Subject: redundancy RE: [Ieprep] any commercial usage for "emergency QoS"?

From: "Gunn, Janet" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 10:47:43 -0500

At least one perspective on IEPREP is "opportunistic" use of Internet
resources.  Many of the organizations involved in emergency preparedness and
reaction DO have "private" communications facilities of some sort.  However,
these facilities are no where near as ubiquitous as the public
communications facilities (PSTN and Internet).  The idea is to be able to
take advantage of "whatever IS there" when the emergency takes place, until
the dedicated facilities can be installed (e.g., a FEMA portable "site").

I think all your suggestions on redundancy are very valid (for both
emergency and on-emergency uses), but I don't know whether they fall within
the scope of IEPREP, or even IETF.

-----Original Message-----
From: Carl Ford [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: Thursday, November 28, 2002 9:11 AM
To: Bill Woodcock; Carl Ford; [email-masked]; [email-masked];
[email-masked]
Subject: Re: [Ieprep] any commercial usage for "emergency QoS"?

I was hoping for a discussion on redundancy.  

As a "bell-head" I have been involved in providing customers with alternate
serving 
wire centers and SONET.  Both were aimed at making the communication path
more 
redundant, but both were from the same provider.  With the Internet my sense
is that 
we can provide better redundancy by saying the following.

1 ISPs should be chosen that are not utilizing the same methodology of
transport.  
Wireless, dial-up, dedicated (particularly if selected from an alternative
carrier) all add 
to redundancy.

2) Internal Intranets that support multiple connection points to ISPs
provide even more 
redundancy.  I am not sure here if it should be stated that some reserve to
rebuild a 
backbone may be a good idea.

3) Security and QoS methodologies should be thought of as when available,
and 
ingress into them should be planned for an any to any methodology.  Meaning
it is 
great if we give the emergency services there own edge devices with priority
services, 
but it probably more likely that they are going to have to connect up at a
library / 
Internet Cafe using some low quality edge point to reach the Internet.

Am I making sense?

Kind Regards,

Carl Ford 

> On Thu, 28 Nov 2002, Carl Ford wrote:
>     > My first question would be what if access were to be unattainable
>     > to the Internet.
> 
> That certainly happens, as we've all noticed from time to time.  And when
> it does, no amount of QoS or additional rules or more fragile routers or
> guys with guns are going to move your packets for you.  The only thing
> that's going to help is having your connectivity restored, and the only
> way that'll happen quickly is if you share fate with the largest number of
> other users.  That is, when there's a problem, you _really_ want to be
> _just like everybody else_, since the aggregated bulk of the users are the
> ones who'll be restored first.
> 
>     > But fundamentally the question that should be asked is what
>     > scenarios are there that would make the Internet inaccessible and
>     > what should be done to prepare for that.
> 
> Keep a candle, some matches, and a good book handy?  :-)
> 
>                                 -Bill

--
Sent from KGB Internet Solutions OpenWebMail
http://www.kgbinternet.com

_______________________________________________
Ieprep mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ieprep
_______________________________________________
Ieprep mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ieprep