[108940] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: routing around Sprint's depeering damage
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Michael Thomas)
Sun Nov 2 10:34:56 2008
Date: Sun, 02 Nov 2008 07:34:46 -0800
From: Michael Thomas <mike@mtcc.com>
To: matthew@eeph.com
In-Reply-To: <490DC3C6.7090402@eeph.com>
Cc: 'Larry Sheldon' <LarrySheldon@cox.net>, nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
Matthew Kaufman wrote:
> James Jun wrote:
>> As much as we blame Cogent and Sprint for breaking the internet, I
>> also have
>> no sympathy for individual single-homed downstream customers on either
>> networks. If you are complaining about Sprint<->Cogent depeering and have
>> customers demanding for your mission-critical services, then you are
>> just as
>> negligent to not have multihomed before all of this happened. ...
>
> Ah yes, I suspect we can get all the network operators here to agree
> that any customer of another ISP should buy a second connection "just in
> case". Maybe this breakage will turn out to be the best way for everyone
> to double their customer base overnight.
I have a probably dumb question. Even if a company were of large enough
wallet to have, say, a single redundant connection, how could it
evaluate the partition problem in order to choose the "best" connection
(where "best" is a function of overall connectivity, say) ? It seems to
me that that's a really, really hard problem. And surely isn't a static
one-off kind of calculation, right?
Mike
