|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| home | help | back | first | fref | pref | prev | next | nref | lref | last | post |
Message-ID: <38950D7A.702B6717@concentric.net> Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2000 20:20:10 -0800 From: "Henry R. Linneweh" <linneweh@concentric.net> Reply-To: linneweh@concentric.net MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Sam Thomas <sthomas@lart.net> Cc: Sean Donelan <sean@donelan.com>, nanog@merit.edu Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------138D3605962CB54F272D750F" Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu --------------138D3605962CB54F272D750F Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I think this is the real issue here http://www.cert.org/incident_notes/IN-99-07.html tribe and trinoo Sam Thomas wrote: > On Sun, Jan 30, 2000 at 12:35:18AM -0800, Sean Donelan wrote: > > > > Should the Internet follow the nuclear and power industry and come up with > > a set of standarized terms for different degrees of events: blackout, brownout, > > flicker, etc. Or follow the telecommunication industry which uses a single > > word, congestion, for most problems. > > <sigh> it took this long for someone to ask that question in a public place? > > I think we should go further than that, and develop an internet standard > for noc-noc communications. at least some sort of bcp, so that those who > conform can know what to expect when calling a peer (in the literal, not > necessarily BGP sense) noc who also claims to conform to such an ad-hoc > "standard". for instance, it would be nice to consistently be able to get > a peer noc to open a ticket on reported troubles, get them to cooperate > in tracking security (i.e. DoS attacks) problems, etc. in 30 years, the > ability for computers to converse with eachother and negotiate reasonably > has improved exponentially. there are still humans sitting behind them > however, who still have problems with this after several thousand years > of evolution. > > $0.02 +/- 0.02 > > Sam > > -- > Sam Thomas > Geek Mercenary -- Thank you; |--------------------------------------------| | Thinking is a learned process so is UNIX | |--------------------------------------------| Henry R. Linneweh --------------138D3605962CB54F272D750F Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit <!doctype html public "-//w3c//dtd html 4.0 transitional//en"> <html> I think this is the real issue here <br><A HREF="http://www.cert.org/incident_notes/IN-99-07.html">http://www.cert.org/incident_notes/IN-99-07.html</A> <br><u>tribe and trinoo</u><u></u> <p>Sam Thomas wrote: <blockquote TYPE=CITE>On Sun, Jan 30, 2000 at 12:35:18AM -0800, Sean Donelan wrote: <br>> <br>> Should the Internet follow the nuclear and power industry and come up with <br>> a set of standarized terms for different degrees of events: blackout, brownout, <br>> flicker, etc. Or follow the telecommunication industry which uses a single <br>> word, congestion, for most problems. <p><sigh> it took this long for someone to ask that question in a public place? <p>I think we should go further than that, and develop an internet standard <br>for noc-noc communications. at least some sort of bcp, so that those who <br>conform can know what to expect when calling a peer (in the literal, not <br>necessarily BGP sense) noc who also claims to conform to such an ad-hoc <br>"standard". for instance, it would be nice to consistently be able to get <br>a peer noc to open a ticket on reported troubles, get them to cooperate <br>in tracking security (i.e. DoS attacks) problems, etc. in 30 years, the <br>ability for computers to converse with eachother and negotiate reasonably <br>has improved exponentially. there are still humans sitting behind them <br>however, who still have problems with this after several thousand years <br>of evolution. <p>$0.02 +/- 0.02 <p>Sam <p>-- <br>Sam Thomas <br>Geek Mercenary</blockquote> <p>-- <br>Thank you; <br>|--------------------------------------------| <br>| Thinking is a learned process so is UNIX | <br>|--------------------------------------------| <br>Henry R. Linneweh <br> </html> --------------138D3605962CB54F272D750F--
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| home | help | back | first | fref | pref | prev | next | nref | lref | last | post |