North American Network Operators Group

Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical

RE: Points of Failure (was Re: National infrastructure asset)

  • From: Matt Levine
  • Date: Mon Sep 24 15:10:58 2001

 
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Also keep in mind the trends that the "consumers" of the service use;
If ohare got nuked, you would also see a serious DROP off in
passengers; much as the airlines are seeing right now.  If PAIX fell
into the ocean, presumably there would be other things going with it,
and there would be an INCREASED usage on the net as people try to
scour for information..

Not that that's particularly related to the issue, just another
example of why it's a poor analogy..


My $0.02

Regards,
Matt

(BTW, I'm flying thru ohare tomorrow, so if anybody has
aforementioned intentions, please re-schedule.)

- --
Matt Levine
@Home: matt@deliver3.com
@Work: matt@easynews.com
ICQ  : 17080004
PGP  : http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x6C0D04CF 
"The Trouble with doing anything right the first time is that nobody
appreciates how difficult it was."

- -----Original Message-----
From: owner-nanog@merit.edu [mailto:owner-nanog@merit.edu] On Behalf
Of Grant A. Kirkwood
Sent: Monday, September 24, 2001 2:43 PM
To: Sean Donelan; nanog@merit.edu
Subject: Re: Points of Failure (was Re: National infrastructure
asset)



Sean Donelan wrote:
> 
> On Mon, 24 Sep 2001, Alex Bligh wrote:
> > My point being that building a network which doesn't have more
> > than  an annoying route flap, if /both/ 60 Hudson and 111 8th
> > avenue are  lost, is extremely hard (*) (especially if it has a
> > transatlantic  component). And that's true even if you have your
> > own fiber.
> >
> > (*) hard means that it isn't compatible with existing topologies,
> >  and building new ones is expensive.
> 
> Which brings me back to my original question.  Are there specific 
> locations which are more important to the functioning of the
> Internet  than others?  You can't simply say everything is
> important.  The FAA  breaks airports down into several catagories,
> large airports, medium  airports and small airports.  A large
> airport has 1% or more of the  passenger traffic.  Are there
> specific locations which handle 1% or  more of the Internet's
> traffic (assuming we had figures for the total  amount of traffic).

The national air traffic system makes a poor analogy to the Internet
in this case, IMHO. If O'Hare got nuked tomorrow, we'd have some
serious disruption in passenger traffic. If PAIX fell into the ocean,
OTOH, traffic would simply route around it. Isn't that how we try to
engineer the Internet?

So in other words, yes, everything is important, and yes, nothing is
particularly important. 

Grant

- -- 
Grant A. Kirkwood - grant@virtical.net
Chief Technology Officer - Virtical Solutions, Inc.
http://www.virtical.net/

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGPfreeware 7.0.3 for non-commercial use <http://www.pgp.com>

iQA/AwUBO6+Elcp0j1NsDQTPEQJAZwCghRKAooQt06lfAnicImgHPalYWtUAoM5e
qsPIHuX1PsGh+Fz3VFIUPYLh
=0Xjs
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----