[148641] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Megaupload.com seized
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Ishmael Rufus)
Thu Jan 19 18:57:33 2012
In-Reply-To: <E1Ro1nt-000C2l-4u@mailman.nanog.org>
From: Ishmael Rufus <sakamura@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2012 17:56:28 -0600
To: "james@smithwaysecurity.com" <james@smithwaysecurity.com>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
That doesn't stop the power of our US government.
On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 5:53 PM, james@smithwaysecurity.com
<james@smithwaysecurity.com> wrote:
> Wow, what suprised the servers were, all located offshore.
>
> Sent from my HTC
>
> ----- Reply message -----
> From: "Paul Graydon" <paul@paulgraydon.co.uk>
> To: <nanog@nanog.org>
> Subject: Megaupload.com seized
> Date: Thu, Jan 19, 2012 7:27 pm
>
>
> On 01/19/2012 12:41 PM, Ryan Gelobter wrote:
>> The megaupload.com domain was seized today, has anyone noticed significa=
nt
>> drops in network traffic as a result?
>>
>> http://www.scribd.com/doc/78786408/Mega-Indictment
>> http://techland.time.com/2012/01/19/feds-shut-down-megaupload-com-file-s=
haring-website/
> Ars Technica are implying it was quite a source of bandwidth usage within=
companies. =C2=A0I'm curious, are any interesting charts on an ISP side?
>
> http://arstechnica.com/business/news/2012/01/before-shutdown-megaupload-a=
te-up-more-corporate-bandwidth-than-dropbox.ars
>
