Got me beat.. I'm only doing 13 Mbps across 2 transponders. But
that's also customer specific and not general Internet access. But
one of the antennas that I'm using is inflatable. Seriously. Most
people think I'm kidding about the inflatable part.
On Jun 2, 2009, at 5:54 PM, Warren Ba
I do 250 mbits on 21 transponders :)
- Original Message -
From: John van Oppen
To: Chris Adams ; Deepak Jain
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Sent: Tue Jun 02 14:51:59 2009
Subject: RE: Fiber cut - response in seconds?
Ok, while this is off-topic, let's just point people to Wikipedia:
.8300
Website: http://spectrumnetworks.us
-Original Message-
From: Chris Adams [mailto:cmad...@hiwaay.net]
Sent: Tuesday, June 02, 2009 3:36 PM
To: Deepak Jain
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: Fiber cut - response in seconds?
Once upon a time, Deepak Jain said:
> I promise you that
Once upon a time, Deepak Jain said:
> I promise you that that is not the case for all applications.
> Geosynchronous satellites can be anywhere. For the applications you
> are considering (communications mostly), equatorial orbit is the most
> advantageous.
Geosynchronous are only over a particu
> Once upon a time, Deepak Jain said:
> > Which is why, if you have a satellite, you often position DIRECTLY
> > over the antenna you are sending to
>
> Unless your target is on the equator, you don't position a satellite
> directly over anything.
>
I promise you that that is not the case for a
Sounds like a lot of work to me. Wouldn't it be easier to just find the carrier
neutral colo facilities where all the peering/transit between major networks
happens, and pay them money to put up a fake wall that you can colo your
optical taps behind?
Yeah it's not like that's ever gonna h
On Tue, Jun 2, 2009 at 7:50 AM, Dave Wilson wrote:
> No. And here's why: If you're a naughty foreign intelligence team, and
> you know your stuff, you already know where some of the cables you'd
> really like a tap on are buried. When you hear of a construction project
> that might damage one, you
Once upon a time, Deepak Jain said:
> Which is why, if you have a satellite, you often position DIRECTLY
> over the antenna you are sending to
Unless your target is on the equator, you don't position a satellite
directly over anything.
--
Chris Adams
Systems and Network Administrator - HiWAAY
> Really? The US Military uses a whole lot of wireless (satellite, ground
> baed, surface to air) links. Those links can be sniffed (by people with
> sufficient motivation/funding/gear to do so). They rely on encryption
> to
> protect them.
Which is why, if you have a satellite, you often positi
Granted the US govt has there own (classified) encryption algorithms
and as such that can't be replicated in a lab environment and requires
access to the physical medium carrying traffic encrypted by said
algorithms.
Which is why they do things like this :
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opera
On Jun 2, 2009, at 3:41 PM, Charles Wyble wrote:
David Barak wrote:
Paranoia 101 teaches us that any given encryption approach will
eventually fall before a brute-force onslaught of sufficient power
and duration[1].
Of course. Hence my comment bout the likely hood of success
depending
David Barak wrote:
Paranoia 101 teaches us that any given encryption approach will eventually fall before a brute-force onslaught of sufficient power and duration[1].
Of course. Hence my comment bout the likely hood of success depending on
how much computing power they have access to. How
>
> Really? I don't think so. I imagine it would be much more dependent on
> the amount of computing power the attacker has access to. More
> encrypted
> blobs won't help. If that was the case then the various encryption
> schemes in wide use today would be cracked already. Bad guys can setup
> ne
--- On Tue, 6/2/09, Charles Wyble wrote:
> David Barak wrote:
> > Encryption is insufficient - if you let someone have
> physical access for a long enough period, they'll eventually
> crack anything.
>
> Really? I don't think so. I imagine it would be much more
> dependent on the amount of co
David Barak wrote:
Encryption is insufficient - if you let someone have physical access for a long enough period, they'll eventually crack anything.
Really? I don't think so. I imagine it would be much more dependent on
the amount of computing power the attacker has access to. More encrypted
link-layer encryption for sonet/atm quite resistant to traffic
analysis... The pipe is full of pdus whether you're using them or not.
valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
> On Tue, 02 Jun 2009 13:54:44 EDT, Martin Hannigan said:
>> It would also be cheaper to add an additional layer of security with
>>
y
close (< 5km) to major offices of lots of folks who would care deeply about
such matters.
