nanog mailing list archives
Re: Collocation Access
From: Roland Perry <lists () internetpolicyagency com>
Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2006 21:28:49 +0100
In article <20061023112018.F56322 () iama hypergeek net>, John A. Kilpatrick <john () hypergeek net> writes
But presumably it would need to be stolen. Wouldn't the tech notice that happening... Or is there some way the colo security guy can clone it undetected?While your point is valid, arguing something like that with an AT&T tech would be like arguing with the TSA. Logic and reasoning are of no value in the conversation. The policy is the policy and you deal with it.
I don't seek to argue it with an individual tech, but with whoever sets the corporate security policy.
-- Roland Perry
Current thread:
- Re: Collocation Access, (continued)
- Re: Collocation Access Sean Donelan (Oct 23)
- Did Cogent & L3 de-peer again? chuck goolsbee (Oct 23)
- Re: Did Cogent & L3 de-peer again? Patrick W. Gilmore (Oct 23)
- RE: Collocation Access Alex Rubenstein (Oct 23)
- Re: Collocation Access Etaoin Shrdlu (Oct 23)
- Re: Collocation Access Roland Perry (Oct 23)
- RE: Collocation Access Craig Holland (Oct 23)
- RE: Collocation Access John A. Kilpatrick (Oct 23)
- Re: Collocation Access Roland Perry (Oct 23)
- Re: Collocation Access John A. Kilpatrick (Oct 23)
- Re: Collocation Access Roland Perry (Oct 23)
- Re: Collocation Access Warren Kumari (Oct 23)
- RE: Collocation Access Stasiniewicz, Adam (Oct 23)
- Re: Collocation Access Henry Yen (Oct 23)
- Re: Collocation Access Etaoin Shrdlu (Oct 23)
- Re: Collocation Access Jim Popovitch (Oct 23)
- RE: Collocation Access David Schwartz (Oct 23)
- RE: Collocation Access Daniel Senie (Oct 23)
- RE: Collocation Access Randy Epstein (Oct 24)
- RE: Collocation Access Michael . Dillon (Oct 24)
- Re: Collocation Access Roland Perry (Oct 24)
- RE: Collocation Access David Schwartz (Oct 24)