North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical Re: Vulnerbilities of Interconnection
Hi Alex, [email protected] wrote: > > > > > > > Lets bring this discussion to a some common ground - > > > > > > What kind of implact on the global internet would we see should we observe > > > nearly simultaneous detonation of 500 kilogramms of high explosives at N of the > > > major known interconnect facilities? > > > > N? Well, if you define N as the number of interconnect facilities, such > > as all the Equinix sites > > Lets say that N is 4 and they are all in the US, for the sake of the > discussion. Which four? Makes a big difference. And there, we just got proprietary/classified. I've often wondered what difference there would be in attacking cable heads instead of colo sites. Cut off the country from everywhere. How bad would that be. > > > (and I'm not banging on Equinix, it's just > > where we started all this) then I think globally, it wouldn't make that > > much difference. People in Tokyo would still be able to reach the globe > > and both coasts of the US. > > This presumes that the networks peer with the same AS numbers everywhere in > the world, which I dont think they do. Hadn't thought of that. I'm not sure then of the impact. > > The other thing to think about is that the physical transport will be > affected as well. Wavelenth customers will lose their paths. Circuit > customers that rely on some equipment located at the affected sites, losing > their circuits. > For individual users, it might be devastating. Overall, globally, that's a different story. Jane
|