[32527] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Limits of reliability or is 99.999999999% realistic
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Shawn McMahon)
Mon Nov 27 11:30:27 2000
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2000 11:28:12 -0500
From: Shawn McMahon <smcmahon@eiv.com>
To: nanog@merit.edu
Message-ID: <20001127112812.A13309@eiv.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-md5;
protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="4Ckj6UjgE2iN1+kY"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <3A2286C6.24A1CA4D@21rst-century.com>; from tme@21rst-century.com on Mon, Nov 27, 2000 at 11:07:34AM -0500
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
--4Ckj6UjgE2iN1+kY
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Mon, Nov 27, 2000 at 11:07:34AM -0500, Marshall Eubanks wrote:
>=20
> In spacecraft work, JPL has found that, if you did not
> strive for "5 sigma's" or even "6 sigma's" of reliability, then
> there would always be something you hadn't counted on that would
> drive reliability to zero.
NASA's needs don't reflect our needs.
If my router fails, I can get to it to fix it in seconds, and if I need
to replace it I don't have to wait five years to launch and another year
to reach the target.
If I have to have a replacement overnighted, I'm still only down a day,
not a decade.
Also, NASA's budget for a POP on Mars is a little higher than my budget
for a POP in Colorado Springs. Hell, their budget for a single lander
is probably higher than my budget for an entire data center.
--4Ckj6UjgE2iN1+kY
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.1 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org
iD8DBQE6IoucEcl9bQ0RMt0RAtVfAJ4so1ACDlfMeZNDYIUx4yvNO/0/SQCeLRY/
V/bAwc81AmODTDwfTDcBTT8=
=wdyz
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--4Ckj6UjgE2iN1+kY--
