To be fair, the reporting (initially) claimed the providers were granting the
USG access directly to their servers. It's understandable and appropriate
that the providers pushed back against that apparently erroneous reporting.
Jason
On Jun 8, 2013, at 22:44, ku po cciehe...@gmail.com wrote:
Yet appears a certain lack of transparency, no?
mh
Message d'origine
De : Jason L. Sparks jlspa...@gmail.com
Date :
A : ku po cciehe...@gmail.com
Cc : NANOG nanog@nanog.org
Objet : Re: PRISM: NSA/FBI Internet data mining project
To be fair, the reporting (initially)
On Saturday, June 08, 2013 6:44 PM, Ryan Malayter [mailto:malay...@gmail.com]
wrote:
Speaking from the content provider dide here, but we've always run IPsec on
DCIs and even private T1s/DS3s back in the day.
Doesn't everyone do the same these days? I find it hard to imagine passing
any
On 06/07/13 18:20 -0700, Owen DeLong wrote:
While the government has no responsibility to protect my data, they do
have a responsibility to respect my privacy. While you are correct in that
proper personal security procedures to protect my data from random
crackers would, in fact, also protect
Anyone? Good quality SIGTRAN/SS7 on STM-1/OCN?
Kind Regards,
Nick.
The view from my side, as both a broadcaster and a consumer of both
broadcast and 'webcast' content:
From what I've been led to understand in my time in broadcast*, the
decision wasn't made because of power costs but because they (the Grand
Alliance and the FCC) believed that 8VSB would work
On 08/06/2013 8:05 AM, Matthew Petach wrote:
On Sat, Jun 8, 2013 at 4:12 AM, Jimmy Hess mysi...@gmail.com wrote:
On 6/7/13, Måns Nilsson mansa...@besserwisser.org wrote:
Subject: Re: PRISM: NSA/FBI Internet data mining project Date: Fri, Jun
07,
2013 at 12:25:35AM -0500 Quoting jamie rishaw
Don't you need to drop DS0's out of that STM for signaling?
On Sat, Jun 8, 2013 at 9:58 AM, Nick Khamis sym...@gmail.com wrote:
Hello Everyone,
Anyone know of a way of bypassing the 90K audiocodes mediant 3000
equipped for STM-1 interface using line cards and a linux box :).
What we are
On 13-06-09 12:47, Eric Adler wrote:
TV that was made in the mid-to-late 1980s (Sony Watchman) and now they are
trying to 'solve' the mobile delivery 'problem'.
Qualcomm is working on adding broadcast capabilities to LTE (this was
from recent at a conference (Telecom Summit in Toronto), so I
Most modern gear can go all the way to individual DS0's in a single
card without a MUX of any kind. OC3/STM-1 is only like 155mbit.
On Sun, Jun 9, 2013 at 10:13 AM, Phil Fagan philfa...@gmail.com wrote:
Don't you need to drop DS0's out of that STM for signaling?
On Sat, Jun 8, 2013 at 9:58
Anyone else notice that the Boundless Informant GUI looks suspiciously like
the Splunk GUI?
And according to the article, it sounds like it does exactly what Splunk is
capable of, albeit on a grander scale than I thought possible.
dgr
On Jun 9, 2013 9:29 AM, Warren Bailey
On Jun 9, 2013, at 7:20 AM, R. Benjamin Kessler ben.kess...@zenetra.com
wrote:
I see that there is actually a beast that will do encryption of multiple 10G
waves between Cisco ONS boxes -
https://www.cisco.com/en/US/prod/collateral/optical/ps5724/ps2006/at_a_glance_c45-728015.pdf
How
Nick are you trying to run these codecs on linux?
On Sun, Jun 9, 2013 at 11:29 AM, Michael Loftis mlof...@wgops.com wrote:
Most modern gear can go all the way to individual DS0's in a single
card without a MUX of any kind. OC3/STM-1 is only like 155mbit.
On Sun, Jun 9, 2013 at 10:13 AM,
Of course the access isn't direct -- there is a firewall and a router in
between. The access is indirect.
---
() ascii ribbon campaign against html e-mail
/\ www.asciiribbon.org
-Original Message-
From: Jason L. Sparks [mailto:jlspa...@gmail.com]
Sent: Sunday, 09 June, 2013 04:24
Dan,
I doubt anyone can answer your question easily because you seem to have
contradictions in your scenario. At one point you say:
private company to collect information about terrorist entities, who
in turn privately contracts with the top X telecom providers and Y
social media companies
On Fri, Jun 07, 2013 at 04:17:14PM -0700, Eric Brunner-Williams wrote:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/07/obama-china-targets-cyber-overseas
the headline may be misleading.
Presidential Policy Directive 20 defines OCEO as operations and
related programs or activities ? conducted
On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 9:28 PM, Leo Bicknell bickn...@ufp.org wrote:
While there's a whole political aspect of electing people who pass
better laws, NANOG is not a political action forum. However many
of the people on NANOG are in positions to affect positive change
at their respective
Le 09/06/2013 20:26, Rob McEwen a écrit :
Dan,
I doubt anyone can answer your question easily because you seem to have
contradictions in your scenario. At one point you say:
private company to collect information about terrorist entities, who
in turn privately contracts with the top X
Dear nanog:
Honestly, I expect replies to this question to range between zero and none,
but I have to ask it.
I understand the CALEA tap mechanism for most ISPs, generally, works like
this:
* we outsource our CALEA management to company X
* we don't even know there's been a request until
Honestly, I expect replies to this question to range between zero and none,
but I have to ask it.
Surprise!
I understand the CALEA tap mechanism for most ISPs, generally, works like
this:
* we outsource our CALEA management to company X
* we don't even know there's been a request
Eric Adler wrote:
The view from my side, as both a broadcaster and a consumer of both
broadcast and 'webcast' content:
[snip]
Thank you Eric...your comments are very much appreciated.
--Michael
(from back when I cared more about calea as an implementor)
On Sun, Jun 9, 2013 at 8:15 PM, Alex Rubenstein a...@corp.nac.net wrote:
Honestly, I expect replies to this question to range between zero and none,
but I have to ask it.
Surprise!
aolme too!/aol
I understand the CALEA tap
On Sun, 9 Jun 2013, Randy Fischer wrote:
Dear nanog:
Honestly, I expect replies to this question to range between zero and none,
but I have to ask it.
I understand the CALEA tap mechanism for most ISPs, generally, works like
this:
* we outsource our CALEA management to company X
* we don't
Sorry everyone for the delayed response. Basically we are trying to
setup up POPS in specific ares. Each POP should be capable of handling
1500-2000 channels or ~60-80 virutal PRIs please bare with me.
Laying down the 80K for Audiocodes 3000 with an OC interface, or even
a Metaswitch would be the
- Original Message -
From: Eric Adler eapt...@gmail.com
The view from my side, as both a broadcaster and a consumer of both
broadcast and 'webcast' content:
My own comments were, and are, from the outside, following along
cause I'll have to deal with it after they make the choices.
It is possible, and not just for ISPs
Matthew Kaufman
(Sent from my iPhone)
On Jun 9, 2013, at 3:59 PM, Randy Fischer randy.fisc...@gmail.com wrote:
Dear nanog:
Honestly, I expect replies to this question to range between zero and none,
but I have to ask it.
I understand the CALEA tap
On 6/9/2013 2:26 PM, Rob McEwen wrote:
There are notable exceptions... for example, an employer is really the
owner of the mailbox, not their employee. Therefore, there is an
argument that government employees don't have privacy rights from the
government for their official work e-mail
27 matches
Mail list logo
