<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix"><br>
I guess I'll have to disagree with you on these, I admire your
certainty. Please let me know what the CAC says about it.<br>
<br>
On 17/06/2015 2:07 AM, Paul Wilkins wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAMmROTKef6g4=utrHVkiMQGkSS1GbXvNcHBJRat9LDDVYrxiCA@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>Paul,<br>
</div>
Agree for the most part, only:<br>
<br>
</div>
1 - Dark fibre isn't covered. If it's not lit, there's no
EMF.<br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
Dark fibre 'enables communications to be carried by means of EMF'.
When your customer lights it up, theres EMF. You can't tell if its
lit or not, and the metadata required doesn't change whether or not
its lit. It may be moot point, you can probably get an exemption for
dark fibre as the metadata is boring and static.<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAMmROTKef6g4=utrHVkiMQGkSS1GbXvNcHBJRat9LDDVYrxiCA@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>3 - At layers above IP (email/web/voip), whether this is
a communication, or the contents of a communication, is one
for the lawyers to sort out. There are going to be some big
lunches.<br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
Nope - AGD has already determined they are. Not the contents of
course - but the SIP headers, SMTP/POP3/IMAP headers are data about
communications. We're still debating them about web, since
web-browsing history is explicitly excluded, but not very well. The
lawyers won't 'sort it out' over lunches, they'll try to do it when
it gets to court, while you try to explain to them what a 'packet'
is - and I don't want to be the test-case while they try.<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAMmROTKef6g4=utrHVkiMQGkSS1GbXvNcHBJRat9LDDVYrxiCA@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>4 - Switching per the 1997 Telco Act is both a
communication (between a person and a person), and 2
communications (between a thing and a thing) (see definition
of communication in section 7 of 1997 Telco Act)<br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
and your point is? communications between a thing and a thing is
still communications, and within scope.<br>
<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAMmROTKef6g4=utrHVkiMQGkSS1GbXvNcHBJRat9LDDVYrxiCA@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div><br>
</div>
(I am not a lawyer. This is not expert legal opinion)<br>
<br>
</div>
Paul Wilkins<br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On 17 June 2015 at 01:35, Paul Brooks <span
dir="ltr"><<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:pbrooks-ausnog@layer10.com.au"
target="_blank">pbrooks-ausnog@layer10.com.au</a>></span>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000"><span class="">
<div>On 16/06/2015 11:25 PM, Paul Wilkins wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div>
<div>Paul,<br>
</div>
I don't think we do disagree. There ought to be
a demarc which says this business is in or
outside the scope of the Act.<br>
<br>
</div>
That demarc is where you provide, as a service,
communications via electromagnetic radiation, ie.
layer 2/3 services, ie. someone pays you to put an
IP on their CE. Layer 1 services are not covered,
as you point out. Or have I overlooked something
you see in contention?<br>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
</span> I think you might have, and it gets a bit hairy.<br>
<br>
The type of service is important. The type of business is
very important.<br>
<br>
Note well that the definition of 'carry' is 'includes
transmit, <b>switch</b> and receive'<br>
<br>
If you are a licensed carrier, a carriage service
provider, or an ISP, you are in-scope IF you provide a
relevant service. If you provide a carriage service - or
you resell someone else's carriage service - you are
automatically a carriage service provider - so focus on
the services.<br>
<br>
The words defining a relevant service are 'it is a service
for carrying communications, <b>or enabling
communications to be carried</b>, by means of guided or
unguided electromagnetic energy or both'. The 'or enabling
communications to be carried' are important, because <b>they
are different from the definition of 'carriage service'
in the Telco Act</b>. <b>And 'carry' includes 'switch'</b>.<br>
<br>
Layer 1 services (and Layer 0 services - dark fibre) are
definitely covered and in-scope - they are services for
carrying communications. The metadata might be fairly slim
and static, but the obligation is still there.<br>
Transmission services, including DSL, leased-line etc,
Layer 2 services, Layer 3 services, non-IP services like
MPLS, IPX, X.25, ATM, Frame Relay etc are all in-scope as
they are services for carrying communications, even though
they don't have anything to do with IP addressing. It has
nothing at all to do with IP addressing or IP capability.<br>
<br>
Fairly straight-forward so far.<br>
<br>
VoIP calls are 'communications'. Emails are
'communications'. A VoIP server or an email server still
'enables communications to be carried by means....' in and
out on the links to/from the servers, even if the operator
