[AusNOG] Welcome to Metadata Retention

Mon Mar 2 09:06:43 EST 2015

Is that all it's going to be?  If that's the case, I'm set, as I already
archive 90% of my mailserver logs for 2 years as a requirement of one of my
customers (funnily enough, AGD :-p)

We were just discussing it at $dayjob, and the Network team were of the
understanding it would require us archiving our sflow data (or is that no
longer on the table?? If so, that makes it a lot easier!).  I did some
quick sums, and shoving that into Amazon Glacier (80TB/month growth) would
be growing at $800/month^2 - so once you hit the 2 years retention
requirement, you're holding at 1.9PB of storage (!@#!#!), and paying
$19k/month for that storage.  And that's at 100:1 sflow sampling (full
netflow would NOT be possible)

On 2 March 2015 at 09:00, Mark McKibbin <mark at team.dcsi.net.au> wrote:

> I don't agree with the legislation, however as we are now stuck with it it
> does not seem over onerous. At a glance it looks like encrypted mail logs
> (no big deal), telephone call data that we already record.... have I missed
> something?
>
> Cheers
> Mark McKibbin
> DCSI
>
> On 2 March 2015 at 08:47, Nathan Brookfield <
> Nathan.Brookfield at simtronic.com.au> wrote:
>
>>  I know it covers me without any hesitation unfortunately so I’ve come
>> to grips with the fact I just need to suck it up.  Storage is cheap, mirror
>> ports are easy to implement and we’re small enough at the moment that it’s
>> not going to cause me any major pain and we’ll likely never be asked for
>> the data…
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* Damien Gardner Jnr [mailto:rendrag at rendrag.net]
>> *Sent:* Monday, 2 March 2015 8:43 AM
>>
>> *To:* Nathan Brookfield
>> *Cc:* Paul Wilkins; ausnog at lists.ausnog.net
>> *Subject:* Re: [AusNOG] Welcome to Metadata Retention
>>
>>
>>
>> Sorry, but I just don't agree.  The way I read it as it currently stands,
>> I can basically ignore the legislation until someone definitively says I
>> have to (i.e. the 'The minister may issue a determination specifically
>> declaring a company to be a hosting provider').
>>
>>
>>
>> It sounds like you WANT to have to collect metadata Nath ;)  Why are you
>> arguing so hard to be covered by the new legislation??
>>
>>
>>
>> On 2 March 2015 at 08:38, Nathan Brookfield <
>> Nathan.Brookfield at simtronic.com.au> wrote:
>>
>> In the best case scenario they are leasing the ‘Hardware’ but that does
>> not mean they are leasing the space, in the majority of cases they are
>> going to be paying for a ‘service’ which you are providing on your own
>> hardware (hosting/vps) and you ‘the hosting provider’ are leasing the
>> space, not the end client.
>>
>>
>>
>> I think on this argument you would need a REALLY good lawyer…..
>>
>>
>>
>> Very different argument to the Megaport/PIPE issue.
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* Damien Gardner Jnr [mailto:rendrag at rendrag.net]
>> *Sent:* Monday, 2 March 2015 8:33 AM
>> *To:* Nathan Brookfield
>> *Cc:* Paul Wilkins; ausnog at lists.ausnog.net
>>
>>
>> *Subject:* Re: [AusNOG] Welcome to Metadata Retention
>>
>>
>>
>> But the customer is located within the facility? They're leasing
>> hardware/space/etc from you, so they are your tenant - therefore they are
>> located in the facility?
>>
>>
>>
>> On 2 March 2015 at 08:26, Nathan Brookfield <
>> Nathan.Brookfield at simtronic.com.au> wrote:
>>
>> But you are providing said (hosting/colo/dedi/vds) services in multiple
>> data centres and the actual customer is not located within that facility, I
>> think that one would be hard pressed to stand behind.
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* AusNOG [mailto:ausnog-bounces at lists.ausnog.net] *On Behalf Of *Damien
>> Gardner Jnr
>> *Sent:* Monday, 2 March 2015 6:32 AM
>> *To:* Paul Wilkins
>> *Cc:* ausnog at lists.ausnog.net
>> *Subject:* Re: [AusNOG] Welcome to Metadata Retention
>>
>>
>>
>> If you're going to quote the Carriage Service definition from the
