I think one of the articles pointed out that the NZSE was no longer able to sync between AKL and WGN, so the closed it (rather than crashing it). And what are the odds that Telecom is (a) a major share holder in NZSE and/or (b) a major vendor and/or (c) a major client (well we know this) - and either by force or political persuasion... ("... You don't need another Telco... We have five 9's uptime on our core network... We'll go somewhere else, if you go somewhere else...) got NZSE to use a single Telco for it's networking... Later'ish Craig BTW I see the list posting time is down to a few minutes now... [Disclaimer: While this is hauntingly familiar, it in no way represents the view of my employer...]
-----Original Message----- From: John S Russell [mailto:jsr(a)jsr.com] Sent: Monday, June 20, 2005 2:27 PM To: Juha Saarinen Cc: nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz Subject: Re: [nznog] I think a rubber band just fell off.
On Mon, 20 Jun 2005, Juha Saarinen wrote:
"The fault, which happened around 10am, also crashed the New Zealand Stock Exchange..."
This is hyperbole, surely? I'd be fairly shocked if the NZSE internal systems themselves could be "crashed" by a fault in an external vendor. Access to the system from external points may be impacted, of course, but even then I'd have to do the Dance of Stupid[1] if the NZSE public and secure networks only used a single network provider for everything.
JSR