[41306] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: ATM failure - No the other kind of ATM
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Chris Woodfield)
Wed Sep 5 18:14:13 2001
Date: Wed, 5 Sep 2001 18:13:37 -0400 (EDT)
From: Chris Woodfield <rekoil@semihuman.com>
To: "Patrick W. Gilmore" <patrick@ianai.net>
Cc: nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <5.0.2.1.2.20010905175058.08e34c18@127.0.0.1>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10109051812580.26352-100000@ignoring.yourpain.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
As a small clarification, when you say IP, do you mean over the public
internet, or on a private IP network? I'm going to guess the latter, but
thought I'd ask...
-C
On Wed, 5 Sep 2001, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote:
>
> At 01:11 PM 9/5/2001 -0700, Sean Donelan wrote:
>
> >Since there is very little "unique" network equipment in
> >the world now, just about everyone buys equipment from the
> >same vendors. So the question is, Can we learn anything from
> >Citibank's experience. Is there anything about their continuing
> >problems which may be used to improve general network reliability?
>
> I've set up a few ATMs. I have used DSLw+ & STUN on 25xx ciscos and
> FRADs. I have also seen modems used. The machines themselves all ran OS2,
> but some banks were talking about moving to NT (this was before Win2K).
>
> When they used IP, they did use cisco, but they did not all use IP. That
> said, I did most of this many years ago (remember - ianai :), and the
> "newer" stuff was almost all IP. It would not surprise me if the majority
> of contemporary ATMs use IP.
>
> It would also not surprise me if Citibank has a lot of old ATMs that use
> 4.8Kbps modems.
>
>
> >I tried to find out some information from Citibank's web site
> >about the issue, but I didn't see anything.
>
> Somehow I think they would be extremely reluctant to tell anyone what they
> use inside their ATMs....
>
> --
> TTFN,
> patrick
>
