nanog mailing list archives
Re: Risk of Internet collapse grows
From: David Diaz <techlist () smoton net>
Date: Thu, 28 Nov 2002 09:27:09 -0500
Well, it seems the national news medias picked up on this story. How us "geniuses" re-engineered the internet into a few points that could be knocked out, killing the internet. The explanation used a bad analogy to explain it to the public.
As already mentioned a lot of bad assumptions were made, and now we will be questioned based on those assumptions.
There has to be a better way for us to play devil's advocate without media feedback.
Happy Thanksgiving. Dave At 0:17 +0000 11/28/02, Stephen J. Wilcox wrote:
On Wed, 27 Nov 2002, Sean Donelan wrote:On Wed, 27 Nov 2002 sgorman1 () gmu edu wrote: > The full paper is available at: > > http://whopper.sbs.ohio-state.edu/grads/tgrubesi/survive.pdf > > password: grubesic > > It was posted on the www.cybergeography.org website with the password, > plus I'm sure Tony would like the feedback. Was this paper peer reviewed ? I'm interested in the problem, but this is not the paper.Not -the- answer but a part of perhaps. I think the paper helps in appreciationof the maths and processes behind the conceptAT&T's network is the most vulnerable? While Onyx is among the least vulnerable? Onyx is bankrupt, and their network is no longer in operation. I guess you could argue Onyx not vulnerable any more. This paper starts out with some bad assumptions, such as there is one NAP in a city, one path between cities or the marketing maps in Boardwatch are meaningful.It does mention there being more than one NAP...Its also highlighting a point about increased resiliency through mesh redundancyand it does acknowledge differences of scale.Until we figure out how to collect some meaningful starting data, we can't draw these types of conclusions.And therein lies the problem! Plenty of room for theorising tho! Steve
-- David Diaz dave () smoton net [Email] pagedave () smoton net [Pager] www.smoton.net [Peering Site under development] Smotons (Smart Photons) trump dumb photons
Current thread:
- Re: Risk of Internet collapse grows, (continued)
- Re: Risk of Internet collapse grows variable (Nov 27)
- Re: Risk of Internet collapse grows Stephen J. Wilcox (Nov 27)
- Re: Risk of Internet collapse grows David Diaz (Nov 27)
- Re: Risk of Internet collapse grows Vadim Antonov (Nov 27)
- Re: Risk of Internet collapse grows Richard Irving (Nov 27)
- Re: Risk of Internet collapse grows variable (Nov 27)
- Re: Risk of Internet collapse grows Andrew Odlyzko (Nov 27)
- Re: Risk of Internet collapse grows sgorman1 (Nov 27)
- Re: Risk of Internet collapse grows Sean Donelan (Nov 27)
- Re: Risk of Internet collapse grows Mike (meuon) Harrison (Nov 27)
- Re: Risk of Internet collapse grows Stephen J. Wilcox (Nov 27)
- Re: Risk of Internet collapse grows David Diaz (Nov 28)
- Re: Risk of Internet collapse grows Stephen J. Wilcox (Nov 28)
- Re: Risk of Internet collapse grows Sean Donelan (Nov 27)
- Federal Reserve Risks Collapse Re: Risk of Internet collapse grows Sean Donelan (Nov 28)
- Re: Federal Reserve Risks Collapse Re: Risk of Internet collapse grows Bill Woodcock (Nov 28)
- Re: Federal Reserve Risks Collapse Re: Risk of Internet collapse grows Stephen Stuart (Nov 28)