[133202] in North American Network Operators' Group
RE: Cloud proof of failure - was:: wikileaks unreachable
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Nathan Eisenberg)
Mon Dec 6 10:30:04 2010
From: Nathan Eisenberg <nathan@atlasnetworks.us>
To: "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>
Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2010 15:29:51 +0000
In-Reply-To: <658958CE-BDD8-42F7-8E7F-3D921A0DA883@americafree.tv>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
> In a cloud hosting environment, you typically don't know where your
> data and servers are, and thus you don't know what legal and political
> pressures they may be subject to. If that means that in practice you
> are subject to the combination of any pressure that can be applied to
> any one of the hosting centers maintained by your hosting provider,
> then "the cloud" indeed would seem pretty unattractive to anyone with
> politically or socially controversial content.
How is it more or less unattractive than having one's own servers in one's =
own office? Lieberman and Co would simply have leaned on Mom's Best BGP (r=
) and Pop's Fastest Packets (r) instead of on Amazon, and the result would =
have been the same.
That's the catch with this here series of tubes - you don't control all of =
the tubes, even if you're Amazon, or Giant National ISP Co, or Massive Nati=
onal Fiber Plant Co. The server infrastructure is the least interesting pa=
rt of what happened to WikiLeaks.
Nathan
