Home page logo

nanog logo nanog mailing list archives

RE: Sprint violations
From: lodge () houston omnes net (Mathew Lodge)
Date: Fri, 22 Sep 1995 16:36:40 -0600

At 9:10 9/22/95, Noel Chiappa wrote:
On the other hand, if Sean et al are willing to take the arrows (arrows ->
pioneers, right? :-), good for them; it will provide cover for providers to
tell their own customers "sorry, there's no use sending out your /28; Sprint
will just filter it". It's always easier to tell a paying customer "no" when
you're just relaying someone else's decision, not your own, no?

Well, no, actually. Customers don't care who's fault it is -- as far as
they're concerned, it's broken. I had a similar situation impressed on me
today: one of our customers wants to send e-mail with MIME attachments to
one of his customers who has a CompuServe account. The attachments never
make it through the CompuServe e-mail gateway.

Now, we know that this is not a problem with our TCP/IP network and SMTP
implementation -- it's a problem at the CompuServe end. The customer knows
nothing about e-mail gateways, and nor does he care. As far as he's
concered, it doesn't work. And Omnes, as his solutions provider, had better
fix it.

I still haven't worked out how to appease this particular individual: but
my point is that customers dislike "finger pointing" when it comes to
resolving a problem. It won't wash.



| Mathew Lodge: lodge () houston omnes net |5599 San Felipe, 4th Floor |
| Internet Specialist, Omnes -- A       |Houston, Texas 77056, USA  |
| Schlumberger/Cable & Wireless company |Phone: +1 713 513 3237     |
| "Bibunt omnes sine lege"              |Fax:   +1 713 513 3126     |

  By Date           By Thread  

Current thread:
[ Nmap | Sec Tools | Mailing Lists | Site News | About/Contact | Advertising | Privacy ]