Crucial govt. agencies should have redundant telecom systems for ...
Crucial govt. agencies should have redundant telecom systems for emergencies, the Progress & Freedom Foundation (PFF) said. In a report, PFF Senior Fellow Randolph May said the Dept. of Homeland Security or General Services Administration should issue guidance by…
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Timely, relevant coverage of court proceedings and agency rulings involving tariffs, classification, valuation, origin and antidumping and countervailing duties. Each day, Trade Law Daily subscribers receive a daily headline email, in-depth PDF edition and access to all relevant documents via our trade law source document library and website.
regulation, bulletin or guideline. “Many federal agency buildings and installation locations apparently do not currently have true telecommunications network redundancy installed in their buildings,” the report said: “Served by a single connection running through a single outside communications central office or switching hub, many are too vulnerable.” May said a Feb. 2003 White House white paper, “The National Strategy for the Physical Protection of Critical Infrastructure and Key Assets,” and a recent Markle Foundation report had called for more redundancy in federal buildings. May said some progress had been made upgrading and securing communications, but “more needs to be done, and it is especially important that the federal government itself takes steps to ensure that it has built into the communications networks upon which it relies sufficient redundancy to maintain the availability and continuity of communications in times of crisis.” Communications lines to buildings must be “physically separate, by a significant distance, from the facilities of the incumbent provider,” he said. There must be separate rights-of-way between the building and the routing center, and redundant services should use a physically separate switching or routing center, the report said. May told us that information about redundant systems at govt. buildings was difficult to find, and he didn’t know whether that was for security or whether the govt. had taken a comprehensive look at redundancy. May’s report did say the govt. should prioritize any efforts to establish redundant communications systems. For instance, the Center for Disease Control is a higher priority than the Consumer Product Safety Commission. The report said the 1996 Telecom Act and its encouragement of network sharing had had an impact on construction of redundant networks. May and PFF have argued in favor of deregulating local phone rates and abandoning RBOC sharing requirements, such as UNE-P (CD Dec 15 p1).