[7852] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: BGP announcements and small providers
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Philip J. Nesser II)
Wed Feb 26 16:50:40 1997
From: "Philip J. Nesser II" <pjnesser@martigny.ai.mit.edu>
To: karl@Mcs.Net (Karl Denninger)
Date: Wed, 26 Feb 1997 16:44:49 -0500 (EST)
Cc: justin@erols.com, bradley@dunn.org, nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <199702262110.PAA12307@Jupiter.Mcs.Net> from "Karl Denninger" at Feb 26, 97 03:10:15 pm
Karl Denninger supposedly said:
>
> You're making lots of assumptions.
>
>
> 1) That client DNS systems will actually honor such a TTL. Many
> don't (claim they're broken all you want, but these are the facts).
>
> 2) That client SOFTWARE will actually go back and ask again for the
> IP number. Several won't (Netscrape being rumored to be one of
> them). TTLs are irrelavent in that case.
>
> Go ahead and try to tell your customer, who purchased web service from you,
> that you have the right to disrupt their operations at any time and under
> any pretense and see how many of them you have left.
>
Karl,
How do you handle hardware upgrades, random crashes, etc. with your
clients? Do you give them a refund for such downtimes? DO you guarentee
that every client that tries to access their web page will always get
through?
My guess is you don't. You perform a service for them and probably
schedule maintenence in such a way as to minimize downtime and impact on
that service.
If you have a better scheme, like fully redundent machines that fall over
automatically and let you do maintenence on one while the other opperates
then I think you have done an excellent job at providing a quality service
for your customers. On the other hand, someone who has done such a setup
should realize how easy it would be to migrate it to different addresses
while maintaining pretty much complete connectivity for the old addresses
for a reasonable time (like a standard TTL length).
---> Phil
