inauguration streams review

Paul Stewart pstewart at nexicomgroup.net
Wed Jan 21 12:54:17 CST 2009


Just curious on that note with COW .. did you have much security related
problems setting up stuff nearby?

-----Original Message-----
From: Mike Lyon [mailto:mike.lyon at gmail.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2009 1:52 PM
To: Jack Carrozzo
Cc: nanog at nanog.org
Subject: Re: inauguration streams review

How many simultaneous connections can each COW handle? What kind of
backhaul
connections do they have?

-Mike


On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 10:49 AM, Jack Carrozzo <jack at crepinc.com>
wrote:

> I can't comment on revenue-generation, though access as a whole was
quite
> high.
>
> We hardly had any voice IAs (Ineffective Attempts, or 'Busy'
> messages). Since data can be queued, the only thing that would cause
> data IAs are bad RF conditions - we had a TON of 'cell on wheels' in
> the area for the event so we had enough carrier space to cover it.
>
> In-network data response times were hardly affected, with switch loads
> well below 50%. In-network SMS were still getting to their
> destinations in under 5 seconds for the most part.... I don't have any
> numbers on MMS or mobile IP data at the moment, though I would have
> heard if something horrible had happened.
>
> I'm told that the out-of-network SMS queue was piling pretty high at
> one point, to delivery times up to an hour, though they all still got
> there. We can't control other network's switches obviously.
>
> This isn't trying to sound like an advertisement - *I'm* not affected
> either way if people sign up with us as I'm not in sales, however from
> my point of view it looks like we had the most solid network... Our
> guys were planning and setting things up since June.
>
> Cheers,
>
> -Jack Carrozzo
>
> On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 1:29 PM, Peter Beckman <beckman at angryox.com>
> wrote:
> > On Tue, 20 Jan 2009, Jack Carrozzo wrote:
> >
> >> Cell networks held up reasonably well for voice, though SMS and MMS
> >> delivery times approached an hour during the event. Switch load in
> >> almost the entire US was higher than midnight on New Years (which
is
> >> generally the highest load of the year).
> >>
> >> Our network has been preparing since June, and I assume likewise
for
> >> others.
> >
> >  Unfortunately for me Sprint did not seem to prepare or have enough
> >  capacity for Voice, SMS or Data access.  No live Twitter blogging!
> >
> >  While I was able to get a few (maybe 5 between 10am and 2pm) text
> messages
> >  out while standing near the Washington Monument, calls and data
were an
> >  impossibility, and SMS only seemed to have capacity available
during
> lulls
> >  in the Inaugural activity.
> >
> >  It was disappointing as a customer -- I'm sure that, had the
capacity
> been
> >  there, the revenue from that single event would have made a
significant
> >  impact on any of the carrier's revenue, at least for the month.
> >
> >> -Jack Carrozzo
> >> (Engineer at $large cell company whose policy doesn't allow me to
> specify)
> >
> >  (Google spills the beans!)  I'm curious if you can find out -- did
the
> >  record traffic positively affect revenue for that period compared
to
> last
> >  year at the same time, or even last week on the same day?
> >
> >  And from a more technical standpoint, did your $large cell company
put
> up
> >  temporary towers?  I'm curious as to how your company added
capacity to
> >  handle the event, as well as how many "Network Busy" messages
customers
> >  got, if any.  I know I got more of those messages than I did
successful
> >  communications.
> >
> > Beckman
> >
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
---
> > Peter Beckman
Internet
> Guy
> > beckman at angryox.com
> http://www.angryox.com/
> >
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
---
> >
>


 

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

"The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and contains confidential and/or privileged material. If you received this in error, please contact the sender immediately and then destroy this transmission, including all attachments, without copying, distributing or disclosing same. Thank you."




More information about the NANOG mailing list