[71031] in North American Network Operators' Group
RE: Worst case worm damage estimates: Research
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Sean Donelan)
Sun Jun 6 01:51:48 2004
Date: Sun, 6 Jun 2004 01:51:11 -0400 (EDT)
From: Sean Donelan <sean@donelan.com>
To: nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <DD7FE473A8C3C245ADA2A2FE1709D90B0DB1AA@server2003.arneill-py.sacramento.ca.us>
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
On Sat, 5 Jun 2004, Michel Py wrote:
> If your desktop support guys are half-organized, they have a replacement
> machine ready to install when the user calls for service, then the
> machine that as problem (which often is PICNIC: Problem In Chair Not In
> Computer) goes on the bench where the time it takes to reload a fresh
> Windows is 5 minutes, time to plug the cables in and pop the Ghost CD
> in.
This is where I agree with Paxson and Weaver, there isn't a deep supply
line for replacement PCs. If 50 million PCs fall over in a single
morning, its unlikely the PC repair people will have enough replacement
machines ready instantly. Its the supermarket effect before a big
snowstorm, they run out of milk and bread within a couple of hours.
But then what happens? People starve? or is there product substitution?
But I disagree with the repair costs and even the productivity impact.
We have some experience with defective software, operator error and
destructive maleware. My concern is over-estimates and under-estimates
can lead to poor decisions. Unfortunately, we don't have a good way to
get the proprietary data that does exist into a useful form for public
decision making.
The perfect storm scenario is interesting. But it needs to be validated
against "business as usual" and cost of historical product recalls.
