[11215] in Commercialization & Privatization of the Internet
Re: ANS and the CIX - have they really connected?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Per Gregers Bilse)
Fri Mar 25 15:52:16 1994
From: Per Gregers Bilse <bilse@eu.net>
Date: Thu, 24 Mar 1994 21:27:42 +0200
To: com-priv@psi.com
On Mar 23, 16:21, John Hawkinson wrote:
>[...]
> But what happens when my users start using their shell accounts with
> term or socks or whatever, without my knowledge, to give themselves
> IP access. Am I morally obliged to pay the CIX fee? To turn it around
> even more, what happens if I say that that behavior is expressly
> prohibited? Is there any way I can actually stop them? There may be
> elaborate statistics I can gather on the subject to try and guess who
> the offenders are, but how can I really stop it?
[John Hawkinson, I'm not picking on you in particular, at all, the
above is just for context]
This discussion really _is_ going round in circles.
The Internet works because it's open and based on cooperation -- so
far, everybody involved have realized that their own success depends
on everybody else's success. Hence the CIX.
Bring on players that don't realize that simple fact, and there's no
Internet.
Bahaa? Keep in mind that X.25 is a huge worldwide success, it being
available in practically every country on earth. And everybody goes
pad'ing and ftam'ing everywhere, right? No?? Ahh ... so then,
closed networking doesn't do what we want.
Go ahead and abuse the Internet, and you'll soon see everybody
closing their doors, all around. From a purely technical point of
view, this is happening already: more and more open sites are
putting themselves behind firewalls, because of attacks by hackers.
Bring on the commerce-hackers, and the same will happen from a
business perspective: those of us doing this for real just don't
want to get, humm, ``done'' by fly-by-night opportunists having
a ball.
--
bilse <bilse@EU.net> +31 20 592 5109 (dir: 5110); fax +31 20 592 5163
``Free X.121 with every X.25 purchased!''
