[135772] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Connectivity status for Egypt
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Alastair Johnson)
Fri Jan 28 15:51:23 2011
Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2011 12:51:02 -0800
From: Alastair Johnson <aj@sneep.net>
To: nanog@nanog.org
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTi=BrQ_m1ypzObszR8_Ta9hPuz_gw-x7ZJYqknJh@mail.gmail.com>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On 1/28/2011 8:17 AM, Christopher Morrow wrote:
> out of curiousity, what's the difference though between loss of light
> and peer shutdown? If the local gov't comes in and says: "Make the
> internets go down", you as the op choose how to do that... NOT getting
> calls from your peer for interface alarms is probably sane. You can
> simply drop your routes, leave BGP running even and roll ...
>
> If it's clear (and it seems to be) that the issue is a
> nation-state-decision... implementation (how it's done, no IF it's
> done) isn't really important, is it?
I guess it depends on what goes down as an effect of the mandate. If
it's full Layer 1 severing, then leased line and other circuits will go
down too. If it's just "shut down your Internet peering sessions", then
there's alternative opportunities for connectivity.
For instance, our corporate WAN links into Cairo are still up (UUNET PIP).
aj
