Almost without exception, "ring topology" implies a single-carrier doing physical layer provisioning and support. In the case where multiple points are under attack in a concerted effort to knock out service (including the failover capabilities), it's either an "inside job" or, at the least, one where intelligence relating to individual SONET backbones and rings has been obtained from various sources for the purpose of thwarting such _self-healing_ capabilities that are usually afforded by SONET/SDH. In the not too distant past (during the pre-sonet and early SONET days when N+1 automatic protection switching was used instead of counter-rotating recovery schemes) we saw this occur, albeit infrequently, during periods of labor unrest and other tense forms of situations relating to competition (where folks feared for their jobs) along the NY-NJ corridor and in certain parts of California, to name just two that I recall off the top of my head. Until recently (post 9-11), however, it was hardly a matter of overwhelming concern. Today it is becoming more so a matter of heightened concern. Meshing through the use of diverse providers' facilities may prove to be the ultimate means of protection, with the proviso being that those providers are not all sharing the same physical routes. fwiw. FAC
Hi Daniel and all, Yes, multiple fiber in multiple conduits, traveling multiple paths is the best way to insure something's going to have connectivity. Ring topology is what I've seen mostly for best protection, if something goes down, restoration takes milliseconds and is automatic. Worst case, is some contractor digs up the place where your fiber enters your building and severs everything....not much you can do about that kind of outage.
At 20:41 6/16/02 +0200, you wrote:
Hi blitz,
I think that you talk about multiple outage in the Telefonica Network in Spain cause by sabotage. (48 fibers in 4 points at the same time)
I see ok the interest of the ministry, is necessary to assure that outages don't affect to the national infraestruture.
In our case we build our network over diverse companys with diverse path in their fiber network. I see ok, that all companys that operate basic services do it and they will have backup and emergency plans.
Regards, Daniel Intelideas
On Sun, 16 Jun 2002, blitz wrote:
The Spanish ministry of science and technology has asked telecommunications companies to activate a backup plan in the case of such emergencies in future.
Spare fibers in the same duct ;-?
Doesn't sound like it would be much protection from "backhoe fade"...heh
Hmm. How many points of disruption, backhoes, chainsaws, hooligans, etc, would be needed to do this in the US and Canada? 20? 30? Sean Donelan on a specially outfitted Segway? (just picture it...) I suspect that might be a better source of inquiry for our friends in the federal government, then, say, SBGP. Might be useful for the Powers That Be to actually do a simulation of this, and see how far they can get. - Daniel Golding
-----Original Message----- From: owner-nanog@merit.edu [mailto:owner-nanog@merit.edu] On Behalf Of Frank Coluccio Sent: Sunday, June 16, 2002 6:43 PM To: blitz@macronet.net Cc: nanog@trapdoor.merit.edu Subject: Re: Re: spare fibers
Almost without exception, "ring topology" implies a single-carrier doing physical layer provisioning and support. In the case where multiple points are under attack in a concerted effort to knock out service (including the failover capabilities), it's either an "inside job" or, at the least, one where intelligence relating to individual SONET backbones and rings has been obtained from various sources for the purpose of thwarting such _self-healing_ capabilities that are usually afforded by SONET/SDH.
In the not too distant past (during the pre-sonet and early SONET days when N+1 automatic protection switching was used instead of counter-rotating recovery schemes) we saw this occur, albeit infrequently, during periods of labor unrest and other tense forms of situations relating to competition (where folks feared for their jobs) along the NY-NJ corridor and in certain parts of California, to name just two that I recall off the top of my head. Until recently (post 9-11), however, it was hardly a matter of overwhelming concern. Today it is becoming more so a matter of heightened concern. Meshing through the use of diverse providers' facilities may prove to be the ultimate means of protection, with the proviso being that those providers are not all sharing the same physical routes. fwiw.
FAC
Hi Daniel and all, Yes, multiple fiber in multiple conduits, traveling
the best way to insure something's going to have connectivity. Ring topology is what I've seen mostly for best protection, if something goes down, restoration takes milliseconds and is automatic. Worst case, is some contractor digs up the place where your fiber enters your building and severs everything....not much you can do about that kind of outage.
