<html><head></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-size: 14px; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; "><div>It's different depending on jurisdiction. If you are really interested in this then read Wiltshire Grannis lawyer Kent Bressie's PTC presentation:</div><div><br></div><div><a href="http://wiltshiregrannis.com/siteFiles/News/FD460B4960A5941155FD0BEA627C8027.pdf">http://wiltshiregrannis.com/siteFiles/News/FD460B4960A5941155FD0BEA627C8027.pdf</a></div><div><br></div><div>As Mark Newton said the process is quite well known.</div><div><br></div><div>You meet with Team Telecom (FBI, CIA, NSA, DoD/Military, DHS, State and Justice Departments). You need to strike an agreement with them before you get approval from the FCC for a landing. Every country has its own controls over critical infrastructure assets (including change in control/ownership, operation and management, confidentiality of facilities and location as well as interception - see page 9 of presentation) and I would suggest that they aren't too dissimilar to other countries I've seen (see page 6 of presentation).</div><div><br></div><div>It is often a requirement of countries that data that relates to network configuration, management and metadata relating to traffic that originates/terminates in their country, stored within their jurisdiction so that if they need to obtain access they can issue a legal instrument (usually subpoena) to access said data (as it sits in their jurisdiction). It's hard/not practical for the US to issue a subpoena in HK to access data. Same applies the other way to HK issuing subpoenas in the US.</div><div><br></div><div>Cheers</div><div><br></div><div>[b]</div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><span id="OLK_SRC_BODY_SECTION"><div style="font-family:Calibri; font-size:11pt; text-align:left; color:black; BORDER-BOTTOM: medium none; BORDER-LEFT: medium none; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0in; PADDING-LEFT: 0in; PADDING-RIGHT: 0in; BORDER-TOP: #b5c4df 1pt solid; BORDER-RIGHT: medium none; PADDING-TOP: 3pt"><span style="font-weight:bold">From: </span> Mark Newton <<a href="mailto:newton@atdot.dotat.org">newton@atdot.dotat.org</a>><br><span style="font-weight:bold">Date: </span> Sunday, 14 July 2013 7:32 PM<br><span style="font-weight:bold">To: </span> Tony Simenson <<a href="mailto:td_miles@yahoo.com">td_miles@yahoo.com</a>><br><span style="font-weight:bold">Cc: </span> "<a href="mailto:ausnog@lists.ausnog.net">ausnog@lists.ausnog.net</a>" <<a href="mailto:ausnog@lists.ausnog.net">ausnog@lists.ausnog.net</a>><br><span style="font-weight:bold">Subject: </span> Re: [AusNOG] Telstra agreed to retain [Australian] data for US authorities<br></div><div><br></div><div><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=iso-8859-1"><div style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; "><br><div><div>On 14/07/2013, at 2:15 PM, Tony <<a href="mailto:td_miles@yahoo.com">td_miles@yahoo.com</a>> wrote:</div><blockquote type="cite"><div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); font-family: 'times new roman', 'new york', times, serif; font-size: 12pt; position: static; z-index: auto; ">Two guys in black suits walk in, look all around the room, then a third suit walks in. He puts it to you that you will do what is outlined in the document being given to you. You essentially have two
choices:<br><br>1. Comply.<br>2. Politely deline and effectively disconnect Australian Internet from the rest of the world.<br></div></div></blockquote></div><br><div>I put it to you that a choice like that would never be presented, because the fallout</div><div>arising from (2) would be (to coin a phrase) "diplomatically apeshit."</div><div><br></div><div>What's more likely is that (2) would be, "Find another landing station operated by someone</div><div>who has already complied."</div><div><br></div><div>That'd delay the project, place the installer in a position where they'd know that landing</div><div>parties would have them by the short and curlies on price and access to cross connects,</div><div>and also ensure that the cable would be in a place where the landing party who had</div><div>already complied would be able to intercept the cable in any case.</div><div><br></div><div>Sometimes small threats are more effective.</div><div><br></div><div>The FCC license grant documents for foreign cables are reasonably open documents, and</div><div>lay out the terms and conditions of the license (including interceptability) and usually</div><div>include the Lat/Long of the cable stations at each end (although sometimes they</div><div>"accidentally" transpose digits, those darn typos!). Pretty sure that a little bit of googling</div><div>will reveal that REACH wasn't being treated at all uniquely here, and nor was Australia.</div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div> - mark</div><div><br></div><div><br></div></div></div>_______________________________________________
AusNOG mailing list
<a href="mailto:AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net">AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net</a>
<a href="http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog">http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog</a>
</span></body></html>