David Barak
Need Geek Rock? Try The Franchise:
http://www.listentothefranchise.com
--- On Tue, 6/2/09, Charles Wyble wrote:
> From: Charles Wyble
> Subject: Re: Fiber cut - response
On Tue, 02 Jun 2009 13:54:44 EDT, Martin Hannigan said:
> It would also be cheaper to add an additional layer of security with
> encryption vs. roving teams of gun toting manhole watchers.
Even if encrypted, you can probably do an amazing amount of traffic
analysis to tell when something is afoot.
Cheaper?
To quote sneakers were the united states govt. we don't do that sort
of thing.
Martin Hannigan wrote:
It would also be cheaper to add an additional layer of security with
encryption vs. roving teams of gun toting manhole watchers.
YMMV,
Best!
Marty
On 6/2/09, Deepak Jain w
It would also be cheaper to add an additional layer of security with
encryption vs. roving teams of gun toting manhole watchers.
YMMV,
Best!
Marty
On 6/2/09, Deepak Jain wrote:
>> No. And here's why: If you're a naughty foreign intelligence team, and
>> you know your stuff, you already know
> No. And here's why: If you're a naughty foreign intelligence team, and
> you know your stuff, you already know where some of the cables you'd
> really like a tap on are buried. When you hear of a construction
> project
> that might damage one, you set up your innocuous white panel truck
> somewhe
> -Original Message-
> From: Charles Wyble [mailto:char...@thewybles.com]
> Sent: Monday, June 01, 2009 7:10 PM
> To: nanog@nanog.org
> Subject: Re: Fiber cut - response in seconds?
>
>
>
> Joel Jaeggli wrote:
> > It's pretty trivial if know where
sro...@fattoc.com (Shane Ronan) wrote:
> In my experience they are required not only to mark the line, but to
> identify it with the initials of the owner.
Hell yeah - but that's not the point I wanted to make.
For any given construction project, the main goal is to
build something without des
On Tue, Jun 2, 2009 at 11:19 AM, Peter Beckman wrote:
> 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
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
They usually hand out tin foil hats to the dig crew. A clear give away
and easy to spot too.
Next?
On 6/2/09, JC Dill wrote:
> Elmar K. Bins wrote:
>> jcdill.li...@gmail.com (JC Dill) wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Why do they "watch" and "monitor" rather than proactively go
>>> out and say "watch out, there'
They usually hand out tin foil hats to the dig crew. A clear give away
and easy to spot too.
Next?
On 6/2/09, JC Dill wrote:
> Elmar K. Bins wrote:
>> jcdill.li...@gmail.com (JC Dill) wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Why do they "watch" and "monitor" rather than proactively go
>>> out and say "watch out, there'
In my experience they are required not only to mark the line, but to
identify it with the initials of the owner.
On Jun 2, 2009, at 10:44 AM, JC Dill wrote:
Elmar K. Bins wrote:
jcdill.li...@gmail.com (JC Dill) wrote:
Why do they "watch" and "monitor" rather than proactively go out
and
Elmar K. Bins wrote:
jcdill.li...@gmail.com (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?
*snicker*
You ever been to a construction site?
On Jun 2, 2009, at 9:19 AM, Martin Hannigan wrote:
On Mon, Jun 1, 2009 at 6:40 PM, Charles Wyble
wrote:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/05/30/AR2009053002114_pf.html
Not sure if I fully believe the article. Responding to a fiber cut in
seconds?
I suppose it's p
On Mon, Jun 1, 2009 at 6:40 PM, Charles Wyble wrote:
>
> http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/05/30/AR2009053002114_pf.html
>
> Not sure if I fully believe the article. Responding to a fiber cut in
> seconds?
>
> I suppose it's possible if $TLA had people monitoring the const
Charles Wyble wrote:
> I do feel this might be the last post from Mr Pooser. :)
>
> Your on to them it seems. ;)
>
> A very interesting idea. I imagine it wouldn't be hard for foreign
> actors to get access to the data feed of construction, observe for signs
> of a cut and then splice in a tap.
jcdill.li...@gmail.com (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?
