Yes that's right, just would of slowed down the process. Sent from my HTC
----- Reply message ----- From: "Ishmael Rufus" <sakam...@gmail.com> To: "ja...@smithwaysecurity.com" <ja...@smithwaysecurity.com> Cc: <p...@paulgraydon.co.uk>, <nanog@nanog.org> Subject: Megaupload.com seized Date: Thu, Jan 19, 2012 7:56 pm That doesn't stop the power of our US government. On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 5:53 PM, ja...@smithwaysecurity.com <ja...@smithwaysecurity.com> wrote: > Wow, what suprised the servers were, all located offshore. > > Sent from my HTC > > ----- Reply message ----- > From: "Paul Graydon" <p...@paulgraydon.co.uk> > To: <nanog@nanog.org> > Subject: Megaupload.com seized > Date: Thu, Jan 19, 2012 7:27 pm > > > On 01/19/2012 12:41 PM, Ryan Gelobter wrote: >> The megaupload.com domain was seized today, has anyone noticed significant >> drops in network traffic as a result? >> >> http://www.scribd.com/doc/78786408/Mega-Indictment >> http://techland.time.com/2012/01/19/feds-shut-down-megaupload-com-file-sharing-website/ > Ars Technica are implying it was quite a source of bandwidth usage within > companies. I'm curious, are any interesting charts on an ISP side? > > http://arstechnica.com/business/news/2012/01/before-shutdown-megaupload-ate-up-more-corporate-bandwidth-than-dropbox.ars >
