|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| home | help | back | first | fref | pref | prev | next | nref | lref | last | post |
In-Reply-To: <2D0AF14BA6FB334988BC1F5D4FC38CB826CC5462F7@EXCHMBX.hq.nac.net> Date: Sun, 9 Jun 2013 20:43:00 -0400 From: Christopher Morrow <morrowc.lists@gmail.com> To: Alex Rubenstein <alex@corp.nac.net> Cc: North American Network Operators Group <nanog@nanog.org> Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org (from back when I cared more about calea as an implementor) On Sun, Jun 9, 2013 at 8:15 PM, Alex Rubenstein <alex@corp.nac.net> wrote: >> Honestly, I expect replies to this question to range between zero and none, >> but I have to ask it. > > Surprise! <aol>me too!</aol> > >> I understand the CALEA tap mechanism for most ISPs, generally, works like >> this: >> >> * we outsource our CALEA management to company X >> * we don't even know there's been a request until we've gotten a bill from X. > > I've never even thought of the idea of outsourcing CALEA requests. That is probably because I would never consider doing it. > > Perhaps we are in the minority, but we scrutinize every request of any sort to ensure it has jurisdiction and is valid. I can't even fathom the thought of trusting a third party for this. > agreed, since most of the tap-work actually requires changes on network equipment in the network you run, why would you outsource this? Especially when the taps impact forwarding performance of the platforms in question...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| home | help | back | first | fref | pref | prev | next | nref | lref | last | post |