On 12/01/16 18:55, Mike wrote:
On 1/11/2016 11:36 PM, Emile Aben wrote:
[snip] dismissing this as useless is a bit premature i think. this is an experiment about how to get community feedback, tied to specific resources (ripe atlas probes) this community has (ie. one vote per probe). if the number of people that 'vote' is insignificant the conclusion is that my attempt of collecting feedback didn't work.
[snip]
If I want to affect the feature set of the probe, I would do so by using communication channels that are already in place, e.g., that we are using now with this mailing list.
I view the probes' tags as a way to announce what the capability of the probe is, and not what I want the capability of the probe to be. I feel that the reduction of the usefulness of the probes' tags to something akin to facebook's "likes" is a diversion of purpose.
agree that this shouldn't become a facebook-"like" type of thing, but it's a fine line. i see this particular tag as showing the potential for a capability of the probe, a tag like 'iwantaffordablebroadband' would not be.
If you want to have some manner of voting, then do so via your account on the RIPE website. I have to log in to the account to change the tags on my probe, why not just put a voting option on the website? I see no need, and I have no desire, to display my vote among the public data on my probe.
agree, this is a hack. a web poll could be a better means of collecting feedback, if we'd also tie the analysis to probe hosting, to show if there is potential for an opt-in bcp38 compliance testing. current status of the tags: $ egrep -i 'bcp38|spoof' tags.txt iwantbcp38compliancetesting (45) sourceaddressspoofok (3) bcp38 (1) i'd characterise that as a bit low turn-out, but informative in the light of previous discussions on this mailing list. as a comparison, for the ripe labs poll on wifi measurements in ripe atlas we got 159 voters. cheers, emile