nanog-outage@ ? ? ?
On 6/8/05, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > My concern would be that by openly encouraging people to send in more
> > reports of or inquiries about outages, we are going to see a lot more
> > noise from unqualified folks wanting to "be cool". I personally don't
> want
> > to hear about it every time someone wants to vendor bash ("@#$%^&ing GX
> is
> > down again and their customer support sucks"), every time a T1 in
> > Bumblescum Nowhere goes down, or otherwise completely useless posts
> ("did
> > anyone see anything funky on level 3 on the east coast yesterday?").
>
> Perhaps the best way to deal with that problem is to wait and
> see if it actually happens. In the past NANOG has carried a lot
> of these outage reports during a time when the net was less
> reliable than it is today. It didn't overwhelm the list back then.
> I would assume that because of the level of effort that operators
> put into having resilient networks, there would not be a huge
> amount of these outage reports because most real outages will
> remain invisible to customers.
>
> --Michael Dillon
>
>
