[3264] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Netcom Outage (Was: My InfoWorld Column About NANOG)
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Avi Freedman)
Fri Jun 21 17:54:51 1996
From: Avi Freedman <freedman@netaxs.com>
To: kaminski@nanospace.com (Peter Kaminski)
Date: Fri, 21 Jun 1996 17:50:44 -0400 (EDT)
Cc: NANOG@merit.edu, bob_metcalfe@infoworld.com, letters@infoworld.com
In-Reply-To: <m0uXDDL-0002BEC@nanospace.com> from "Peter Kaminski" at Jun 21, 96 01:53:59 pm
> Can other big parts of the backbone fall down and take 13 (or more) hours
> to get back up? Or is the rest of the net engineered more redundantly than
> Netcom? Should I build two backbones, each with separate technologies?
> Was this a foreshock of the coming Metcalfean Big One, or just lousy
> procedures at one of the bigger ISPs?
Maybe we should turn off a major exchange point for 6 hours as a test.
Seriously, unless you have on-staff people who are quite swift and
really understand both the architecture and the implementation bogies of
your particular IP network, it might not be a bad idea to build two
separate backbones with different technology and/or routing policy.
> Inquiring minds want to know. Right now, it appears to be just a few
> (thankfully?). And now is the time to develop communications and publicity
> strategies for this sort of thing -- along with the engineering to
> hopefully prevent them.
>
> --
> Pete Kaminski
> kaminski@nanospace.com
Avi
