[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Wanted: volunteers with bandwidth/storage to help save climate data
n Sat, Dec 17, 2016 at 6:15 PM, Doug Barton <dougb at dougbarton.us> wrote:
> On 12/16/2016 1:48 PM, Hugo Slabbert wrote:
>> This started as a technical appeal, but:
>> 1. Discussion will focus on Internet operational and technical issues as
>> described in the charter of NANOG.
> Hard to see how the OP has anything to do with either of the above.
Actually, it's not that hard ... *if* we can control ourselves from
making them partisan, and focus instead on the operational aspects.
(Admittedly, that's pretty hard!)
The OP's query was a logical combination of two concepts:
- First, from the charter (emphasis mine): "NANOG provides a forum
where people from the network research community, the network operator
community and the network vendor community can come together *to
identify and solve the problems that arise in operating and growing
- Second, from John Gilmore: "The Net interprets censorship as damage
and routes around it."
The OP appears to be managing risk associated with a (perhaps low)
chance of future censorship. Was the OP asking a straight question
about BGP or SFPs or CDNs? Of course not. But should doctors only talk
about surgical technique -- and not about, say, the need for a living
will? Of course not.
IMO, *operational, politics-free* discussion of items like these would
also be on topic for NANOG:
- Some *operational* workarounds for country-wide blocking of
Facebook, Whatsapp, and Twitter , or Signal 
- The *operational* challenges of replicating the Internet Archive to Canada 
Each operator has to make such risk calculations for themselves. Some
may see the "NA" in NANOG as insurance that such censorship could
never happen here. Others -- especially those who came from other
countries -- may feel differently.
Put another way:
Everyone has a line at which "I don't care what's in the pipes, I just
work here" changes into something more actionable. Being
*operationally* ready for that day seems like a good idea to me.