North American Network Operators Group

Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical

RE: YouTube IP Hijacking

  • From: Tomas L. Byrnes
  • Date: Tue Feb 26 14:18:50 2008

Since the US has no jurisdiction over 17557, other than for the US govt.
to force ISPs to refuse to accept any advertisements with 17557 or any
other AS that didn't meet some regulatory requirements in the path, how
would you propose that the regulatory environment you envision work?

American Airlines isn't the right straw-man here, Pakistan International
Airlines is. The only reason THEY meet anyone else's standards is that
they wouldn't be allowed to use the airspace or land if they didn't.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On 
> Behalf Of Dave Pooser
> Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2008 10:15 AM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: YouTube IP Hijacking
> > But, due to a lot of effort in making better educational material 
> > available for pilots, including better flight simulators and better 
> > simulator scenarios, flying is a lot safer than it was in 1958.
> At the risk of being a stereotypical American liberal, I'll 
> point out two significant reasons flying is safer than it 
> used to be in the US are Federal regulation and post-accident 
> lawsuits. If there were an organization like the FAA that had 
> the power to "ground" AS17557 until their network engineers 
> completed a week's refresher course, there'd be significantly 
> better change management techniques in play. If YouTube were 
> currently suing Pakistani Telecom for eighty-seven gazillion 
> dollars-- and were widely considered a lock to win their 
> lawsuit-- suddenly a whole lot of other ISPs would magically 
> find the training budget to make sure THEIR engineers didn't 
> expose THEM to that sort of liability.
> Pilots don't spend dozens of hours in simulators because it's 
> fun, they do it to get/keep their license. American Airlines 
> doesn't spend millions of dollars on pilot (and ground crew) 
> education because they're run by philanthropists, they do it 
> because screwups could cost them orders of magnitude more 
> money. The Internet lacks any such enforcement mechanisms.
> How many people do you think have lost their jobs for this 
> latest incident?
> What are the odds that the responsible party lost a penny in 
> revenue or in fines?
> When there is no financial or regulatory pressure to avoid 
> screwups, avoiding screwups ceases to be a priority at Layer 
> 8 or Layer 9. And then you have incidents like this, where 
> the operational solutions are widely agreed upon and the 
> political obstacles are widely agreed to be insurmountable. 
> And we wait for the next incident.
> --
> Dave Pooser, ACSA
> Manager of Information Services
> Alford Media