-----Original Message----- From: owner-nanog@merit.edu [mailto:owner-nanog@merit.edu]On Behalf Of Peter Galbavy Sent: Friday, December 21, 2001 5:47 AM To: Sean Donelan; nanog@merit.edu Subject: Re: Automated DLR conflict detection
On many occasions in my prior life at Demon Internet we laughed sales people out of meetings when they offered SLAs that were limited to the value of a months service. But, in the end *all* the salepeople offered the same deal. Until when SLAs come with a pay back greater than the cost of the contract, and in fact cover consequential losses, most service providers will treat the failure to deliver within the SLA as a risk associated with the service and not something more serious.
However: Would you (or anyone in the group) be willing to pay a premium for that, and how much is a "real" SLA, one covering consequential losses, worth to you? Marc Pierrat marc@sunchar.com www.sunchar.com
On many occasions in my prior life at Demon Internet we laughed sales
You misunderstand. Which operators will offer this (backed by some underwritten insurance) in an effort to be better than the competition ? Peter ----- Original Message ----- From: "Marc Pierrat" <marc@sunchar.com> To: <nanog@merit.edu> Sent: Friday, December 21, 2001 6:50 PM Subject: RE: Automated DLR conflict detection -----Original Message----- From: owner-nanog@merit.edu [mailto:owner-nanog@merit.edu]On Behalf Of Peter Galbavy Sent: Friday, December 21, 2001 5:47 AM To: Sean Donelan; nanog@merit.edu Subject: Re: Automated DLR conflict detection people
out of meetings when they offered SLAs that were limited to the value of a months service. But, in the end *all* the salepeople offered the same deal. Until when SLAs come with a pay back greater than the cost of the contract, and in fact cover consequential losses, most service providers will treat the failure to deliver within the SLA as a risk associated with the service and not something more serious.
However: Would you (or anyone in the group) be willing to pay a premium for that, and how much is a "real" SLA, one covering consequential losses, worth to you? Marc Pierrat marc@sunchar.com www.sunchar.com
You know, I keep looking at the subject of this thread and wondering what Dave Rand is up to. -- J.D. Falk "you can bomb the world to pieces, <jdfalk@cybernothing.org> but you can't bomb it into peace" -- Michael Franti
On many occasions in my prior life at Demon Internet we laughed sales
It's a great question. For an operator to offer such a contract, I would imagine these assumptions must hold true: 1) The operator has a profit motivation: to sell what you and others will buy 2) that you and others are willing to pay a premium for a service that includes consequential damages in the SLA over a service that does not 3) that consequential damages can be defined to mutual satisfaction 4) the operator has the ability to quantify what the premium should be (the statistics of reliability and service delivery economics) 5) Starting reliability plus the overhead burden of managing such an SLA is such that the calculated premium is both marketable and profitable I might have missed a few, but it's a start - Is this how you see the problem? Marc -----Original Message----- From: Peter Galbavy [mailto:peter.galbavy@knowtion.net] Sent: Sunday, December 23, 2001 6:32 AM To: Marc Pierrat; nanog@merit.edu Subject: Re: Automated DLR conflict detection You misunderstand. Which operators will offer this (backed by some underwritten insurance) in an effort to be better than the competition ? Peter ----- Original Message ----- From: "Marc Pierrat" <marc@sunchar.com> To: <nanog@merit.edu> Sent: Friday, December 21, 2001 6:50 PM Subject: RE: Automated DLR conflict detection people
out of meetings when they offered SLAs that were limited to the value of a months service. But, in the end *all* the salepeople offered the same deal. Until when SLAs come with a pay back greater than the cost of the contract, and in fact cover consequential losses, most service providers will treat the failure to deliver within the SLA as a risk associated with the service and not something more serious.
However: Would you (or anyone in the group) be willing to pay a premium for that, and how much is a "real" SLA, one covering consequential losses, worth to you? Marc Pierrat marc@sunchar.com www.sunchar.com
On Sun, 23 Dec 2001, Peter Galbavy wrote:
You misunderstand. Which operators will offer this (backed by some underwritten insurance) in an effort to be better than the competition ?
Buying car insurance doesn't alter the chances of your car breaking down on a long trip. Insurance doesn't alter the chances of something bad happening. Driver training, seat belts, and spare tires are things which can reduce risk. A warranty is not a substitute for due dilegence. How can you perform due dilegence on a carrier? With a car, you can open the trunk and check the spare tire. What is the best way to check a spare circuit?
On Sun, 23 Dec 2001, Peter Galbavy wrote:
You misunderstand. Which operators will offer this (backed by some underwritten insurance) in an effort to be better than the competition ?
Buying car insurance doesn't alter the chances of your car breaking down on a long trip. Insurance doesn't alter the chances of something bad happening. Driver training, seat belts, and spare tires are things which can reduce risk.
A warranty is not a substitute for due dilegence.
How can you perform due dilegence on a carrier? With a car, you can open the trunk and check the spare tire. What is the best way to check a spare circuit?
To me, the diverse route *is* the safety belt. If it does not work when it is supposed to, I (or my mourning relatives) will sue the car companies arse off - if the attribution for the failure rests with a design of manufacturing flaw. Safety / Seat belts are not decoration - and neither should a diverse route or protection circuit be. (Yes, my English can boldly go... but I am still waiting for the coffee to finish.) Peter
On Sat, 29 Dec 2001 04:32:08 EST, Sean Donelan said:
How can you perform due dilegence on a carrier? With a car, you can open the trunk and check the spare tire. What is the best way to check a spare circuit?
How do you know it's a <insert vendor> field engineer trying to fix a flat tire? He keeps swapping tires till he finds the flat one... Make sure your testing procedure *really* tests the actual spare circuit, not something else's representation of one. I know one poor soul who wrote software to monitor-via-ping the other end of a point-to-point, then watched in horror as a co-worker accidentally removed the entire DSU from the rack, unwilling to say "Wait, that's the wrong one" because the monitor hadn't burped an error. Guess who's network was basically a triangle? ;) -- Valdis Kletnieks Operating Systems Analyst Virginia Tech
participants (5)
-
J.D. Falk -
Marc Pierrat -
Peter Galbavy -
Sean Donelan -
Valdis.Kletnieks＠vt.edu