gov.za proxy fail

The *.gov.za services that are proxied behind iproxy1.gov.za all seem to have fallen over, while the services that are proxied behind iproxy2.gov.za seem to be fine:

iproxy1
cemis.wcape.gov.za
www.westerncape.gov.za
www.services.gov.za
www.search.gov.za

iproxy2
www.gov.za
www.info.gov.za

Could be a proxy issue, or maybe Telkom playing games again, or even a local failure. Weiiiird.

Government envelopes (v)

South African Communications Minister Ivy Matsepe-Casaburri told FMTech that she is hopeful that InfraCo and SEACOM will be incorporated into the new Nepad cable project.
[thanks FMTech]

It's amusing (and simultaneously heartbreaking) to see the Department of Communications making their bid to control all of South Africa's external communication networks.

However, the framing of the statement indicates that Neotel has the go-ahead with SEACOM, else why would they want this project folded into the NBIN?

Columbia to be punished for hosting the new Hitler

Interesting reading at Marc Parent's blog

All of the hysteria over Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's speaking at Columbia University is so tiresome for so many reasons, beginning with the fact that it is all rather transparently motivated by exactly what Juan Cole says: "The real reason his visit is controversial is that the American right has decided the United States needs to go to war against Iran. Ahmadinejad is therefore being configured as an enemy head of state."
...

More good comments in the blog post.

Fool me twice...

Shame on you, SABC.

Don't we already pay for the content you produce? [hint: tvlice...]

But now we'll have to pay to watch it again on a Pay TV channel, where we're already paying a premium. And are we expected to believe SABC won't use the extra viewership figures to punt their timeslots to the advertisers? Or will the Pay TV outfits be free to replace the adverts?

This is an established player using market dominance and manipulating slight legal obligations into a stick with which to beat new entrants.

Brilliant comments

Ace reader comments on this ITWeb article: Cable require local ownership

The ownership of the international cable company cannot be dictated by the South African government as the cable lies in international waters. It is curious that the government does not think that Intelsat should be owned by South Africans as it provides international satellite capacity to South African broadcasters and telecoms companies.

and

If every country where a cable lands demands local majority ownership, there will be no cables.

Take that! Slash, parry...

South African Landing Rites

From a recent allAfrica article:

South Africa's decision to nationalise its landing rites is also expected to affect the East Africa Submarine cable (EASSy).

No wonder SEACOM and EASSy are so confused. What strange magick is the government practising in order to confuse the ICT sector?

I predict we will soon have to rename all accounts with UID==0 as beetroot.

[available at allafrica.com as of 11-09-07]