North American Network Operators Group

Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical

Re: definition of unattended operation

  • From: Sean Donelan
  • Date: Mon Mar 01 03:56:52 1999

[email protected] (Steven J. Sobol) writes:
>So, what do you suggest as an alternative?

Other than not having power outages in Herndon, VA?  :-)  Instead of
worrying about passing Cisco's certification test just so I'm allowed
to sell more Cisco hardware (as if Cisco really needs the money), I
sometimes think I should start an independent certification firm to
go around and certify "critical infrastructure" around the net.
Hint: Your emergency phone number should not be routed through
your main PBX.

Anyone care to discuss setting up that emergency phone thing again
in case you can't look up other NOC's phone numbers in WHOIS?
(Inside joke, I'm just venting this morning...)

Back to the subject at hand.

I have a concept of Information Entropy.  Essentially all information
turns into chaos unless a lot of energy is expended to keep it organized.
Maybe I just work with too many librarians all day long, but I don't see
the value in adding more contacts when the current contact information
isn't kept up to date.  SRI and even BBN each undertook projects in
the past to keep the contact information up to date.  But so far the
current custodian has indicated they don't believe it was in the job

Nor do I think setting up yet another directory service is the answer.
Look at the phone companies each starting their own directory companies
giving out three year old information at $1 a query.  Yes, several
people have set up contact web pages, and there are several efforts
to put contact information in DNS (along with everything else).  Peering
agreements have language saying each providing will provide contact

Fact of the matter, there is no penalty or pain for not making up-to-date
technical contact information available to other providers.  Nor is
their any penalty or pain for not maintaining any of the "standard"
contact methods.  On the other hand, there also doesn't seem to be any
penalty or pain for making a false report to an official contact method.
So those providers that attempt to do the right thing are quickly overwhelmed
by the vigilantes.


1) First figure out why providers don't keep their current contact
information up to date.

2) Make it a security and fraud issue.  This isn't a legal list, go talk
to your lawyer why that is important when competitors decided to do something.

3) Only if the reason is providers will handle the messages differently
should additional contacts be listed.  If most providers are going to
aliases them all to the customer service blackhole, its just a waste of
effort, time and space.  I would rather spend the effort, time and space
keeping one contact up to date.
Sean Donelan, Data Research Associates, Inc, St. Louis, MO
  Affiliation given for identification not representation