Hi @Brian, imo, "force majeure" would put the current situation in the same class as that of an earthquake or civil/political unrest which I believe it is not. The damage to a cable in a busy shipping lane carries its risk, and based on this assumption there would be a need for redundancies. Unfortunately it is the ISP/Telco/Gateway operators responsibility to assure its able to deliver on services. This is where we are told it's a business decision and not a requirement. And that is why am saying CCK, if the clauses do not exist, needs to make it a requirement not a business decision because of the nature of the Telecommunications sector. The impact of the current outage is significant enough to warrant some changes. :-) @John_Gitau. Not sure if you can respond to this, but why is it that the business decisions still charge up to 400USD for a 1Mbit capacity that is based on pricing almost 3 years old? Yet despite paying the 400USD, you would still not be able to guarantee connectivity between Nairobi to Fujairah? However, when the business person bought the capacity, they paid for the termination between those 2 points. Secondly, I don't believe you that Safaricom offers end to end SLAs. Are you saying that you are able to provide a traffic manager graph in Fujiarah based on an end-end capacity between Nairobi-Fujiarah on e.g. Teams? Please share more, as its quite interesting. :-) Rgds.