[33974] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Monitoring highly redundant operations
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (mdevney@teamsphere.com)
Thu Jan 25 20:09:08 2001
Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2001 17:06:28 -0800 (PST)
From: <mdevney@teamsphere.com>
Cc: nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <5552.980379833@sunf25>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0101251702350.7214-100000@core.teamplay.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
On Wed, 24 Jan 2001, Simon Lockhart wrote:
>
> Indeed. We currently monitor each part of our operation from a monitoring
> station on our network. Under certain conditions, this can give us both
> false positives and false negatives:
>
Umm... Keynote?
(http://www.keynote.com)
I find it truly amazing that people don't already diversely
monitor. Hell, have cronned pings running off your friend's cable modem
if that's all you can afford, but for christ's sake, a single box colo'd
in someone else's cage, or a shell at shells.com or nether.net really
isn't that expensive.
Fighting the war against bad networks,
Matthew Devney
Teamsphere Interactive
P.S.: It is not wise to get me started about other bad network practices
(stub network) or various other stupidities that piss me off.
