Make sure you get legal involved in any plan of this. On 11 December 2014 at 20:29, Neil J. McRae <[email protected]> wrote:
> Well hopefully, and being from Edinburgh it's a shame to say this, > hopefully- they will follow Glasgow and Aberdeen's lead! > > It's a while since I read some of the legislation but I don't think any > network is exempt from the law! but as Zoe pointed out in many cases it's > unclear what is expected and in other cases organisations do things > voluntarily. > > Regards, > Neil > > > On 11 Dec 2014, at 18:26, William Waites <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > On Thu, 11 Dec 2014 15:32:01 +0000, "Neil J. McRae" <[email protected]> > said: > > > >> How are you engaged in this project? Are they not going to > >> tender it? > > > > I should have been clearer about this. I'm not directly involved in > > any way. I'm not bidding, and I don't work for the council. My only > > vested interest is as someone who lives here and is paying attention. > > > > This already went through one iteration, the contract -- which was > > problematic in various ways -- was awarded to something called Gowex > > which promptly went bankrupt, so they are re-starting the process. I > > was asked by somebody who is involved what I thought about data > > retention and I realised that I don't know quite how it works -- all > > the networks that I have worked on in this country are exempt for one > > reason or another. So I thought to ask the list. > > > > So they will probably re-tender and what I would like to see happen is > > a nice, enlightened network that is symmetric, does IPv6, doesn't > > harass you by interfering with your traffic, doesn't spy on you and > > sell you to advertisers. The main reason they wouldn't ask for that in > > their ITT is because they would be worried about risk from things like > > the DRIP. So how to assuage those fears with operational experience? > > > > -w > > -- BaconZombie 55:55:44:44:4C:52:4C:52:42:41 LOAD "*",8,1
