gagging *IX directors re snoop/block orders

[math at sizone.org (Ken Chase)]

Just meant it as a parallel operational example. Both situations, while legally
distinct, present the same operational issues. 

Purposely breaking things - and then being required to keep the breakage secret -
is going to mess up a whole lot of things. (How does Chinese operators handle this?)

Additionally the snooping is an issue, though I can't imagine anyone depends on
an IX for maintaining secrecy at a contract level :/ Today's realities.

/kc


On Fri, Feb 17, 2017 at 10:03:00AM -0600, Mike Hammett said:
  >I'm not sure Cogent is on any IXes? 
  >
  >
  >
  >
  >----- 
  >Mike Hammett 
  >Intelligent Computing Solutions 
  >http://www.ics-il.com 
  >
  >Midwest-IX 
  >http://www.midwest-ix.com 
  >
  >----- Original Message -----
  >
  >From: "Ken Chase" <math at sizone.org> 
  >To: nanog at nanog.org 
  >Sent: Friday, February 17, 2017 9:56:23 AM 
  >Subject: gagging *IX directors re snoop/block orders 
  >
  >And when you go to figure out why that IP wont ping through Cogent on 
  >your exchange, and start troubleshooting but can't get any answers 
  >as to why things are bust... 
  >
  >[ Clearly now an operational issue for NANOG. ] 
  >
  >Purposely breaking routing and not being able to talk about why is going to 
  >set many orgs at odds with their basic operational charters. I expect that 
  >a paid service will work when it's provided, including help debugging their end. 
  >
  >This is slightly different from a service provider, ostensibly you can 
  >go elsewhere to get service - but when you are a member of a nonprofit *IX 
  >(as we are with TorIX), things get a lot more complex. 
  >
  >I imagine contract lawyers are going to be all over this. 
  >
  >https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/02/17/linx_snoopers_charger_gagging_order/ 
  >
  >(their typo in the url) 
  >

/kc 
-- 
Ken Chase - math at sizone.org Guelph/Toronto Canada