Russia this week also floated a bill bill that to The Register's eye
Looks like a set of amendments.
1. Very well written technical definitions - this was not written by a legal critter like the telecoms crap which goes through the US congress or the UK parliament. This was written by an engineer. Applause.
2. The emphasis is on infrastructure resilience, not on cutting off. Albeit, if it takes cutting off to keep the system in piece it can and should do it - nothing in it prohibiting it. It basically specifies that government is entitled to keep the net running by whatever f*** means necessary and where it can apply said means necessary.
3. It has quite a bit on regulating peering points too. Peering points (and if I read it right people who peer) are obliged to publish peering policies, etc. Not surprising - if you are going to add any measures to keep the net running in an emergency you need to know where can traffic go and how.
UK has the same it is just not written out properly. In fact, it is not written at all as it supposedly does not exist. There is a reason why the LINX CTO job requires a security clearance which is not even in the official list of clearances, ya know... (that as a result of a mistake by the LINX secretary in 2007 is now public by the way - it leaked in a job spec posted on cwjobs).