|
North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical Re: Internet FUD Abound
At 18:16 07/26/2000 -0400, David Charlap wrote: >Sean Donelan wrote: >> The Reuters article skips over some of the important qualifiers >> in the Nature letter. Read the entire letter on the Nature >> website. http://www.nature.com/ >> >> The conclusions are interesting, but I think missing a few pieces >> of data. Every major public NAP has had service affecting incidents, >> and so far we have not seen the partioning effect Albert et al write >> about. I agree with Sean that the article itself is an interesting read. In fact, I'd say it's better than I expected based on the Reuters report. A key conclusion -- that elimination of a random 2.5% of the routers of the Internet would cause little harm, but elimination of the most central 2.5% of the routers would at least triple the diameter of the network -- is likely correct. (Although I don't think we needed fancy mathematics to tell us that. ;^) Sean, I don't think that they were arguing that EVERY failure would cause this kind of collapse. They were saying that a scale-free system might be particularly vulnerable to a systematic attempt to cripple its most critical elements. A failure of a single public NAP is probably well below that threshhold. > ... and David Charlap wrote: >Note also that the graph they examine is one of web pages linked to each >other. Not the underlying network of fibers and routers... Perhaps you read this too hastily? They appear to have evaluated both. Cheers, - Scott
|