On Fri, 29 June 2001, Rishi Singh wrote:
I offering a general apology to the entire nanog list. At least one subscriber found my post about the NASDAQ outage not relevant to the charter of NANOG.
Those that don't remember the past are doomed to repeat it. The fact it was NASDAQ is not very interesting. The fact some error by a network technician disrupted a large, normally reliable is relevant to network operators. Did the network technician have a chance, make a mistake, or was it inherent to the equipment or design? Was the root cause a vulnerability that other network operators may also have in their network. The reason why NRIC and the FCC require telecommunication carriers report errors isn't to punish bad network technicians. But to identify and correct common errors which may exist in multiple carriers. Sticking your head in the sand, and not talking about it doesn't fix anything. If you do not know what went wrong with Worldcom's network, you don't know if your network may be vulnerable to the same thing. Problems in non-Internet networks have later shown up in the same equipment and operations used for the Internet.