[2292] in Commercialization & Privatization of the Internet
Re: Self-supporting networks
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Dennis Fazio)
Wed Feb 5 14:12:05 1992
From: dfazio@MR.Net (Dennis Fazio)
To: members@farnet.org
Date: Wed, 5 Feb 92 13:09:34 CST
Cc: com-priv@psi.com
In-Reply-To: <9202051512.AA14724@Eagle.MIT.EDU>; from "breeden@farnet.org" at Feb 5, 92 10:14 am
>
> Anyone want to add to this? Is this the whole list of those networks that
> can be considered "self-supporting"?
>
> Laura
>
> >Date: Tue, 4 Feb 92 17:27:32 EST
> >From: drw@BOURBAKI.MIT.EDU
> >To: com-priv@psi.com
> >Subject: Self-supporting networks
> >
> >The replies I've gotten mention the following as self-supporting.
> >(Of course, NSFnet connections are subsidized. But the internal
> >operations of the networks are self-supporting.)
> >
> > Merit (Michigan) (for 20 years! Now that's privatization!)
> > BARRNet (Calif.)
> > Nearnet (New England)
> > CSNET (before it merged with BITNET)
> >
> >Thanks to all who answered!
> >
> >Dale Worley Dept. of Math., MIT drw@math.mit.edu
This depends upon your definition of "self-supporting". I'm not sure
what Dale is looking to find out. If the question is "Do you receive any
government cash subsidies?" I can easily add MRNet to the list. We have
been self-supporting for 4 years.
However, there is another question: "If all your subsidies, both
outright cash and hidden, went away, would you stay in operation as you
are now?" I would have to say no for MRNet, and I imagine some of the
other "self-supporting" networks would have to at least readjust their
operations.
There are informal and hidden subsidies all over the place in the
regional and state networks. MRNet has received large subsidies from the
Minnesota Supercomputer Center and the University of Minnesota, both
government supported institutions, in the form of free facilities,
equipment and especially labor. We have received large subsidies in
labor and some equipment from several of our members. Our membership
would not be so large, and our viability thus jeopardized, if our
educational members did not get NSF funding to enable them to connect
and operate for a couple of years.
How many networks have government subsidized members to add to their
numbers and revenue? How many get lower-cost facilities, payroll
services, accounting services, benefits, administrative help, etc. from
a big University or associated supercomputer center? How many get labor,
expertise or other assistance now and then from these Universities and
supercomputer centers? How many save bucks on equipment purchases
because of group buying and educational pricing they would not normally
get if they were on their own? How many get indirect government
subsidies because they are tax-exempt?
I'm not saying that there is anything wrong with any of this, or that
BARRNet, Merit and even MRNet and others shouldn't consider themselves
self-supporting. Indeed if BARRNet, Merit and some others had to go
commercial and be truly self-supporting they would probably do just fine
since a lot of these hidden subsidies are probably not a significant
part of their budgets. The networking industry is going to grow and
expand with a lot of explicit and implicit subsidies of various sizes.
The question of whether or not any network receives government help is
just too fuzzy to state clearly. This may cause difficulties in
maintaining complete fairness, but our country's industrial and
commercial history is full of examples of this. I think it is our job to
make use of any resources available to make our industry grow and to foster
the cooperation that will best make this happen.
--
Dennis Fazio, Executive Director
Minnesota Regional Network | Internet: dfazio@mr.net
511 11th Avenue South, Box 212 | Gabnet: (612) 342-2570
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55415 | Faxnet: (612) 344-1716
