links on the blink (fwd)

Steven J. Richardson sjr at
Mon Nov 6 20:18:15 UTC 1995

  >From list-admin at Sat Nov  4 15:13:10 1995
  >Date: Sat, 4 Nov 1995 12:48:36 -0800 (PST)
  >From: Michael Dillon <michael at>
  >X-Sender: michael at
  >To: Hans-Werner Braun <hwb at>
  >cc: Mike <mn at>, nathan at, nanog at,
  >        D.Mills at
  >Subject: Re: links on the blink (fwd)
  >In-Reply-To: <199511041859.KAA08467 at>
  >Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.3.91.951104123440.12997A-100000 at>
  >On Sat, 4 Nov 1995, Hans-Werner Braun wrote:
  >> I will not go into a point by point rebuttal here, even though I
  >> generally do not subscribe to your arguments. I am not planning on
  >> "winning" here, I just want to get the issues on the table and evaluate
  >> the solution space. Just let me ask you, as a customer who fairly
  >> frequently experiences 10% packet loss between major Internet locations
  >> across major service providers (no mom and pop shops in the middle or
  >> at the end points), how would you suggest I deal with that? 
  >Uh... Ignore it?
  >10% packet loss is quite within the normal range of parameters for a 
  >packet switching network such as the Internet. If you want 0% packet loss, 
  >you can lease your own private point-to-point lines.
  Uh...  Michael, when we were running the NSFNET, as Hans-Werner and
  many readers of this list are well aware, we did _not_ accept 10% packet
  loss on any link or across the network.  These problems stayed with 
  the NSFNET NOC until resolution by the provider, MCI.  We only considered 
  -0%- loss to be acceptable.

  Sorry if others also responded to this,

  Steve Richardson/Merit

  >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