[138794] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: US .mil blocking in Japan
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (JoeSox)
Wed Mar 16 12:49:22 2011
In-Reply-To: <582587.43563.qm@web59616.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2011 09:49:17 -0700
From: JoeSox <joesox@gmail.com>
To: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
Andrew,
I am not sure I understand your statement (below).
The ONE-NET network is what I have worked on in the past while in the
Navy Reserve
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0OBA/is_1_23/ai_n15390013/
http://www.marketwire.com/press-release/Multimax-Awarded-74-Million-in-Opti=
ons-for-Navys-ONE-NET-Program-726586.htm
The military has a bunch of sub systems that can integrate with crypto
devices. In any event, military end users need classified and
unclassified networks for their desktops and I am guessing the article
is talking about military unclassified networks which provides
internet access.
--
Joe
On Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 9:14 AM, andrew.wallace
<andrew.wallace@rocketmail.com> wrote:
>You would think their war fighting networks, weren't the same ones used fo=
r civilian-based web sites on the public internet. It seems there is a conf=
lict here between what they push out to the media as to what their cyber ca=
pabilities are, and what the realities are on the ground. In that respect, =
yes I'm very surprised. --- Andrew
>
