[67961] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: How relable does the Internet need to be? (Was: Re: Converged
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (sgorman1@gmu.edu)
Thu Feb 26 12:49:16 2004
Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2004 12:47:28 -0500
From: sgorman1@gmu.edu
To: Roland Perry <nanog@internetpolicyagency.com>
Cc: nanog@merit.edu
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
So does this mean we also need a regulator to make sure fiber providers "fess up to the actual diversity of their physical paths". The "R" word is not one to be tossed around lightly. When does it apply and when does it not, or does it never apply. The more critical you get get the more "R" creeps in, but who defines critical and when does that rise above a threshold to induce "R"?
----- Original Message -----
From: Roland Perry <nanog@internetpolicyagency.com>
Date: Thursday, February 26, 2004 12:20 pm
Subject: Re: How relable does the Internet need to be? (Was: Re: Converged Network Threat)
>
> In article <200402261652.i1QGq3ln018676@turing-police.cc.vt.edu>,
> Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu writes
> >We often can't get the owners of the fiber to 'fess up to the actual
> >physical path, when we're trying to build out diversity.
> >
> >What makes you think the Ambulance Service will have the competency
> >to have any *clue* where their dial tone actually comes from and
> goes to?
>
> You need a Regulator[tm] which insists that the Ambulance Service
> demonstrates that they understand these issues, or revoke their
> licence.
> A bit like you do for the wetware behind the steering wheel (or
> the life
> support system in the back).
> --
> Roland Perry
>
>
