[46465] in North American Network Operators' Group
RE: Help with bad announcement from UUnet
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (James Smith)
Fri Mar 29 12:08:58 2002
Message-ID: <171DAAD54475984F8F41345A0945DF9CCAA603@hqexchange.presidio.com>
From: James Smith <jsmith@PRESIDIO.com>
To: "'nanog@merit.edu'" <nanog@merit.edu>
Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2002 12:05:43 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C1D743.F6755F74"
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.
------_=_NextPart_001_01C1D743.F6755F74
Content-Type: text/plain
I would generally agree that non-paying customers should not get top-shelf
service, but when it is someone with clue calling (your people should be
able to tell, they should be clueful to a degree) about an issue that is
being sourced from your network, or transits your network, is it not an
issue that you should be involved in anyway?
Why wait for the call from your upstream when you can get a jump on the
problem?
James H. Smith II NNCDS NNCSE
Systems Engineer
The Presidio Corporation
Yeah, I know, top-posting is frowned upon. I have other bad habits...
-----Original Message-----
From: fingers [mailto:fingers@fingers.co.za]
Sent: Friday, March 29, 2002 11:51 AM
To: Leo Bicknell
Cc: nanog@merit.edu
Subject: Re: Help with bad announcement from UUnet
Hi
> Note that in both cases, b0rken-noc takes a single call, so their
> load is unchanged. The second case adds a call to both my-upstream-noc,
> and b0rken-noc-upstream-noc.
>
> It would seem going direct would put a lower load on NOC's in general,
> which presumably would let them spend more time on problems and provide
> better service.
surely a noc's first responsability is to direct customers? even if the
other network experiencing the problem may affect said customer, the
service is not just about connectivity, but also about trying to deal with
calls in the best possible manner. if more time were spent on
non-customers, a paying customer would end up losing out on that warm
fuzzy feeling when his call is answered promptly, the person he speaks to
actually listens, and his general experience interacting with the noc is
something he doesn't walk away from feeling cheated.
Regards
--Rob
------_=_NextPart_001_01C1D743.F6755F74
Content-Type: text/html
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV=3D"Content-Type" CONTENT=3D"text/html; =
charset=3DUS-ASCII">
<META NAME=3D"Generator" CONTENT=3D"MS Exchange Server version =
5.5.2650.12">
<TITLE>RE: Help with bad announcement from UUnet</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>I would generally agree that non-paying customers =
should not get top-shelf service, but when it is someone with clue =
calling (your people should be able to tell, they should be clueful to =
a degree) about an issue that is being sourced from your network, or =
transits your network, is it not an issue that you should be involved =
in anyway?</FONT></P>
<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>Why wait for the call from your upstream when you can =
get a jump on the problem?</FONT>
</P>
<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>James H. Smith II NNCDS NNCSE</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>Systems Engineer</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>The Presidio Corporation</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>Yeah, I know, top-posting is frowned upon. I have =
other bad habits...</FONT>
</P>
<BR>
<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>-----Original Message-----</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>From: fingers [<A =
HREF=3D"mailto:fingers@fingers.co.za">mailto:fingers@fingers.co.za</A>]<=
/FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>Sent: Friday, March 29, 2002 11:51 AM</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>To: Leo Bicknell</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>Cc: nanog@merit.edu</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>Subject: Re: Help with bad announcement from =
UUnet</FONT>
</P>
<BR>
<BR>
<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>Hi</FONT>
</P>
<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>> Note that in both cases, b0rken-noc takes a =
single call, so their</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> load is unchanged. The second case adds a =
call to both my-upstream-noc,</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> and b0rken-noc-upstream-noc.</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>></FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> It would seem going direct would put a lower =
load on NOC's in general,</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> which presumably would let them spend more time =
on problems and provide</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> better service.</FONT>
</P>
<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>surely a noc's first responsability is to direct =
customers? even if the</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>other network experiencing the problem may affect =
said customer, the</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>service is not just about connectivity, but also =
about trying to deal with</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>calls in the best possible manner. if more time were =
spent on</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>non-customers, a paying customer would end up losing =
out on that warm</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>fuzzy feeling when his call is answered promptly, =
the person he speaks to</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>actually listens, and his general experience =
interacting with the noc is</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>something he doesn't walk away from feeling =
cheated.</FONT>
</P>
<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>Regards</FONT>
</P>
<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>--Rob</FONT>
</P>
</BODY>
</HTML>
------_=_NextPart_001_01C1D743.F6755F74--
