Hello. It is the first time that happened since the creation of ICANN. A quick risk analysis would say: - That custody during transport is not for ICANN - That duplication is not necessary - There was a very quick response - ICANN is working with transparency and accountability in solving critical problems, with costs adjusted as necessary to maintain the operation. Kind regards Alberto De: at-large-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto:at-large-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] En nombre de Seun Ojedeji Enviado el: lunes, 03 de octubre de 2016 03:00 p.m. Para: Roberto Gaetano <roberto_gaetano@hotmail.com> CC: At-Large Worldwide <at-large@atlarge-lists.icann.org> Asunto: Re: [At-Large] Cruz' revenge Hello Roberto, Please tell me the first question is "pun intended" ;-) As to the second; well I understand it's prudent to have backup of network services/data but what does having a backup of over 100 tons of hardware mean? I think it definitely will mean a lot of redundancy resulting to a waste of resources as well. As I note from the announcement[1], looks like a number of the devices has been replaced. The remote hubs will be the major hit. I can imagine the ICANN tech are working around the logistics. Regards 1. https://www.icann.org/news/blog/fire-on-cargo-ship-affects-it-equipment-boun... Sent from my LG G4 Kindly excuse brevity and typos On 3 Oct 2016 18:21, "Roberto Gaetano" <roberto_gaetano@hotmail.com <mailto:roberto_gaetano@hotmail.com> > wrote: http://domainincite.com/21067-ship-explosion-takes-icann-gear-out-of-action Two questions: * We always talk about disaster recovery, duplication of resources, etc. Why did we not put in place these measures? The question will now be “if those folks cannot secure their own equipment, how can they be trusted to take care of the Internet?” * What will be the real impact for the meeting? I cannot believe that we do not have backup solutions, as Murphy implies. We live in interesting times indeed. Brings me back to 1998, when CORE servers were stolen. Cheers, R _______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org <mailto:At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org --- El software de antivirus Avast ha analizado este correo electrónico en busca de virus. https://www.avast.com/antivirus

...

It is the first time that happened since the creation of ICANN. A quick risk analysis would say: <> - That custody during transport is not for ICANN - That duplication is not necessary - There was a very quick response - ICANN is working with transparency and accountability in solving critical problems, with costs adjusted as necessary to maintain the operation.

Agreed. This is a very unusual problem, and ICANN is taking reasonable action to deal with it. Some of the people here appear to be suggesting that ICANN should have two or three sets of the 100 tons of stuff they send to meetings, or perhaps that they should run their own shipping line. I can promise that the Register would be full of stories about "A peek inside ICANN's million dollar warehouse of cables." Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies", Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. https://jl.ly

I am with Alberto here. Best, Vanda Scartezini Polo Consultores Associados Av. Paulista 1159, cj 1004 01311-200- Sao Paulo, SP, Brazil Land Line: +55 11 3266.6253 Mobile: + 55 11 98181.1464 Sorry for any typos. From: <at-large-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org> on behalf of "svg@milathan.ltd" <svg@milathan.ltd> Date: Tuesday, October 4, 2016 at 9:49 AM To: Alberto Soto <asoto@ibero-americano.org> Cc: 'At-Large Worldwide' <at-large@atlarge-lists.icann.org> Subject: Re: [At-Large] Cruz' revenge +1 Stéphane Van Gelder Le 3 oct. 2016 à 20:12, Alberto Soto <asoto@ibero-americano.org> a écrit : Hello. It is the first time that happened since the creation of ICANN. A quick risk analysis would say: - That custody during transport is not for ICANN - That duplication is not necessary - There was a very quick response - ICANN is working with transparency and accountability in solving critical problems, with costs adjusted as necessary to maintain the operation. Kind regards Alberto De: at-large-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto:at-large-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] En nombre de Seun Ojedeji Enviado el: lunes, 03 de octubre de 2016 03:00 p.m. Para: Roberto Gaetano <roberto_gaetano@hotmail.com> CC: At-Large Worldwide <at-large@atlarge-lists.icann.org> Asunto: Re: [At-Large] Cruz' revenge Hello Roberto, Please tell me the first question is "pun intended" ;-) As to the second; well I understand it's prudent to have backup of network services/data but what does having a backup of over 100 tons of hardware mean? I think it definitely will mean a lot of redundancy resulting to a waste of resources as well. As I note from the announcement[1], looks like a number of the devices has been replaced. The remote hubs will be the major hit. I can imagine the ICANN tech are working around the logistics. Regards 1. https://www.icann.org/news/blog/fire-on-cargo-ship-affects-it-equipment-boun... Sent from my LG G4 Kindly excuse brevity and typos On 3 Oct 2016 18:21, "Roberto Gaetano" <roberto_gaetano@hotmail.com> wrote: http://domainincite.com/21067-ship-explosion-takes-icann-gear-out-of-action Two questions: · We always talk about disaster recovery, duplication of resources, etc. Why did we not put in place these measures? The question will now be “if those folks cannot secure their own equipment, how can they be trusted to take care of the Internet?” · What will be the real impact for the meeting? I cannot believe that we do not have backup solutions, as Murphy implies. We live in interesting times indeed. Brings me back to 1998, when CORE servers were stolen. Cheers, R _______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org El software de antivirus Avast ha analizado este correo electrónico en busca de virus. www.avast.com _______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org _______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org