of the servers doesn't operate the links. So these
services appear to be in-scope as services too.<br>
<br>
HOWEVER - the definition of 'carriage service' in the
Telco Act only says 'service for carrying communications
by means of guided...etc' and doesn't include the 'or
enable communications to be carried' bit. Also, the Telco
Act has a definition of 'electronic messaging service
provider' which is clearly intended to be something
different from a carriage service provider, and captures a
pure email processing entity.<br>
<br>
So, if you provide an email service ONLY, it would be
in-scope - if you were a licensed carrier, a CSP using the
definition of the Telco Act, or an ISP. If you aren't one
of those three, then you may well be OK for now - until
you are captured at a later time by 187A(3)(b)(iii) 'of a
kind for which a declaration under subsection (3A) is in
force' when they realise the loophole and the Minister
declares its to be a relevant service despite all this.<br>
<br>
OK, reading back through all that - its complicated, I am
not a lawyer either, and while I like to think I'm
relatively on top of all this, this is not expert opinion
and maybe you really should get a real legal expert
opinion from someone with sufficient insurance that if it
turns out they interpret it differently from me or the
AGD, their insurance will cover your costs of complying
even if your real legal expert opinion also thought you
didn't.<span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888"><br>
<br>
Paul.</font></span><span class=""><br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div><br>
</div>
<div>(I am not a lawyer, this is not expert opinion)<br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
Paul Wilkins<br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On 16 June 2015 at 22:13,
Paul Brooks <span dir="ltr"><<a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:pbrooks-ausnog@layer10.com.au"
target="_blank">pbrooks-ausnog@layer10.com.au</a>></span>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0
0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc
solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<div>
<div>
<div>On 16/06/2015 3:30 PM, Mike Everest
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d">Hi
Paul, all,</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d"> </span></p>
<div
style="border:none;border-left:solid
blue 1.5pt;padding:0cm 0cm 0cm
4.0pt">
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:5.25pt">Per
my understanding (having
read the relevant sections
of the Retention Act and
the Telecommunications Act
(the definitions are
somewhat recursive, but it
eventually comes down to
whether you provide a
service for carrying
communications via
electromagnetic waves -
whether or not you have a
carrier license).<span
style="color:#1f497d"></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d">That’s
essentially the
definition of a carrier,
and in Australia, if you
are a carrier then you
need to be a licensed
one – so, moot point
maybe ;-)</span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
NO NO NO! To both of you!<br>
<br>
Being a carrier has NOTHING to do with
providing IP addresses, or services.<br>
<br>
A carrier license is a license to dig holes.
Its a civil construction permit, to build
and/or own the underlying cables or radio
links. Nothing more.<br>
<br>
If you *operate* the cables, or services
provided over the cables (yours or cables you
lease from someone else) then you are *also* a
CSP - Carriage Service Provider.<br>
You don't need a carrier license to own
buildings, you don't need one to own the
equipment that lights up the cables, you don't
need one to provide services, you don't need
one to lease a connection from someone else.
You only need a carrier license if you own the
underlying cable/radio link as an asset (and
its more than 600 metres, or crossing a
property boundary), or you want to build a new
one.<br>
<br>
To the point - being a licensed carrier has
NOTHING to do with data retention. A licensed
carrier, that doesn't provide services, has
nothing to retain.<span><font color="#888888"><br>
<br>
Paul.<br>
</font></span></div>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
AusNOG mailing list<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net"
target="_blank">AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net</a><br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog</a><br>
<br>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset></fieldset>
<br>
<pre>_______________________________________________
AusNOG mailing list
<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net" target="_blank">AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net</a>
<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog" target="_blank">http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</span></div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
<pre wrap="">_______________________________________________
AusNOG mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net">AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog">http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>