[35854] in North American Network Operators' Group
RE: Broken Internet?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Roeland Meyer)
Fri Mar 16 15:47:59 2001
Message-ID: <9DC8BBAD4FF100408FC7D18D1F092286039CE9@condor.mhsc.com>
From: Roeland Meyer <rmeyer@mhsc.com>
To: 'Adam Rothschild' <asr@latency.net>
Cc: nanog@merit.edu
Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2001 11:43:54 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
> From: Adam Rothschild [mailto:asr@latency.net]
> Sent: Friday, March 16, 2001 11:23 AM
>
> On Fri, Mar 16, 2001 at 02:34:35AM -0800, Roeland Meyer wrote:
> > > DSL has always been a cheap, semi-reliable solution for people
> > > that didn't want to pay the money for a dedicated circuit.
>
> This, I agree with.
>
> > DSL behaves like a dedicated circuit
>
> Dedicated in what sense? "Always up" nature? Aggregation hierarchy /
> topology? Bandwidth, considering your provider might be _losing_
> money with transit/ops/etc costs factored in, if you're using it al
> full line rate 24x7?
Well, all of the above, except that there is no way to tell if your upstream
is losing money or not. Not if their market-communications folks know what
they're doing and they're privately-held.
> > Additionally, you don't have to tune the link and it doesn't need to
> > be hand-rebooted when the CSU/DSU drops (all the things they don't
> > tell you about T1's).
>
> What circuit-level fine tuning and rebooting do you speak of? Is the
> telco running Microsoft DACS Server(TM) in the CO? ;)
I'm speaking from having spent many nights and week-ends waiting for the
telco to bring the line back up, after my CSU lost power/went down/died/etc.
That's why we went with DSL (besides straight cost). Granted, after initial
build, this didn't happen. Mainly, because the CSU never went down again.
> But yeah, putting all your eggs in one basket could make for a nice
> single point of failure. Or calculated risk. Your call...
That's my point, small shops don't have much choice. Typical Inet start-ups
are cases where headcount is far less than server count. Granted, most of
the H/W is in a co-lo.
<sigh> You guys just don't want to allow a small business to run their own
data center, do you?
Can't y'all understand that there are serious business reasons for a company
to do so?
