[155227] in North American Network Operators' Group
RE: cost of misconfigurations
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Eric Wieling)
Thu Aug 2 07:09:10 2012
From: Eric Wieling <EWieling@nyigc.com>
To: "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>
Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2012 07:08:15 -0400
In-Reply-To: <CACB8Nf71Sm0BAHXnpadCQ4qiSLLtLHi=DLodbQMF8gcqv0dWMw@mail.gmail.com>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
I do not think occasional outages cause significant loss of customers. Cus=
tomers get angry easily, but once an issue is fixed, they get happy quickly=
. Customers have very short memories and the cost and hassle of changing s=
ervices is often significant. Outages are never good, but it is better to =
concentrate on fixing the issue than panic about customers canceling their =
service.
Many times the cause of an outage is totally out of your control. For exam=
ple, most of our outages are caused by Verizon's aging and neglected copper=
cable plant. I often wish some company had the balls to file a class act=
ion lawsuit over Verizon's neglect of their copper plant, but NOBODY wants =
to piss off their ILEC, including us.
-----Original Message-----
From: Diogo Montagner [mailto:diogo.montagner@gmail.com]=20
Sent: Wednesday, August 01, 2012 8:32 PM
To: Darius Jahandarie; Murat Yuksel; nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: cost of misconfigurations
Hi Darius,
You are right. The lost of a customer due to those things. However, I would=
classify this as an unknown situation (in terms of risk
analisys) because the others I mentioned are possible to calculate and esti=
mate (they are known). But it is very hard to estimate if a customer will c=
ancel the contract because 1 or n network outages. In theory, if the custom=
er SLA is not being met consecutively, there is a potential probability he =
will cancel the contract.
Regards
On 8/2/12, Darius Jahandarie <djahandarie@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 8:08 PM, Diogo Montagner=20
> <diogo.montagner@gmail.com> wrote:
>> A misconfiguration will, at least, impact on two points: network=20
>> outage and re-work. For the network outage, you have to use the SLAs=20
>> to calculate the cost (how much you lost from the customers' revenue)=20
>> due to that outage. On the other hand, there is the time efforts=20
>> spent to fix the misconfiguration. Under the fix, it could be=20
>> removing the misconfig and applying a new one correct. Or just fixing=20
>> the misconfig targeting the correct config. This re-work will=20
>> translate in time, and time can be translated in money spent.
>
> Isn't the largest cost omitted (or at least glossed over) here?
> Namely, lost customers due to the outage. That's why people have SLAs=20
> and rework the network at all -- to avoid that cost.
>
>
> --
> Darius Jahandarie
>
--
Sent from my mobile device
./diogo -montagner
JNCIE-SP 0x41A
