On Fri, 2006-12-22 at 17:22 +1300, Steve Wray wrote:
What amazes me is that Telstra maintain that a truck
hitting a pole was
a *completely* unforseeable event and that even in retrospect they could
not have been expected to have forseen that *one* *day* a truck would
hit a 'single-point-of-failure pole' and that they could not have been
expected to have planned for it.
I ask you, is that really reasonable?
In defence of our friends at TCL..
In a world of infinite budgets, yes. In the world of reality, no.
Single Points of failure are like 'whack a mole' in some respects.
They're always there, and all you can really do is shift them to a place
of least damage and least probability. In the scheme of things, some
plonker with an (illegal?) oversized truck is in the realms of extremely
Also, is there anywhere which keeps a log of outages
experienced by NZ
ISP's, how long they last etc?
The first step is standardising on the format that we inform people.
Aggregating things to form reliable stats after that is easier. I opened
my mouth about something like that on NZNOG a while back and then
rapidly ran out of time to actually do something about it. Que Sera
But it's on the backboiler, so at some point something like you mention
may come to life.
Hmm.. Maybe we should get Uma Thurman on the case.