[26932] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: www.etrade.com has no DNS A record !
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Christopher E. Brown)
Mon Jan 31 19:23:26 2000
Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2000 15:12:25 -0900 (AKST)
From: "Christopher E. Brown" <cbrown@denalics.net>
To: John Hawkinson <jhawk@bbnplanet.com>
Cc: Kai Schlichting <kai@pac-rim.net>, nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <20000125220619.B19709@jhawk-foo.bbnplanet.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10001311507390.20541-100000@borg.denalics.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
On Tue, 25 Jan 2000, John Hawkinson wrote:
>
> Why is discussion of a single site's DNS configuration screwup
> appropriate for NANOG?
>
> Is your goal to get the word out to people who use E*TRADE?
> I don't think NANOG is right for that.
>
> Is your goal to get the word out to network providers of people
> who use E*TRADE? Do you really expect that many of them will
> forward this announcement or make good use of it? Should
> a message be sent to NANOG every time CNN, Netscape, or Yahoo
> go down?
>
> Am I missing something here? [Like a sense of humor?]
Because etrade is a site (among many) that customers tend to
get very pissed if they cannot reach. While a long drawn out argument
about it is silly, the initial announcement is useful. It helped my
staff handle the multiple 'Your network is broken and you are losing
me $$$ you $%^^&^%&' calls.
Very nice to be able to say 'No, we are fine, ETrade is
however suffering from a configuration failure with their DNS. There
are currently Nationwide issues getting to them.'
---
As folks might have suspected, not much survives except roaches,
and they don't carry large enough packets fast enough...
--About the Internet and nuclear war.
