nanog mailing list archives
Re: sat-3 cut?
From: Nick Hilliard <nick () foobar org>
Date: Sun, 09 Aug 2009 20:20:04 +0100
On 08/08/2009 18:09, William Allen Simpson wrote:
Not in a long time. My memory is that SAT-3 was supposed to be a nice cooperative effort funded by the nations themselves, rather than an outside investor. With cooperation, I'd have expected good peering.
Indeed, it is a co-operative affair owned by several of the incumbent telcos along the route, and one suspects that they engage in all of the sort of benevolent, community-focussed behaviour that you'd expect from incumbents.
On a more serious note, and peering / interconnection arrangements aside, the cable fault indicates a critical lack of resilience on the west coast of africa.
Nick
Current thread:
- Re: sat-3 cut? Randy Bush (Aug 07)
- Re: sat-3 cut? William Allen Simpson (Aug 08)
- Re: sat-3 cut? William Allen Simpson (Aug 08)
- Re: sat-3 cut? Nick Hilliard (Aug 09)
- Re: sat-3 cut? William Allen Simpson (Aug 09)
- Re: sat-3 cut? Randy Bush (Aug 09)
- Re: sat-3 cut? Eric Brunner-Williams (Aug 09)
- Re: sat-3 cut? William Allen Simpson (Aug 10)
- Re: sat-3 cut? Steven M. Bellovin (Aug 10)
- Re: sat-3 cut? Randy Bush (Aug 10)
- Re: sat-3 cut? bmanning (Aug 10)
- Re: sat-3 cut? Martin Hannigan (Aug 10)
- Re: sat-3 cut? Nick Hilliard (Aug 10)
- Re: sat-3 cut? Joel Jaeggli (Aug 10)
- Re: sat-3 cut? William Allen Simpson (Aug 08)