*snicker*
You ever been to a construction site?
Joel Jaeggli wrote:
Given the location the guys in the blacks suvs likely have at least
situational awareness of all of the contruction projects in their
immediate vicinity.
This has to be the most backwards way of dealing with this problem.
They know exactly where the construction is taking
On Mon, 1 Jun 2009, Charles Wyble wrote:
Right. So why the "near instant" response time.
Extra budgets, job creation. Knowing ahead of time where and when work is
going to be done (easily found out), have someone around the corner at a
Starbucks so they can jump into action if/when somethi
Its all a sham. The construction was done by the cubans.. They're good at fiber
taps
- Original Message -
From: Charles Wyble
To: nanog@nanog.org
Sent: Mon Jun 01 16:17:08 2009
Subject: Re: Fiber cut - response in seconds?
I do feel this might be the last post from Mr Pooser. :)
I do feel this might be the last post from Mr Pooser. :)
Your on to them it seems. ;)
A very interesting idea. I imagine it wouldn't be hard for foreign
actors to get access to the data feed of construction, observe for signs
of a cut and then splice in a tap.
Though wouldn't that tap be fo
> Right. So why the "near instant" response time. If it's a diverse path,
> one would imagine that they could respond in a few hours or a day and
> not have any impact.
Just a guess, but: A cut cable is one thing. A cut cable in which people
wearing different suits and driving a different brand of
The fact that they are so closely monitoring the construction and wanting to
fix it that fast seems a bit over the top for redundant systems.
Even despite what we saw recently in the SF bay area?
If black helicopters are involved, I suspect this is about par on the
paranoia scale.
Joel Jaeggli wrote:
Charles Wyble wrote:
Joel Jaeggli wrote:
It's pretty trivial if know where all the construction projects on your
path are...
How so? Setup OTDR traces and watch them?
When you lose link on every pair in a bundle, but don't lose any of the
buildings you're serving via
In a message written on Mon, Jun 01, 2009 at 03:40:31PM -0700, Charles Wyble
wrote:
> http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/05/30/AR2009053002114_pf.html
>
> Not sure if I fully believe the article. Responding to a fiber cut in
> seconds?
Folks who dig call "Miss Utility" (i
Charles Wyble wrote:
>
>
> Joel Jaeggli wrote:
>> It's pretty trivial if know where all the construction projects on your
>> path are...
>
> How so? Setup OTDR traces and watch them?
When you lose link on every pair in a bundle, but don't lose any of the
buildings you're serving via diverse p
> From nanog-bounces+bonomi=mail.r-bonomi@nanog.org Mon Jun 1 18:30:48
> 2009
> Date: Mon, 01 Jun 2009 15:40:31 -0700
> From: Charles Wyble
> To: "nanog@nanog.org"
> Subject: Fiber cut - response in seconds?
>
> http://www.washingtonpost.com
I'm not sure why this sounds so surprising or impressive... given g$vt
budgets.
Monitoring software using a pair of fibers in your bundle. OTDR or
similar digital diagnostics. You detect a loss, you figure out how many
feet away it is. You look at your map.
A simpler way to do it (if you d
Joel Jaeggli wrote:
It's pretty trivial if know where all the construction projects on your
path are...
How so? Setup OTDR traces and watch them?
I've seen this happen on a university campus several times. no black
helicopters were involved.
Care to expand on the methodology used? A camp
It's pretty trivial if know where all the construction projects on your
path are...
I've seen this happen on a university campus several times. no black
helicopters were involved.
joel
Charles Wyble wrote:
> http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/05/30/AR2009053002114_pf.html
nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Fiber cut - response in seconds?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/05/30/AR200905
3002114_pf.html
Not sure if I fully believe the article. Responding to a fiber cut in
seconds?
I suppose it's possible if $TLA had people monitoring the constru
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/05/30/AR2009053002114_pf.html
Not sure if I fully believe the article. Responding to a fiber cut in
seconds?
I suppose it's possible if $TLA had people monitoring the construction
from across the street, and they were in communication
48 matches
Mail list logo
