"Come back SNA, all is forgiven!"
Chris Mason
----- Original Message -----
From: "daver++" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.ibm-main
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2007 5:11 PM
Subject: Re: Outsourcing loosing steam?
From: CICS Guy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Never the less, the LAX problem was reported as customs not being able to
verify anybody because the computer was down.......International flights
only.....
"Around 1:30 p.m., the CPB experienced problems accessing its database
containing information on international travelers. Assuming this to be a
wide-area network problem, CBP called Sprint, its carrier, to test the
lines. After three fruitless hours of remote testing, Sprint finally
sent technicians on-site. Another three hours passed before Sprint
finally concluded that transmission lines were not the problem, meaning
the problem was inside the CBP local network. After more hours of
troubleshooting, the issue was finally resolved at 11:45 p.m. The real
culprit: a failed router."
http://blogs.zdnet.com/projectfailures/?p=346
20,000 stranded because it took over ten hours to diagnose and replace a
failed router. I used to be a mainframe guy that inherited the network
side, so they cut me some slack. BUT- I can guarantee that there wasn't
anywhere near enough slack for me to get off with taking that long to
replace a router. I would have been tarred, feathered and run out of
town. It seems like basic due diligence wasn't even followed. Yes,
Sprint added to the problem, but Sprint never should have been called.
Why call Sprint before determining that the problem isn't on _your_ end?
It is all a bit silly, and it frightens me a bit that our airlines have
this level of quality.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
