Re: routing around Sprint's depeering damage

From: Michael Thomas (no email)
Date: Sun Nov 02 2008 - 10:34:46 EST

  • Next message: Joe Greco: "Re: routing around Sprint's depeering damage"

    Matthew Kaufman wrote:
    > James Jun wrote:
    >> As much as we blame Cogent and Sprint for breaking the internet, I
    >> also have
    >> no sympathy for individual single-homed downstream customers on either
    >> networks. If you are complaining about Sprint<->Cogent depeering and have
    >> customers demanding for your mission-critical services, then you are
    >> just as
    >> negligent to not have multihomed before all of this happened. ...
    > Ah yes, I suspect we can get all the network operators here to agree
    > that any customer of another ISP should buy a second connection "just in
    > case". Maybe this breakage will turn out to be the best way for everyone
    > to double their customer base overnight.

    I have a probably dumb question. Even if a company were of large enough
    wallet to have, say, a single redundant connection, how could it
    evaluate the partition problem in order to choose the "best" connection
    (where "best" is a function of overall connectivity, say) ? It seems to
    me that that's a really, really hard problem. And surely isn't a static
    one-off kind of calculation, right?


  • Next message: Joe Greco: "Re: routing around Sprint's depeering damage"

    Hosted Email Solutions

    Invaluement Anti-Spam DNSBLs

    Powered By FreeBSD   Powered By FreeBSD