From nanog-bounces+bonomi=mail.r-bonomi.com@nanog.org Mon Jun 1 18:30:48 2009 Date: Mon, 01 Jun 2009 15:40:31 -0700 From: Charles Wyble <charles@thewybles.com> To: "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org> Subject: Fiber cut - response in seconds?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/05/30/AR2009053002...

Not sure if I fully believe the article. Responding to a fiber cut in seconds?

I *don't* believe it, _as_written_. If one takes 'in seconds' to mean single-digit quantities, they had to be: in the vehicle, with the engine running transmission in gear, starting from within a few hundred feet, with no interfering traffic AND no opposing traffic light. Now, change the 'facts' of the scenario "slightly", and it becomes a bunch more believable. Allow 'double-digit' numbers of seconds, from the time the crew _noticed_ the cut, and it gets a bit less fantastic. Postulate some form of 'damage' to the cable -- maybe a kink, that stretched, but did not sever the cable, or more likely, a pressure rupture in an enclosing safety guard, -- such as a 'near miss' by a back-hoe might cause a few scoops before the cable was completely severed, plus allow for a little time between actual cable severance, and the cut cable becomes _visible_; now you're looking at 5-10 minutes from 'first warning' of a problem at the NOC (with TDR type gear giving approximate location) and the 'rapid response' team on site. They'd have to be on an alert status comparable to the old SAC first alert bomber crews, and probably based within 3-5 miles, but things are now within the realm of beleivability. Not saying I _do_ believe it, but we're into the range of "might, maybe, possibly, happen that way", without having to postulate a TARDUS. <grin> I would have expected such a crew to be eqipped with, and need to _use_, 'lights and sirens', and *big* air horns, in dealing with traffic on the roadway -- *AND* I would have expected that 'minor detal' to have been noted by the work crew. As for the last part -- about the billing issue -- assuming that the construction contractor had called JULIE (The undergournd utilities marking service) and gotten the sign-off from all the carriers, they _were_ 'home free'. The carrier who 'failed to mark' their cable gets to pay the cost of replacement.