RE: (fwd) [Oz-ISP] USG takes control of xpnder off PAS-2
Or you could pony up for a non-preemptable circuit. Much more expensive. Your choice. Live with it. -Al Rowland personal capacity only. -----Original Message----- From: Rachel Warren [mailto:rachel@plur.net] Sent: Friday, September 21, 2001 1:00 PM To: nanog@merit.edu Subject: (fwd) [Oz-ISP] USG takes control of xpnder off PAS-2 I thought this might interest NANOG: ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Fri, 21 Sep 2001 18:11:39 +1000 (EST) From: Terence <terry@tdce.com.au> To: aussie-isp@aussie.net Cc: AusBONE Members <ausbone-members@ausbone.tdce.com.au> Subject: [Oz-ISP] USG takes control of xpnder off PAS-2 Well, there must be a big war coming up, because the US govmint just appropriated our PAS-2 transponder, effectively shutting down our regional operations on October 15. I'm more than happy for journalists to call me. I may be sympathetic to the USG over terrorism, but they can't go around putting AUSTRALIAN REGIONAL ISP's out of business... --- Terence C. Giufre-Sweetser +---------------------------------+--------------------------+ | TereDonn Telecommunications Ltd | Phone +61-[0]7-32369366 | | 1/128 Bowen St, SPRING HILL | FAX +61-[0]7-32369930 | | PO BOX 1054, SPRING HILL 4004 | Mobile +61-[0]414-663053 | | Queensland Australia | http://www.tdce.com.au | +---------------------------------+--------------------------+ Rachel -- http://www.plur.net/~rachel/misc/stock-market-nasdaq.jpg
On Fri, 21 Sep 2001, Rowland, Alan D wrote:
Or you could pony up for a non-preemptable circuit. Much more expensive. Your choice. Live with it.
There are several levels of preemption. At the highest level, which to my knowledge has *not* been activated, every carrier with an FCC license (including cable landing and satellite earthstation licenses) are subject to preemption by the US Government. Its in the FCC rules and regulations, but I don't have the citation with me. Even so-called "Irrevocable Right to Use" are subject to preemption under this condition. The only limitiation is in the US Constitution, 5th Amendment, which means US Carriers still get preempted, but also get a big check from the US Treasury in compensation. Lower levels of pre-emption work much like the electrical grid or advertisers on the television networks. You get a discount, in return the carrier is able to turn off your circuit if they need the transponder for something else, or just a better paying customer. For example, if PanAmSat lost a satellite and re-routed traffic over PAS-2, people who took the discount also accepted the risk they could be pre-empted on PAS-2. Or if a higher paying customer, e.g. US Military needs bandwidth, people getting the discount are the first ones booted off the satellite. I suspect the PAS-2 pre-emption is of the second variety. Which means you aren't entitled to compensation except as called out in your contract with PanAmSat.
On Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 05:28:39PM -0400, Sean Donelan wrote:
On Fri, 21 Sep 2001, Rowland, Alan D wrote:
Or you could pony up for a non-preemptable circuit. Much more expensive. Your choice. Live with it.
There are several levels of preemption. At the highest level, which to my knowledge has *not* been activated, every carrier with an FCC license (including cable landing and satellite earthstation licenses) are subject to preemption by the US Government. Its in the FCC rules and regulations, but I don't have the citation with me. Even so-called "Irrevocable Right to Use" are subject to preemption under this condition. The only limitiation is in the US Constitution, 5th Amendment, which means US Carriers still get preempted, but also get a big check from the US Treasury in compensation.
You'd think satellite capacity would be subject to some more international set of regulations than those of the FCC. Are you saying that if I buy preemptable capacity on PAS-N to uplink from New Zealand and downlink to Fiji, that the capacity is subject to preemption by the US Government under FCC rules? Or is there an assumption here that there's an (up|down)link on US soil involved? Joe
On Fri, 21 Sep 2001, Joe Abley wrote:
You'd think satellite capacity would be subject to some more international set of regulations than those of the FCC. Are you saying that if I buy preemptable capacity on PAS-N to uplink from New Zealand and downlink to Fiji, that the capacity is subject to preemption by the US Government under FCC rules?
Or is there an assumption here that there's an (up|down)link on US soil involved?
There are satellites not subject to US FCC regulations. PAS-2 isn't one of them.
I would think only those satellites of US origin could be in a position to deny non-refundable SLA time which can occur whenever they dictate. If they provide the initial investment into space can't they write whatever they choose into the contract? Even if it exceeds international boundaries? After all, the satellite is in international air space; isn't it? ----- Original Message ----- From: "Sean Donelan" <sean@donelan.com> To: "Joe Abley" <jabley@automagic.org> Cc: <nanog@merit.edu> Sent: Friday, September 21, 2001 6:47 PM Subject: Re: (fwd) [Oz-ISP] USG takes control of xpnder off PAS-2
On Fri, 21 Sep 2001, Joe Abley wrote:
You'd think satellite capacity would be subject to some more international set of regulations than those of the FCC. Are you saying that if I buy preemptable capacity on PAS-N to uplink from New Zealand and downlink to Fiji, that the capacity is subject to preemption by the US Government under FCC rules?
Or is there an assumption here that there's an (up|down)link on US soil involved?
There are satellites not subject to US FCC regulations. PAS-2 isn't one of them.
participants (4)
-
Joe Abley -
Rowland, Alan D -
Sean Donelan -
Tim Devries