From: Steven M. Bellovin (no email)
Date: Mon May 05 2008 - 13:59:20 EDT
On 05 May 2008 16:07:03 +0000
Paul Vixie <> wrote:
>
> > But yes, Joe's ISC TechNote is an excellent document, and was a big
> > help in figuring out how to set this up a few years ago.
>
> and now for something completely different -- where in the interpipes
> could a document like that have been published, vs. ISC's web site?
> the amount of red tape and delay involved in Usenix or IETF or IEEE
> or ACM are vastly more than most smart ops people are willing to put
> in. where is the light / middle weight class, or is every
> organization or person who wants to publish this kind of thing going
> to continue to have the exclusive and bad choice of "blog it, or
> write an article for ;login:/ACM-Queue/Circle-ID, or write an
> academic paper and wait ten months"? isn't this a job for... NANOG?
I did some checking on this topic a few years ago. The consensus among
the people I talked to was that NANOG itself seemed to generate too
little that was publishable in a formal way to warrant a specific
mechanism.
A web site like arxiv is good for some stuff. But -- should there be a
link from nanog.org to operational content? Should nanog.org have
its own archive? Should there be a peer review process? If not, what
should the criteria be for an "official" note of the paper?
--Steve Bellovin, http://www.cs.columbia.edu/~smb
_______________________________________________
NANOG mailing list
http://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog
|
|
|