Internet Backbone Index
black at zen.cypher.net
Sat Jun 28 02:06:05 UTC 1997
On Fri, 27 Jun 1997, Jack Rickard wrote:
> > apparently your definition of nonconfrontational includes calling people
> > morons. i think i will expand my definition of "editor" to include
> > clueless network engineer wannabes.
> As I recall, you specifically began the name calling episode.
"mom, he started it!"...i have no recollection of starting any name
calling, but i also don't recall making a claim to be nonconfrontational.
> > since you obviously don't know a thing about how things like peering,
> > NAPs, IP routing, and all the other components of network engineering
> > work, i this it humorous.
> Actually I know quite a bit about them. If it is obvious to you otherwise,
> it becomes rather obvious that you don't.
you have provided no evidence that you are actually familiar with even
the most basic concepts of large-scale network engineering with IP. the
only obvious thing here is that you edit a magazine that 5 years ago
stated that the internet is insignificant and BBSs would carry the day.
> > so you are hoping backbone providers move their own home page web servers
> > in order to skew a severely limited and obviously bogus benchmark? if it
> > is as easy as that to change the results, don't you think perhaps there
> > is something radically wrong with your methodology? wouldn't that seem
> > to indicate this so-called benchmark isn't really testing what it
> > purports to?
> I don't think it will be that easy, which if you could read you would see
i can read just fine, thank you. and what i see is you backpedalling.
you specifically stated that you hoped backbone providers would move
their web servers to the absolute best spot on their network (assuming
that were a static location). how exactly does that improve service for
either their dialup, direct digital, or colocation customers?
such a move would accomplish *nothing* other than potentially skewing
your benchmarks int heir favor.
again i ask, what has that got to do with providing the best possible
service for *customers*?
> in the comments you quoted. No, I don't think there is something radically
> wrong with the methodology. I have no hopes for what providers do. They
other than specifically stating you hope providers move their web
hosts...you have an amazingly short memory.
> can do whatever they like. We will continue to publish test results. How
> they react to them is no affair of mine.
then why are you posting on nanog?
More information about the NANOG