nanog mailing list archives
Re: Limits of reliability or is 99.999999999% realistic
From: Shawn McMahon <smcmahon () eiv com>
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2000 11:28:12 -0500
On Mon, Nov 27, 2000 at 11:07:34AM -0500, Marshall Eubanks wrote:
In spacecraft work, JPL has found that, if you did not strive for "5 sigma's" or even "6 sigma's" of reliability, then there would always be something you hadn't counted on that would drive reliability to zero.
NASA's needs don't reflect our needs. If my router fails, I can get to it to fix it in seconds, and if I need to replace it I don't have to wait five years to launch and another year to reach the target. If I have to have a replacement overnighted, I'm still only down a day, not a decade. Also, NASA's budget for a POP on Mars is a little higher than my budget for a POP in Colorado Springs. Hell, their budget for a single lander is probably higher than my budget for an entire data center.
Attachment:
_bin
Description:
Current thread:
- Limits of reliability or is 99.999999999% realistic Sean Donelan (Nov 25)
- Re: Limits of reliability or is 99.999999999% realistic Patrick Greenwell (Nov 26)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- Limits of reliability or is 99.999999999% realistic Toby_Williams (Nov 27)
- Re: Limits of reliability or is 99.999999999% realistic Marshall Eubanks (Nov 27)
- Re: Limits of reliability or is 99.999999999% realistic Shawn McMahon (Nov 27)
- Re: Limits of reliability or is 99.999999999% realistic hardie (Nov 27)
- Re: Limits of reliability or is 99.999999999% realistic Bennett Todd (Nov 27)
- Re: Limits of reliability or is 99.999999999% realistic Brian W. (Nov 27)
- RE: Limits of reliability or is 99.999999999% realistic Christian Kuhtz (Nov 27)
- Re: Limits of reliability or is 99.999999999% realistic Marshall Eubanks (Nov 27)
- Re: Limits of reliability or is 99.999999999% realistic Allan Carscaddon (Nov 27)