Hello Roberto, By "pun intended" it loosely meant" I hope you were joking" ;-). That said, yes you are right about how press could get an headline around this. However I am glad that ICANN is indeed being transparent with this by providing update on happenings to the community. I think Alberto gave a good 4 line summary that we can always forward to any press that wants to relate mere meeting equipment incidence to imply incompetence in operation of the IANA Function. Regards On Mon, Oct 3, 2016 at 10:35 PM, Roberto Gaetano < roberto_gaetano@hotmail.com> wrote:

Seun,

I don’t understand the “pun intended” issue.

About the contents, I am with you implying that there is a cost-benefit issue about decisions on the backup issues.

However, being a well-known paranoiac, I am worried about the possible bad press about it.

That is why I do hope that we will have no hiccups, not even minor ones, in Hyderabad.

The eyes of the world will be upon us.

R

*Da:* Seun Ojedeji [mailto:seun.ojedeji@gmail.com] *Inviato:* lunedì 3 ottobre 2016 20:00 *A:* Roberto Gaetano *Cc:* At-Large Worldwide *Oggetto:* Re: [At-Large] Cruz' revenge

Hello Roberto,

Please tell me the first question is "pun intended" ;-) As to the second; well I understand it's prudent to have backup of network services/data but what does having a backup of over 100 tons of hardware mean? I think it definitely will mean a lot of redundancy resulting to a waste of resources as well.

As I note from the announcement[1], looks like a number of the devices has been replaced. The remote hubs will be the major hit. I can imagine the ICANN tech are working around the logistics.

Regards 1. https://www.icann.org/news/blog/fire-on-cargo-ship- affects-it-equipment-bound-for-icann57-hyderabad

Sent from my LG G4 Kindly excuse brevity and typos

On 3 Oct 2016 18:21, "Roberto Gaetano" <roberto_gaetano@hotmail.com> wrote:

http://domainincite.com/21067-ship-explosion-takes-icann- gear-out-of-action

Two questions:

· We always talk about disaster recovery, duplication of resources, etc. Why did we not put in place these measures? The question will now be “if those folks cannot secure their own equipment, how can they be trusted to take care of the Internet?”

· What will be the real impact for the meeting? I cannot believe that we do not have backup solutions, as Murphy implies.

We live in interesting times indeed. Brings me back to 1998, when CORE servers were stolen.

Cheers,

R

_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large

At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org

-- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ *Seun Ojedeji,Federal University Oye-Ekitiweb: http://www.fuoye.edu.ng <http://www.fuoye.edu.ng> Mobile: +2348035233535**alt email: <http://goog_1872880453>seun.ojedeji@fuoye.edu.ng <seun.ojedeji@fuoye.edu.ng>* Bringing another down does not take you up - think about your action!