From list-admin@merit.edu Sat Nov 4 15:13:10 1995
>Date: Sat, 4 Nov 1995 12:48:36 -0800 (PST)
>From: Michael Dillon <michael@memra.com>
>X-Sender: michael@okjunc.junction.net
>To: Hans-Werner Braun <hwb@upeksa.sdsc.edu>
>cc: Mike <mn@tremere.ios.com>, nathan@netrail.net, nanog@merit.edu,
> D.Mills@cs.ucl.ac.uk
>Subject: Re: links on the blink (fwd)
>In-Reply-To: <199511041859.KAA08467@upeksa.sdsc.edu>
>Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.3.91.951104123440.12997A-100000@okjunc.junction.net>
>
>> 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