On Wed, Sep 05, 2012 at 02:44:34PM +0000, Vernon Schryver <[email protected]> wrote a message of 78 lines which said:
> Why poke distant anchors when almost all "The Internet is down" > complaints have local causes, and when not local, are out of the > control Because the goal is not to fix them but to be aware of them so that I don't receive emails "www.example.com is DOWN" when it's actually the IGP inside my ISP which went berserk. > My systems poke the far sides of my routers, services that I own and > operate on other networks, Precisely what I do. And I'm tired of spurious alarms when all these services seem to go down at the same time. There is a reason why every serious monitoring software has the concept of "dependency". > and service providers that receive my money for more substantial > services. Someone suggested privately to use www.my-ISP.net. It is a sufficient test in most case and it is not a common resource, it is a service I pay for. > That irony made me see that the unsolicited beacon/anchor idea is > yet another "doesn't scale" and "tragedy of the commons" notion like > spam. But today, there is no "public service beacon". (No, I'm not volunteer to set up one with my money.) _______________________________________________ dns-operations mailing list [email protected] https://lists.dns-oarc.net/mailman/listinfo/dns-operations dns-jobs mailing list https://lists.dns-oarc.net/mailman/listinfo/dns-jobs
