nanog mailing list archives
RE: Great job AT&T (re: Microsoft problems)
From: Roeland Meyer <rmeyer () mhsc com>
Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 15:02:39 -0800
From: Craig Partridge [mailto:craig () aland bbn com] Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2001 1:33 PM In message <3A6F3FB8.FA526852 () senie com>, Daniel Senie writes:Looking at traces to Microsoft's DNS servers (which are all hosted on the same ISP backbone, bad idea) shows 50% packet loss right now from ATT Broadband. It's possible the servers will actually answer DNS queries, but the protocols don't survive all that well in the face of 50% or greater packet loss.Past evidence (like times in 1987 and 1988 when we ran the DNS over links with 50% loss and higher, and experience on the bottlenecked trans Atlantic cable a few years back) suggests the DNS works pretty well with high loss regimes.
s/pretty/amazingly/
Current thread:
- Re: Great job AT&T (re: Microsoft problems), (continued)
- Re: Great job AT&T (re: Microsoft problems) Steven J. Sobol (Feb 24)
- Re: Great job AT&T (re: Microsoft problems) Jeff Frost (Feb 24)
- Re: Great job AT&T (re: Microsoft problems) Mike Lewinski (Feb 24)
- Re: Great job AT&T (re: Microsoft problems) Stephen J. Wilcox (Feb 24)
- Re: Great job AT&T (re: Microsoft problems) Charles Sprickman (Feb 24)
- Re: Great job AT&T (re: Microsoft problems) Valdis . Kletnieks (Feb 24)
- Re: Great job AT&T (re: Microsoft problems) Tony Rall (Feb 24)
- Re: Great job AT&T (re: Microsoft problems) Jeff Frost (Feb 24)
- Re: Great job AT&T (re: Microsoft problems) poptix (Feb 24)
- RE: Great job AT&T (re: Microsoft problems) Chris Davis (Feb 24)
- RE: Great job AT&T (re: Microsoft problems) Roeland Meyer (Feb 24)
- Re: Great job AT&T (re: Microsoft problems) Richard A. Steenbergen (Feb 24)
- RE: Great job AT&T (re: Microsoft problems) Roeland Meyer (Feb 24)
- Re: Great job AT&T (re: Microsoft problems) Steve Sobol (Feb 24)
- RE: Great job AT&T (re: Microsoft problems) Roeland Meyer (Feb 24)