[Outages-discussion] [outages] Fwd: OC 192 Outage in OR/WA

[Jay Ashworth]

----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jeremy Chadwick" <outages at jdc.parodius.com>

> On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 12:03:44PM -0500, Jay Ashworth wrote:
> > Yeah, but after you're done paying the class-action settlement with your
> > customers who were *pretty sure* they'd contracted with you for protected
> > service, and their attorneys' fees, the profit's a little lower, no?
> 
> Who to date has ever attempted that? Have any references or historical
> cases I can read?

I didn't suggest anyone had.  But people certainly *could*, and were I
a carrier, I'd be pretty stupid not to take it into account, no?

If you contract to deliver protected service, and someone can prove that
you *purposely* didn't bother to engineer for it/purposely sold the
protect capacity to other customers as primary, then your neck would
be out a country mile.

> I can mirror Bill's sentiments and experience here, especially when
> working with the "big boys" (AT&T, Verizon, Abovenet, L3, etc.). It's
> impossible to say whether the decisions made during provisioning and
> deployment were done to save money, or out of sheer laziness. I tend
> to think it's the latter.

Could be.  Malice, negligence... doesn't really matter to a lawyer.

> I do recognise that in some cases there are physical limitations that
> trump all of the above (ex. only one conduit available for long-haul
> as a result of a huge mountain being in the way).

Sure.  But we're not discussing simply whether the carrier could *deliver*
protected capacity... we're discussing whether *they sold it to customers
anyway*, knowing that they *could not*.

Cheers,
-- jr 'oh; brakes will be in v1.2' a