Home page logo

nanog logo nanog mailing list archives

Re: cyber-redundancy
From: sgorman1 () gmu edu
Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 17:56:51 -0500

They need to know what the most resilient provider or combination of providers is to light up a set of locations.  A 
data pool would not give you the data just the answer.  

I do not think the problem is with the design layout groups.  They have the ROWs they have - there is little change in 
that currently.  Nor is there much incentive to volunteer the information if it could possibly result in the loss of a 
potential customer.  

Currently there is no optimization of the diversity we have because the information is not available to the market to 
make an informed decision.  As a result we have problems like during 9/11 when nobody realized that all the banks where 
using the same circuit to connect to the Fed for fund transfers.  

Simply put the customer needs the information to make the best decision.  I don't think anybody would rely on the 
providers to make the best decision for them.  Trust me I'll give you the best price I am just not going to tell you 
what it is or how that compares to anyone elses prices.  Substitute diversity for price and you get the point.

----- Original Message -----
From: Sean Donelan <sean () donelan com>
Date: Thursday, January 19, 2006 5:34 pm
Subject: cyber-redundancy

On Thu, 19 Jan 2006 sgorman1 () gmu edu wrote:
Agree that a level of security is required, but the real value 
is in
customers like banks knowing where their fiber is, so when they 
lease> service for a back up provider they know it is not in the 
same ditch.

Does the bank actually need that information?  Or does there need to
be a way for the two providers to do conflict detection between their
design layout groups?  You don't need copies of all provider's fiber
maps to do conflict detection for a particular group of circuits.

  By Date           By Thread  

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