links on the blink (fwd)

Michael Dillon michael at
Sun Nov 5 05:08:46 UTC 1995

On Sat, 4 Nov 1995, Scott Bradner wrote:

> > 10% packet loss is quite within the normal range of parameters for a
> > packet switching network such as the Internet.
> Well, I don't think I will need to be reminded not to buy Internet service
> from your organization.

Why not? We don't run the Internet, we just connect people to it. And our 
10Mbps fibre ATM link rarely gets to 25% utilization.

> I consider it a problem when the loss exceeds 1% through this long path -
> as do the people who run the networks that my traffic passes through.  The
> normal loss through this path is less than 1% and, much of the time it is 0.

momentary samples such as yours are meaningless. One moment you can have 
0% loss, the next moment 10%. I will agree that sustained high loss 
levels are not acceptable, but isolated ping measurements do not measure 

> > But nothing is broken. There is no inter-ISP level.
> It is so much easier to just say it is the other guy's problem.
> Hans-Werner suggests that most phone companies do not take this attitude,

I disagree. If you get busy signals or recorded messages from a telco 
other than the one who provides your local phone service, the most they 
will do is to promise you that they will look into it and/or inform the 
company whose service appears to be the problem. This is all any ISP can 
do when a customer complains that ISP X is not reachable or that ISP X's 
site appears to be overloaded. I am talking about ISP's here, not NSP's.

Michael Dillon                                    Voice: +1-604-546-8022
Memra Software Inc.                                 Fax: +1-604-542-4130                             E-mail: michael at

More information about the NANOG mailing list