Transit, Exchange Point Agreements, and Acceptable Use?

Paul Ferguson fergdawgster at
Fri Nov 21 15:13:40 UTC 2014

Hash: SHA256

On 11/21/2014 7:09 AM, Siegel, David wrote:

> Most written peering agreements have a clause that says you can't
> provide that data unless required to by authorities and only in
> compliance with applicable local law.
> The article says that's still an open question:
> "Channel 4 News has been unable to establish whether Reliance
> Communications was served with a warrant to authorise this and the
> company has not responded to our calls."

Right, I noticed that bit. :-)


- - ferg

> Dave
> -----Original Message----- From: NANOG
> [mailto:nanog-bounces at] On Behalf Of Paul Ferguson Sent:
> Friday, November 21, 2014 7:59 AM To: NANOG Subject: Transit,
> Exchange Point Agreements, and Acceptable Use?
> I'll apologize up front if this offends anyone's sensitivities as
> to what is relevant for list conversation... but one sentence in
> this Channel4 News story (from what I understand, Channel4 is a
> very popular news source in the UK) struck me as perhaps in
> violation of some sort of peering and/or transit agreement. Cable
> and Wireless:
> "...even went as far as providing traffic from a rival foreign
> communications company, handing information sent by millions of
> internet users worldwide over to spies."
> The entire article is here:
>  My question is this: Do willful actions such as these violate
> peering, transit, and/or exchange agreements in any way?
> Thanks,
> - ferg

- -- 
Paul Ferguson
VP Threat Intelligence, IID
PGP Public Key ID: 0x54DC85B2
Key fingerprint: 19EC 2945 FEE8 D6C8 58A1 CE53 2896 AC75 54DC 85B2
Version: GnuPG v2


More information about the NANOG mailing list