nanog mailing list archives
Re: Fiber cut - response in seconds?
From: Peter Beckman <beckman () angryox com>
Date: Tue, 2 Jun 2009 11:19:17 -0400
On Tue, 2 Jun 2009, JC Dill wrote:
Why do they "watch" and "monitor" rather than proactively go out and say "watch out, there's an unmarked cable here" and keep them from cutting the cable in the first place?
Because if they DON'T hit the line, it is still a secret. Then again, if they DO hit the line, it's pretty obvious what the line is for and at least one place it runs. I wonder if the Gov't schedules a move of the line once it's operational security is comprimised by an accidental cut. Beckman --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Peter Beckman Internet Guy beckman () angryox com http://www.angryox.com/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Current thread:
- Re: Fiber cut - response in seconds?, (continued)
- Re: Fiber cut - response in seconds? Paul Wall (Jun 02)
- Re: Fiber cut - response in seconds? Charles Wyble (Jun 02)
- Re: Fiber cut - response in seconds? Peter Beckman (Jun 01)
- Re: Fiber cut - response in seconds? JC Dill (Jun 01)
- Re: Fiber cut - response in seconds? Elmar K. Bins (Jun 02)
- Re: Fiber cut - response in seconds? JC Dill (Jun 02)
- Re: Fiber cut - response in seconds? Shane Ronan (Jun 02)
- Re: Fiber cut - response in seconds? Elmar K. Bins (Jun 02)
- Re: Fiber cut - response in seconds? Martin Hannigan (Jun 02)
- Re: Fiber cut - response in seconds? Martin Hannigan (Jun 02)
- Re: Fiber cut - response in seconds? Peter Beckman (Jun 02)
- Re: Fiber cut - response in seconds? Christopher Morrow (Jun 02)
- RE: Fiber cut - response in seconds? Eric Van Tol (Jun 02)
- Re: Fiber cut - response in seconds? Jared Mauch (Jun 02)
- Re: Fiber cut - response in seconds? Charles Wyble (Jun 02)
- RE: Fiber cut - response in seconds? Deepak Jain (Jun 02)