Not major but, yes, would require a change on the phone, as I suggested at the time.
Some improvement could occur on the network side if the ‘tower’ could shut itself down, for the particular mobile network operator, if it loses effective backhaul connectivity - although there could be some negative implications of that.
That is never going to be a complete fix because the assumption is that there is a malfunction in the network of one mobile network operator. The complete fix is on the phone.
Possibly but bear in mind that as of inside a year all 3 mobile networks will have shut down their 3G network and all voice calls will be over the data network anyway (VoLTE).
It wouldn’t have to be sequential. As long as you are outside and have clear skyview, using automated technology like AML but with the data packet sent via satellite, some kind of emergency message can be sent via satellite automatically regardless of how you are going with trying to call 000.
It’s more complicated than that, AIUI. Singtel did a software upgrade on their network (which may or may not involve any Cisco equipment at all, and may or may not have been advised to Optus or any other network operator). That triggered a bunch of routing changes that propagated from Singtel’s network to Optus’s network (and presumably to other networks as well). The routing changes caused the Cisco routers inside Optus to panic and disconnect from the network. This was because of incorrect configuration by Optus of the Cisco routers.
The root cause was: the incorrect configuration.
My understanding is that a config parameter of the Cisco routers was at its default value. For an organisation the size of Optus it is their responsibility to RTFM and consider whether the default value is appropriate for their environment.
Cisco was quick to make public their disagreement with Optus regarding the characterisation of the failure.
I have personally experienced the Cisco panic problem. It used to occur for us at very inopportune times of day when IT staff should be asleep in bed. While the particular panic was different for us, the result was the same: the Cisco device shut down ports, thus breaking the network at that point. (Another difference is that for us any given Cisco device would shut down in isolation, independently of any other Cisco device, whereas the Optus experience was all Cisco core routers shutting down simultaneously, which indeed must have looked like a cyber attack. )
There may be some merit in that claim. It is possible that they had reduced staff levels, particularly at the highest level of knowledge of the network, in the “remote sites” i.e. too much centralisation.
Another observation, now that we know that the equipment is Cisco, is that some Cisco devices have a dedicated management port. You are supposed to network those management ports together and to the control centre so that you don’t lose remote access even if the underlying network falls over.
Latest commentary, a fairly good timeline: Two weeks since the Optus outage, documents show backroom scrambling and urgent meetings occurred as the emergency played out - ABC News