nanog mailing list archives
RE: YouTube IP Hijacking
From: "Tomas L. Byrnes" <tomb () byrneit net>
Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2008 10:47:19 -0800
Since the US has no jurisdiction over 17557, other than for the US govt. to force ISPs to refuse to accept any advertisements with 17557 or any other AS that didn't meet some regulatory requirements in the path, how would you propose that the regulatory environment you envision work? American Airlines isn't the right straw-man here, Pakistan International Airlines is. The only reason THEY meet anyone else's standards is that they wouldn't be allowed to use the airspace or land if they didn't.
-----Original Message----- From: owner-nanog () merit edu [mailto:owner-nanog () merit edu] On Behalf Of Dave Pooser Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2008 10:15 AM To: nanog () merit edu Subject: Re: YouTube IP HijackingBut, due to a lot of effort in making better educational material available for pilots, including better flight simulators and better simulator scenarios, flying is a lot safer than it was in 1958.At the risk of being a stereotypical American liberal, I'll point out two significant reasons flying is safer than it used to be in the US are Federal regulation and post-accident lawsuits. If there were an organization like the FAA that had the power to "ground" AS17557 until their network engineers completed a week's refresher course, there'd be significantly better change management techniques in play. If YouTube were currently suing Pakistani Telecom for eighty-seven gazillion dollars-- and were widely considered a lock to win their lawsuit-- suddenly a whole lot of other ISPs would magically find the training budget to make sure THEIR engineers didn't expose THEM to that sort of liability. Pilots don't spend dozens of hours in simulators because it's fun, they do it to get/keep their license. American Airlines doesn't spend millions of dollars on pilot (and ground crew) education because they're run by philanthropists, they do it because screwups could cost them orders of magnitude more money. The Internet lacks any such enforcement mechanisms. How many people do you think have lost their jobs for this latest incident? What are the odds that the responsible party lost a penny in revenue or in fines? When there is no financial or regulatory pressure to avoid screwups, avoiding screwups ceases to be a priority at Layer 8 or Layer 9. And then you have incidents like this, where the operational solutions are widely agreed upon and the political obstacles are widely agreed to be insurmountable. And we wait for the next incident. -- Dave Pooser, ACSA Manager of Information Services Alford Media http://www.alfordmedia.com
Current thread:
- Re: YouTube IP Hijacking, (continued)
- Re: YouTube IP Hijacking Arnd Vehling (Feb 26)
- Re: YouTube IP Hijacking Stephane Bortzmeyer (Feb 26)
- Re: YouTube IP Hijacking Arnd Vehling (Feb 26)
- Message not available
- Message not available
- RE: YouTube IP Hijacking Randy Epstein (Feb 26)
- Re: YouTube IP Hijacking Arnd Vehling (Feb 26)
- RE: YouTube IP Hijacking Randy Epstein (Feb 26)
- Re: YouTube IP Hijacking Arnd Vehling (Feb 26)
- Re: YouTube IP Hijacking Jeroen Massar (Feb 26)
- RE: YouTube IP Hijacking michael.dillon (Feb 26)
- Re: YouTube IP Hijacking Dave Pooser (Feb 26)
- RE: YouTube IP Hijacking Tomas L. Byrnes (Feb 26)
- Re: YouTube IP Hijacking Dave Pooser (Feb 26)
- RE: YouTube IP Hijacking Steve Gibbard (Feb 26)
- Re: YouTube IP Hijacking Danny McPherson (Feb 26)
- Re: YouTube IP Hijacking brett watson (Feb 26)
- Re: YouTube IP Hijacking Stephane Bortzmeyer (Feb 26)
- Re: YouTube IP Hijacking Owen DeLong (Feb 24)
- RE: YouTube IP Hijacking Tomas L. Byrnes (Feb 24)
- Re: YouTube IP Hijacking Rick Astley (Feb 24)
- Re: YouTube IP Hijacking Simon Leinen (Feb 26)
- Re: YouTube IP Hijacking sthaug (Feb 24)