if not done already, I am wondering if requiring availability of a redundant
network is workable. For example, like the satellite Link such as GEO, have
to be bidirectional, internationally funded by good-will governments
donations?
IETF can work out the technical details?
Pan
-----Original Message-----
From: Sean Donelan [mailto:sean(_at_)donelan(_dot_)com]
Sent: Saturday, December 23, 2000 4:24 AM
To: ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
Cc: Harald(_at_)Alvestrand(_dot_)no;
ieps(_at_)listserv(_dot_)gsfc(_dot_)nasa(_dot_)gov
Subject: RE: International Emergency Preference Scheme
On Fri, 22 December 2000, "Folts, Harold" wrote:
Harald Alvestrand [mailto:Harald(_at_)Alvestrand(_dot_)no] wrote:
note - this effort is focused at recovering the society from
a serious
disaster, not recovering the network, I think.
You are quite right. Recovery operations does primarily mean restoration
for
society. However, recovery of network resources is often necessary to
facilitate the ultimate objective.
Its usually doesn't get addressed directly in the priority scheme, but
elsewhere. If you need to recover the network, none of the government
priority schemes apply. The carrier has first dibs on their own
infrastructure. What gets confusing is we don't have monolithic
vertically integrated carriers. So it is possible to create a recovery
deadlock.