IP: Price of copper must be good: [risks] Risks Digest 21.26

[David Farber <dave@farber.net>]

>Date: Thu, 01 Mar 2001 07:35:22 +0000
>From: Malcolm Pack <risks2@potnoodle.net>
>Subject: >Subject: SETI@Home felled by a Single Point of Failure
>
>After being unavailable for over 24 hours, the home page for the >After being unavailable for over 24 hours, the home page for the SETI@Home
>project, <http://setiathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/>, has currently (1 March 2001)
>been set to redirect to a holding page at
><http://www.net.berkeley.edu/setiathome/>.
>
>| Fiber cut silences >| Fiber cut silences SETI@Home
>|
>| At about 3:30 AM PST on 27 February an optical fiber cable connecting
>| the U.C. Berkeley campus with the Lawrence Berkeley National
>| Laboratory was cut, apparently by vandals trying to "salvage" copper
>| from other nearby cables.
>|
>| The broken fiber carries data and voice connections for LBNL and also
>| for the Space Sciences Lab. SSL is where the >| for the Space Sciences Lab. SSL is where the SETI@Home project is
>| located, so the millions of participants helping to analyze data have
>| been unable to contact the >| been unable to contact the SETI@Home servers for more than a day.
>|
>| Contractors are pulling new cable now. It's expected that service to
>| SSL will be restored by Friday, 2 March 2001. We'll update this page
>| as we learn more about the progress of the repairs.
>
>I infer either:
>
>o       Traffic to and from the >o       Traffic to and from the SET@Home servers is too great to be
>         permitted to use any backup connection that exists between the
>         two facilities.
>
>or
>
>o       LBNL and SSL are cut off from the 'Net altogether until this
>         SPF is repaired.
>
>The loss of processing time to the project is unimportant in terms of
>contribution to overall success or failure (I doubt ET will be too
>upset if we find him/her/it/them 4 days later than expected), but the
>drop-out rate may increase as people simply give up instead of
>checking the home page for an explanation for their lack of progress.
>
>Malcolm Pack



For archives see: http://www.interesting-people.org/