[146263] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: [outages] More notes
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu)
Tue Nov 8 13:06:10 2011
To: Stephane Bortzmeyer <bortzmeyer@nic.fr>
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 08 Nov 2011 09:21:37 +0100."
<20111108082137.GA20928@nic.fr>
From: Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu
Date: Tue, 08 Nov 2011 13:05:27 -0500
Cc: NANOG <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
--==_Exmh_1320775527_2525P
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
On Tue, 08 Nov 2011 09:21:37 +0100, Stephane Bortzmeyer said:
> I disagree. The official bug statement from Juniper in August was
> trying very hard to downplay the importance of the bug ("Given the
> complexity of conditions required to trigger this issue, the
> probability of exploiting this defect is extremely low"). No wonder so
> few people (and not only at Level-3) did not upgrade.
August (and if that's when the *fix* came out, the bug is even older).
September.
October.
November. So maybe the probability *is* low.
And if JunOS is anything like CIsco IOS, a lot of shops didn't upgrade because
the newer release has *other* issues in their environments. Nobody wants to
upgrade to fix a once-ever-few-months bug if it also buys them a daily crash in
something else.
--==_Exmh_1320775527_2525P
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Exmh version 2.5 07/13/2001
iD8DBQFOuW9ncC3lWbTT17ARAvP7AJ9rhV196nK2vFd9RUmu9X8t6kesaQCeI5zr
rSVTKXWE+R152a9STNIximc=
=kFHH
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--==_Exmh_1320775527_2525P--
