to be dying. You've
done it at least once already.

Don't, please. (I'm being more polite than I really think I ought to here...)