[145467] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: meeting network
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu)
Mon Oct 10 11:11:35 2011
To: Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Mon, 10 Oct 2011 10:44:12 EDT."
<m28vossy83.wl%randy@psg.com>
From: Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu
Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2011 11:10:07 -0400
Cc: North American Network Operators' Group <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
--==_Exmh_1318259407_2551P
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
On Mon, 10 Oct 2011 10:44:12 EDT, Randy Bush said:
> o no hotel believe that we'll actually be significantly high use.
> they simply can not conceive of it. ietf, apricot, ... have
> seen this time and time again
To be fair, that's not a hotel-only problem. We've seen that problem within
the IT industry. Actual discussion with a vendor who wanted to analyze our
logs so they could size a solution:
"Send us a day's worth of logs" "OK"
...
"We said a *day's* worth, not a *week*". "That *was* a day"
"Wow, that logfile was huge, we didn't think anybody actually did that much traffic a day..."
The sad part was that the vendor in question *really* should have known better,
we're pretty sure they targeted their solution at many sites bigger than us.
Or maybe the other sites are bigger, but we pound the bejeebers out of stuff. I dunno.
--==_Exmh_1318259407_2551P
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Exmh version 2.5 07/13/2001
iD8DBQFOkwrPcC3lWbTT17ARAukqAKCYHJQquB476uH8MrXXmG6n7zLa7QCgsznG
0AqnoKnLc1ZVKvHQwdO77TE=
=gEEo
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--==_Exmh_1318259407_2551P--