>> Telecommunications Act, you also need to note Section 89, the 'same
>> premises' exclusion. This excludes services delivered inside the same
>> building, which reads to me that provided you're only supplying internet
>> services inside of Datacenters (which most hosting/colo/dedi/vds companies
>> do), you're not providing carriage services, and thus aren't affected by
>> this bill?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 2 March 2015 at 02:51, Paul Wilkins <paulwilkins369 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> The fundamental qualifier is whether you provide a 'carriage service', as
>> defined by the Telecommunications Act, 1997. (The Broadcasting Services Act
>> relies on the definition in the Telco Act).
>>
>> *carriage service* means a service for carrying communications by means
>> of guided and/or unguided electromagnetic energy.
>>
>>
>>
>> If you provide a service (or resell a service) for the termination of
>> cables or fiber, you're clearly within the scope of the bill.
>>
>> If you don't touch the physical or data link layers, the bill may or may
>> not apply, subject to interpretation and legal argument. It's not clear if
>> a communication at the IP layer is to the opposite IP (which arguably
>> requires transmission by electromagnetic energy). Then again, IP doesn't
>> deal with electromagnetic radiation, so perhaps not, but I wouldn't think
>> this a strong argument.
>>
>> Alternatively, if the communication is viewed as from the IP to the MAC,
>> then the communication is local and there is no transmission via
>> electromagnetic energy (except from what is local to the NIC chipset).
>> Assuming this interpretation, the IP<>IP conversation would be 'content' of
>> the MAC<>IP communication, and still remains outside the bill.
>>
>> As I've said, the lawyers will have a lot of fun with this. I'm not a
>> lawyer and don't represent myself as a legal expert. If you need informed
>> opinion, consult a legal professional, or ask the advice of the Dep't of
>> Communications, who administer both the Telco Act, and the Broadcasting
>> Services Act.
>>
>>
>>
>> Paul Wilkins
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> AusNOG mailing list
>> AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net
>> http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> Damien Gardner Jnr
>> VK2TDG. Dip EE. GradIEAust
>> rendrag at rendrag.net -  http://www.rendrag.net/
>> --
>> We rode on the winds of the rising storm,
>>  We ran to the sounds of thunder.
>> We danced among the lightning bolts,
>>  and tore the world asunder
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> Damien Gardner Jnr
>> VK2TDG. Dip EE. GradIEAust
>> rendrag at rendrag.net -  http://www.rendrag.net/
>> --
>> We rode on the winds of the rising storm,
>>  We ran to the sounds of thunder.
>> We danced among the lightning bolts,
>>  and tore the world asunder
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> Damien Gardner Jnr
>> VK2TDG. Dip EE. GradIEAust
>> rendrag at rendrag.net -  http://www.rendrag.net/
>> --
>> We rode on the winds of the rising storm,
>>  We ran to the sounds of thunder.
>> We danced among the lightning bolts,
>>  and tore the world asunder
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> AusNOG mailing list
>> AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net
>> http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog
>>
>>
>
>
> --
>
> [image: DCSI Logo]
>
> *Mark McKibbin*
> Director
>
>
>
> DCS Internet Pty Ltd | 64 Queen St, Warragul VIC 3820
> W: www.dcsi.net.au | P: 1300 665 575 | F: 1300 556 595
>

-- 

Damien Gardner Jnr
VK2TDG. Dip EE. GradIEAust
rendrag at rendrag.net -  http://www.rendrag.net/
--
We rode on the winds of the rising storm,
 We ran to the sounds of thunder.
We danced among the lightning bolts,
 and tore the world asunder
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ausnog.net/pipermail/ausnog/attachments/20150302/88336c5d/attachment.html>