Do ATM-based Exchange Points make sense anymore?

Sat Aug 10 15:41:52 UTC 2002

On Sat, Aug 10, 2002 at 11:20:44AM -0400, Richard A Steenbergen wrote:
> 
> On Sat, Aug 10, 2002 at 06:09:05PM +0300, Petri Helenius wrote:
> > 
> > If the software MTBF would be better, convergence would not be an issue.
> > As long as it's an operational hazard to run core boxes (with some
> > vendors anyway)  with older piece of code than six months, you end up
> > engineering convergence into the networks.
> 
> Odd, I think most people would say it's an operational hazard to run code
> newer than 6 months old, or at least with less than 6 months of testing on
> any particular image.

	With all the recent software secuirty advisories that affect
many vendors (ssh, snmp, etc..) running anything older than that is
a blatant security risk for anyones network.  Not keeping up-to-date
on these items and thinking you're fine is just asking to be
brought down.

> How they're able to completely break so many critically important things
> within 2 weeks between a bugfix code rev is still beyond me. :)

	I'm not sure what vendor you are refering to, but i've not seen
any problems like this anytime in the past 6+ months.

	- jared

-- 
Jared Mauch  | pgp key available via finger from jared at puck.nether.net
clue++;      | http://puck.nether.net/~jared/  My statements are only mine.