nanog mailing list archives

Re: Internet FUD Abound


From: David Charlap <david.charlap () marconi com>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 18:16:47 -0400


Sean Donelan wrote:
Andrew Bender wrote:

Another lapse in editorial integrity... this time, Reuters:

http://www.techweb.com/wire/story/reuters/REU20000726S0007

The Reuters article skips over some of the important qualifiers
in the Nature letter.  Read the entire letter on the Nature
website.  http://www.nature.com/

The conclusions are interesting, but I think missing a few pieces
of data.  Every major public NAP has had service affecting incidents,
and so far we have not seen the partioning effect Albert et al write
about.

Note also that the graph they examine is one of web pages linked to each
other.  Not the underlying network of fibers and routers.

And, as you said, there have been catastrophic failures in the past
(even as recent as last month), none of which fragmented the internet. 
Sure, some sites got isolated, but the majority of users didn't notice
anything more than longer response times.

I think there are much more important things to be worried about, like
the security of the DNS system, than a coordinated attack on multiple
major switching centers.

-- David



Current thread: