[Outages-discussion] Cogent disconnecting Russia

[Anthony Hoppe]

So, for full disclosure, while I am knowledgeable in the world of BGP, I do not work with BGP in an internet facing capacity.  So correct me if I'm wrong on the following...

I was thinking about this whole "blackroute Russia" and, well, wouldn't this truly take a group effort.  I'm not for this action, but *if* it were to happen, wouldn't all providers that have trunks to Russia need to be in agreeance?  If some providers turn down their Russia trunks, wouldn't that just cause the traffic to be re-routed over the remaining trunks?  Thus then causing a domino affect of overloading those who chose to remain up?



On 3/4/22 11:59, Owen DeLong wrote:
> It’s clear from the second paragraph of I.9 that this convention is written
> to apply to “powers” (i.e. governments) and that each government is expected
> to enforce compliance by companies operating under its “flag” for lack of a
> better term.
> 
> As such, it seems, at least in theory that Cogent would be expected to be
> of the same posture (neutrality or not) as the U.S. overall. I think it would
> be hard to claim that the U.S. is either entirely neutral or entirely in support
> of Ukraine under current conditions, so I guess that leaves Cogent free to
> choose anywhere on that spectrum they wish as well.
> 
> Personally, I’m of mixed opinion. I support doing whatever we can to hurt
> Putin and the leadership of Russia that has created this situation, but I am
> not convinced that cutting off access to outside information for millions of
> Russian citizens is not counterproductive to that end.
> 
> Owen
> 
> 
>> On Mar 4, 2022, at 11:36 , Matthew Petach <matt at petach.org <mailto:matt at petach.org>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> If they're going to follow the War Conventions in the Hauge, they should likewise terminate all customer connections to Ukraine as well, if they're considering themselves to be a neutral party.
>>
>> Of course, that doesn't apply if they're taking a side as a participant in the conflict.
>>
>> Shamelessly copying from Sean Donelan...
>>
>> https://www.icrc.org/en <https://www.icrc.org/en>
>>
>> Convention (V) respecting the Rights and Duties of Neutral Powers and
>> Persons in Case of War on Land. The Hague, 18 October 1907.
>>
>> CHAPTER I : THE RIGHTS AND DUTIES OF NEUTRAL POWERS - ART. 8.
>>
>> Art. 8. A neutral Power is not called upon to forbid or restrict the use
>> on behalf of the belligerents of telegraph or telephone cables or of
>> wireless telegraphy apparatus belonging to it or to companies or private
>> individuals.
>>
>>
>> CHAPTER I : THE RIGHTS AND DUTIES OF NEUTRAL POWERS - ART. 9.
>>
>> Art. 9. Every measure of restriction or prohibition taken by a neutral
>> Power in regard to the matters referred to in Articles 7 and 8
>> must be impartially applied by it to both belligerents.
>>
>> A neutral Power must see to the same obligation being observed by
>> companies or private individuals owning telegraph or telephone cables or
>> wireless telegraphy apparatus.
>>
>> On Fri, Mar 4, 2022, 11:20 Andy Ringsmuth <andy at andyring.com <mailto:andy at andyring.com>> wrote:
>>
>>     Apparently effective at noon EDT, which would be a couple hours ago.
>>
>>     Washington Post, but here’s a paywall-free archive:
>>
>>     https://archive.ph/TFgyg <https://archive.ph/TFgyg>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Outages-discussion mailing list
>> Outages-discussion at outages.org <mailto:Outages-discussion at outages.org>
>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/outages-discussion
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Outages-discussion mailing list
> Outages-discussion at outages.org
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/outages-discussion