deleskie@gmail.com wrote:
Not to turn this into an ethical typ discussion but this arguement would have to assume you could sue the telco not the 'vandal' due to a loss of life if it occured, and that, that dollar amt would be greater then 'securing' all cables.
Internet lawyering is a different mailing list... joel
The cost to fix all pintos' gas tanks was only $11 per car unit and it was gambled, though they lost it was cheeper then the lawsuits, I'm betting the while fewer units, its order of magnatitudes more then 11$ per unit to 'secure' access points with a lot less certain negative lawsuit outcomes. Sent from my BlackBerry device on the Rogers Wireless Network
-----Original Message----- From: Ravi Pina <ravi@cow.org>
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 2009 01:51:16 To: JC Dill<jcdill.lists@gmail.com> Cc: nanog@nanog.org<nanog@nanog.org> Subject: Re: Outside plant protection, fiber cuts, interwebz down oh noes!
On Thu, Apr 09, 2009 at 10:22:41PM -0700, JC Dill wrote:
Ravi Pina wrote:
That said one would *hope* vault access is not trivial and there are mechanisms in place to alert of unauthorized, unlawful entry.
I regularly drove on these roads when these lines were being put in up-and-down the SF Peninsula. There are 4 manhole covers every 1/4 mile or so that provide access to this fiber. Do the math. Multiply by the number of miles of fiber runs across the world, and the number of access points per mile on each run. Exactly how do you plan to make "vault access non-trivial" and yet make the access as easy as it needs to be for routine maintenance and repair?
Having never been in a vault or know how to get in one other than apparently lifting a manhole cover I can't possible answer that with anything more than guessing.
My guess is that it is probably less expensive in the long run to leave them unprotected and just fix the problems when they occur than to try to "secure" the vaults and deal with the costs and extended outage delays when access it "secured" and it takes longer to get into a vault to fix things.
I wasn't thinking Exodus/C&W/SAVVIS/Whoever level security, but considering communications cables traverse such sites it is hardly unreasonable to think they could implement some alarm that is centrally monitored by a NOC. I'm guessing *anything* is better than what appears to be the *nothing* that is in place now.
Also not to get sensationalist, but less expensive than a life that could be lost if an emergency call can't be put through?
-r