[41716] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: World Trade Center attack
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Mark C . Langston)
Wed Sep 12 00:24:46 2001
Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2001 18:47:06 -0700
From: "Mark C . Langston" <mark@bitshift.org>
To: "Christopher X. Candreva" <chris@westnet.com>
Cc: nanog@merit.edu
Message-ID: <20010911184706.S51436@bitshift.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.4.33.0109112126210.14473-100000@westnet>; from chris@westnet.com on Tue, Sep 11, 2001 at 09:26:42PM -0400
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
On Tue, Sep 11, 2001 at 09:26:42PM -0400, Christopher X. Candreva wrote:
> On Tue, 11 Sep 2001, Mark C . Langston wrote:
>
> > DEFCON 2 has been reached, I believe.
> >
> > DEFCON 1 does not necessarily equate automatically to war, however. It
> > is merely the maximum level of force readiness.
>
> Wargames had it backwards. DEFCON 1 is peace, DEFCON 5 is war.
The DoD Dictionary
(http://www.dtic.mil/doctrine/jel/new_pubs/jp1_02.pdf) doesn't
explicitly state the order, but does imply it progresses from 5 to 1.
Army Regulation 2510
(http://www.google.com/search?q=cache:99rWu1xnDgQ:www.usapa.army.mil/pdffiles/r25_10.pdf+defense+readiness+condition+defcon&hl=en)
implies that the restrictions on information transfer during an
emergency increase as the DEFCON level decreases from 5 to 1, implying
that 1 is the highest state of operational readiness, not the lowest.
Further, most every reference available, military and non-military,
recognizes DEFCON 5 as the state of lowest operational readiness.
Were I so inclined to search further, I'm sure I could dig up a
definitive military or governmental document that explicitly states
the rank ordering of defense readiness conditions. However, I think
the evidence above suffices.
--
Mark C. Langston
mark@bitshift.org
Systems & Network Admin
http://www.bitshift.org
