[1881] in Commercialization & Privatization of the Internet
Re: The NREN and Regulation
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (the terminal of Geoff Goodfellow)
Sun Jan 5 22:47:26 1992
To: cook@tmn.com (Gordon Cook)
Cc: com-priv@psi.com
In-Reply-To: Your message of Sun, 05 Jan 92 19:34:54 -0500.
Date: Sun, 05 Jan 92 19:48:18 PST
From: the terminal of Geoff Goodfellow <geoff@fernwood.mpk.ca.us>
<<MESSAGE from>> Gordon Cook 05-JAN-92 19:34
cook@tmn.com
... If the network implementors
and providers should prove to be incapable of implementing the network in
such a way that inexpensive access to the network increases rather than
decreases, then they should not be surprise if they are faced with
restrictive regulation.
Perhaps this is the rub: i think i can generalize with some small amount
of credence that members of the the CIX have had a history of inexpensive
access to the network resources. I believe one such provider (PSI) has
even had one or more(?) rate DECREASES over the life of their various service
offerings, Bill/Marty? I am not so sure about CERFNet or AlterNet/UUnet,
Susan and Rick?
The danger of high rates for network access comes into play when there isn't
an "open playing field" (not to be confused with a "level playing field").
If an "open playing field" critical mass can be brought to bear, then there
would be no need for restrictive regulation I would hope. If an "open
playing field" fails critical mass, is restrictive regulation the only answer?
What steps need be taken for an "open playing field" to reach critical mass?
Geoff