At 20:41 6/16/02 +0200, you wrote:
Hi blitz,
I think that you talk about multiple outage in the Telefonica Network in Spain cause by sabotage. (48 fibers in 4 points at the same time)
I see ok the interest of the ministry, is necessary to assure that outages don't affect to the national infraestruture.
In our case we build our network over diverse companys with diverse path in their fiber network. I see ok, that all companys
basic services do it and they will have backup and emergency plans.
Regards, Daniel Intelideas
On Sun, 16 Jun 2002, blitz wrote:
The Spanish ministry of science and technology has asked telecommunications companies to activate a backup
multiple paths is that operate plan in the
case of such emergencies in future.
Spare fibers in the same duct ;-?
Doesn't sound like it would be much protection from "backhoe fade"...heh
Hahaha...SBGP...Praise you my son. You make very, very, VERY valid points... You made me smile. =] On Sun, 16 Jun 2002, Daniel Golding wrote:
Hmm. How many points of disruption, backhoes, chainsaws, hooligans, etc, would be needed to do this in the US and Canada? 20? 30? Sean Donelan on a specially outfitted Segway? (just picture it...)
I suspect that might be a better source of inquiry for our friends in the federal government, then, say, SBGP.
Might be useful for the Powers That Be to actually do a simulation of this, and see how far they can get.
- Daniel Golding
-----Original Message----- From: owner-nanog@merit.edu [mailto:owner-nanog@merit.edu] On Behalf Of Frank Coluccio Sent: Sunday, June 16, 2002 6:43 PM To: blitz@macronet.net Cc: nanog@trapdoor.merit.edu Subject: Re: Re: spare fibers
Almost without exception, "ring topology" implies a single-carrier doing physical layer provisioning and support. In the case where multiple points are under attack in a concerted effort to knock out service (including the failover capabilities), it's either an "inside job" or, at the least, one where intelligence relating to individual SONET backbones and rings has been obtained from various sources for the purpose of thwarting such _self-healing_ capabilities that are usually afforded by SONET/SDH.
In the not too distant past (during the pre-sonet and early SONET days when N+1 automatic protection switching was used instead of counter-rotating recovery schemes) we saw this occur, albeit infrequently, during periods of labor unrest and other tense forms of situations relating to competition (where folks feared for their jobs) along the NY-NJ corridor and in certain parts of California, to name just two that I recall off the top of my head. Until recently (post 9-11), however, it was hardly a matter of overwhelming concern. Today it is becoming more so a matter of heightened concern. Meshing through the use of diverse providers' facilities may prove to be the ultimate means of protection, with the proviso being that those providers are not all sharing the same physical routes. fwiw.
FAC
Hi Daniel and all, Yes, multiple fiber in multiple conduits, traveling
the best way to insure something's going to have connectivity. Ring topology is what I've seen mostly for best protection, if something goes down, restoration takes milliseconds and is automatic. Worst case, is some contractor digs up the place where your fiber enters your building and severs everything....not much you can do about that kind of outage.
At 20:41 6/16/02 +0200, you wrote:
Hi blitz,
I think that you talk about multiple outage in the Telefonica Network in Spain cause by sabotage. (48 fibers in 4 points at the same time)
I see ok the interest of the ministry, is necessary to assure that outages don't affect to the national infraestruture.
In our case we build our network over diverse companys with diverse path in their fiber network. I see ok, that all companys
basic services do it and they will have backup and emergency plans.
Regards, Daniel Intelideas
On Sun, 16 Jun 2002, blitz wrote:
The Spanish ministry of science and technology has asked telecommunications companies to activate a backup
multiple paths is that operate plan in the
case of such emergencies in future.
Spare fibers in the same duct ;-?
Doesn't sound like it would be much protection from "backhoe fade"...heh
participants (3)
-
Daniel Golding -
dies＠pulltheplug.com -
Frank Coluccio