[Outages-discussion] Cogent disconnecting Russia
Jay R. Ashworth
jra at baylink.com
Fri Mar 4 18:36:00 EST 2022
Nope. This is for *discussion* of outages and potential outages, unlike the
main list.
As a moderator, I rule it on-topic for -discuss.
And the consensus seems the be pretty global: applying the Internet Death
Penalty, in any fashion, to Russia would be counterproductive.
Cheers,
-- jra
----- Original Message -----
> From: "Savarrah Goss" <Savarrah.Goss at hamiltonrelay.com>
> To: "Sean Brown" <sean.brown at saminds.com>, "Owen DeLong" <owen at delong.com>
> Cc: "Outages Discussion" <outages-discussion at outages.org>
> Sent: Friday, March 4, 2022 3:37:15 PM
> Subject: Re: [Outages-discussion] Cogent disconnecting Russia
> Isn’t this for outage reporting and not discussing world affairs?
>
>
>
>
> Savarrah Goss | Hamilton Relay
>
> O: 229.338.7086 | C: 229.854.8872 | Savarrah.Goss at hamiltonrelay.com |
> HamiltonRelay.com
>
>
>
> Hamilton Relay | @HamiltonRelay
>
>
>
>
>
> From: Outages-discussion <outages-discussion-bounces at outages.org> On Behalf Of
> Sean Brown
> Sent: Friday, March 4, 2022 3:27 PM
> To: Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com>
> Cc: Outages Discussion <outages-discussion at outages.org>
> Subject: Re: [Outages-discussion] Cogent disconnecting Russia
>
>
>
>
> **This email originated from outside of the Hamilton network. Please use extra
> caution with links and attachments. **
>
>
> I disagree. It seems pretty obvious the ’neutral power’ reference are the
> signatory nations to the Convention not engaged in conflict and not every
> private entity therein. As such the US (in this case) couldn’t direct Cogent to
> disconnect from Russia and not Ukraine, but Cogent is free, as a private
> entity, to choose not to do business with companies in Russia.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> The US is not directing Cogent to this action so the US is not in violation of
> the Convention, and Cogent is not a signatory to the Convention.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Mar 4, 2022, at 2:59 PM, Owen DeLong < owen at delong.com > 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 > 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
>
> 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 > 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
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Outages-discussion mailing list
> 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
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTE: This email and any attachments are confidential and may be
> protected by legal privilege. If you have received this email in error, please
> immediately notify the sender by return email and delete all copies of this
> email.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Outages-discussion mailing list
> Outages-discussion at outages.org
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/outages-discussion
--
Jay R. Ashworth Baylink jra at baylink.com
Designer The Things I Think RFC 2100
Ashworth & Associates http://www.bcp38.info 2000 Land Rover DII
St Petersburg FL USA BCP38: Ask For It By Name! +1 727 647 1274
More information about the Outages-discussion
mailing list