[193739] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: gagging *IX directors re snoop/block orders
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Christian de Larrinaga)
Fri Feb 17 13:19:25 2017
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2017 18:12:44 +0000
From: Christian de Larrinaga <cdel@firsthand.net>
To: Brandon Butterworth <brandon@rd.bbc.co.uk>
In-Reply-To: <20170217173825.GA5534@sunf10.rd.bbc.co.uk>
Reply-To: cdel@firsthand.net
Cc: William Waites <wwaites@tardis.ed.ac.uk>, NANOG list <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
It's a pretty shocking development.
It's one thing to nobble a single network under the IP Act to interfere
with equipment but to use a neutral exchange to nobble shared
infrastructure used across US and UK and ... is a completely different
can of worms.
I don't exercise a vote anymore at LINX but I do hope members will pause
and consider this very carefully indeed.
Christian
> Brandon Butterworth <mailto:brandon@rd.bbc.co.uk>
> 17 February 2017 at 17:38
> On Fri Feb 17, 2017 at 05:19:32PM +0000, William Waites wrote:
>> So instead of saying, "we have this new spying law in the UK and we need
>> to rejigg the decision-making at LINX so we will be ready in case we are
>> required to do something that must be kept secret"
>
> Yes but "hey government, swivel on this" isn't going to be an
> effective secret weapon, they'll neutralise it before you use it
>
>> what was proposed to
>> the membership was, "we have embarked on this long governance journey
>> and this is what we have come up with as the best way to run LINX". Those
>> are two very different propositions
>
> A big winking eye emoji was needed
>
> brandon
> William Waites <mailto:wwaites@tardis.ed.ac.uk>
> 17 February 2017 at 17:19
>> On Feb 17, 2017, at 16:46, Patrick W. Gilmore <patrick@ianai.net> wrote:
>>
>> There is one problem: The article is factually incorrect on multiple points.
>
> It would be interesting to know what points those are, it reads mostly accurately
> to me.
>
>> The proposed constitutional changes are in the public domain.
>
> The main problem, though this point may have gotten lost in the very long
> discussion on the LINX members list, is that the reasoning and motivation for
> the changes was not made clear. Even when explanatory materials were
> belatedly provided, they weren’t especially clear.
>
> So instead of saying, "we have this new spying law in the UK and we need
> to rejigg the decision-making at LINX so we will be ready in case we are
> required to do something that must be kept secret" what was proposed to
> the membership was, "we have embarked on this long governance journey
> and this is what we have come up with as the best way to run LINX". Those
> are two very different propositions, especially for busy people who don’t have
> time to read in detail and understand all the implications.
>
> All that I suggested is that the members be properly informed so that they
> can make this choice with their eyes open. It is important to have this
> discussion in the open, and explicitly mark the transition where Internet
> Exchange Points re-organise themselves to accommodate spying laws and
> gag orders.
>
> William Waites
> Laboratory for Foundations of Computer Science
> School of Informatics, University of Edinburgh
> Informatics Forum 5.38, 10 Crichton St.
> Edinburgh, EH8 9AB, Scotland
>
> The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in
> Scotland, with registration number SC005336.
>
--
Christian de Larrinaga FBCS, CITP,
-------------------------
@ FirstHand
-------------------------
+44 7989 386778
cdel@firsthand.net
-------------------------
