Home page logo
/

nanog logo nanog mailing list archives

RE: Yahoo, Google, Microsoft contact?
From: "Frank Bulk" <frnkblk () iname com>
Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2006 11:11:23 -0600


I'm sorry, but being a larger company requires more resources to support it.
Our upstream provider has only 3 to 5 people in their NOC during the day,
but they only serve a couple dozen ITCs.  A bigger company generates more
revenue and accordingly has increased responsibilities.  Largish companies
benefit from economies of scale (their overnight crew *actually* has calls
to take) and will likely have better processes in place to handle things
efficiently.    

What do you think the messages:NOC man-hours ratio is?  I would argue that
smaller operations provide better service, but it costs them more per
message, or whatever metric you want to use.

Frank

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-nanog () merit edu [mailto:owner-nanog () merit edu] On Behalf Of
Christopher L. Morrow
Sent: Friday, February 03, 2006 10:37 AM
To: Ivan Groenewald
Cc: Valdis.Kletnieks () vt edu; nanog () merit edu; 'Gadi Evron'; 'n3td3v'
Subject: RE: Yahoo, Google, Microsoft contact?



On Fri, 3 Feb 2006, Ivan Groenewald wrote:


Earlier, Valdis scribbled:
There's also the deeper question:  Why do we let the situation persist?
Why do we tolerate the continued problems from unreachable companies?
(And yes, this *is* an operational issue - what did that 4 hours on the
phone cost your company's bottom line in wasted time?)


To a certain extent, it's simple economic logic.
At the end of the day, I got my issue sorted and it cost me 4 hours of
billable time. It cost the other party 15 minutes of time. Why employ
another person full time to deal with queries or man an email desk, to
save
*me* 3h45min? It makes economic sense for bigger companies not to, well,
"care". They aren't going to go away, you're not going to get in the way
of
the big Google/MS/BigCorp(tm) engine with gripes on your blog, so why
bother
spending more money on helping *you*?

It might sound very black and white, but I can tell you now that a lot of
these companies use that as a rationale even without thinking about it so
directly.

actually, working for a largish company, I'd say one aspect not recognized
is the scale on their side of the problem... abuse () mci|uu|vzb gets (on a
bad month) 800k messages, on a 'good' month only 400k ... how many do
yahoo/google/msn get? How many do their role accounts get for
hostmaster/postmaster/routing/peering ?? Expecting that you can send an
email and get a response 'quickly' is just no reasonable unless you expect
just an auto-ack from their ticketting system.

-Chris


  By Date           By Thread  

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