[108367] in North American Network Operators' Group
RE: 143.228.0.0/16 and house.gov
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Sargun Dhillon)
Wed Oct 1 00:53:36 2008
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2008 21:51:26 -0700
From: "Sargun Dhillon" <sdhillon@decarta.com>
To: "Ernie Rubi" <ernesto@cs.fiu.edu>,
<nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
I'm surprised it isn't outsourced to some managed (hosting) provider, or =
a CDN.. Like Akamai or LLNW. It would surely be far more efficient for =
their purposes.=20
Also, if you've planned your network correctly QoS/Shaping will not =
negatively effect your network. You always engineer your outer edge to =
take a beating.
Sargun Dhillon
925.202.9485
deCarta
sdhillon@decarta.com
www.decarta.com
-----Original Message-----
From: Ernie Rubi [mailto:ernesto@cs.fiu.edu]
Sent: Tue 9/30/2008 21:41
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: 143.228.0.0/16 and house.gov=20
=20
Hi folks, just musing...
From an ops perspective, wonder just how much traffic caused:
"This morning, our engineers sounded the alarms ... and we have =20
installed a digital version of a traffic cop. We enacted stopgaps that =20
we planned for last night. We had hoped we didn't have to."
--Jeff Ventura, communications director for the House's chief =20
administrator. (from =
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/09/30/congress.website/index.html)
Don't .govs have enough b/w or at least ability to add b/w in order to =20
satisfy their 'public outreach/information' role? (not a rhetorical =20
question...hehe)
It also seems to me that adding load balancing, firewall, throttling, =20
etc methods for traffic shaping might actually make the problem worse =20
by adding yet another layer(s) of hardware/software that may be prone =20
to bottlenecking or overloading.
whaddayathink?
Ernie M. Rubi
Network Engineer
AMPATH/CIARA
Florida International Univ, Miami
