[127101] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: On the control of the Internet.
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Joel Jaeggli)
Sun Jun 13 21:21:21 2010
Date: Sun, 13 Jun 2010 18:21:07 -0700
From: Joel Jaeggli <joelja@bogus.com>
To: Bruce Williams <williams.bruce@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTikbTS54m4doooh8_dn7wdt1eDtk0HYID7PZFM8T@mail.gmail.com>
Cc: "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>, Joe Greco <jgreco@ns.sol.net>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On 06/13/2010 06:13 PM, Bruce Williams wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 13, 2010 at 6:42 AM, Joe Greco <jgreco@ns.sol.net> wrote:
>>> Generally speaking, it will be treated as damage and routed around.
>>
>> That fable only really stands a chance when the damage is accidental; in
>> the case where such "damage" is being deliberately inflicted, particularly
>> by government, it gets more complicated. A lot of the 'net is a little
>> more centralized than it ought to be in order to allow the "routed around"
>> concept to work successfully.
>>
>> ... JG
>
> BTW, I forget, when was the original ARPANET spec of surviving a
> nuclear war tested? I mean, we do know what would happen, right?
Paul baran's rand paper was on survivable networks. The arpanet was not
that network.
> Yes, Joe, the ARPANET fable does lives on.
>
> Bruce Williams
>
>
