[2763] in Commercialization & Privatization of the Internet
Bill Schrader's Truth in Advertising posting - reevaluation time?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Gordon Cook)
Mon May 18 00:15:40 1992
To: com-priv@psi.com
Date: 17 May 92 23:53:48 EDT (Sun)
From: cook@tmn.com (Gordon Cook)
Message-From: Gordon Cook <cook@tmn.com>
On October 2, 1990 at 15:46 Bill Schrader sent to the com-priv list the
following:
"Part of the uncertainty our community feels is due to the lack of clarity
in what NSF - IBM/MCI claim hey are doing.
1) Lets take IBM/MCI first. They appear to be temporarily acting under
the ANS tax exempt shield, if and when such tax exemption is approved by
the IRS. How many of you actually think it will be approved? Even if
they have applied for it, the automatic provisional 501 (c) (3) status
will last for one year and by that time a second stage (?) of their
business plan might come into play. At that time, tax exemption will no
longer matter, having served its purpose in obtaining acquiescence from
the FARnet membership networks as well as taking most of their customers.
The next action "might be a commercial spin off, " removing any need for
ANS at all. This ANSII, of course, "might" be backed entirely by IBM and
MCI, while still holding on to whatever is left of the original startup
funds, "under contract to MERIT."
IF IBM is truly trying to build "a gigabit network to serve US and
Research educational interests"' as advertised in their press conference,
one might expect them to begin work doing this. Why then are IBM/MCI -
ANS focusing on replacing the regional networks first (net effect of their
activity to date), while offering only T-1 and 56 kbs service (same as the
regionals)? Yes IBM/MCI - ANS has given nominal mention of the 45 mgbs
service, but lets be serious and recognize that "no one" will buy such
service at $300,000 per year, except the NSF of course, which apparently
did so in order to increase the guaranteed revenue of the ANS start up.
IBM Vice President (former.) and ANS President, Al Weis announced that
"IBM and MCI were putting an order of magnitude more funds into this
project than they had formally announced and there is more." This was said
at the Boulder meeting as well, the same place that the NSF announced big
cuts for the regionals and no cuts for IBM/MCI - ANS.
2. NSF is next. NSF is trying to maintain its self appointed (with FRICC
original backing) role as lead agency in the now stalled (but fast
changing) Congressional legislation. Remember they took over the
networking.effort from DoD when they started supercomputing for academics
in '85. Since then the NSF has supported three levels of campus
networking.(BB, regional, and campus). With Graham/Ruddman the campus and
regionals will be slashed, while the IBM/MCI - ANS backbone (with MERIT,
sorry) will be more than doubled in funds and staff and a factor of 20
incease in bandwidth. Without Gr/Rdm reductions (and know that IBM/MCI
-ANS is fully protected regardless), where will the NSF funds be invested?
I would like to know, as would most of the FARnet membership and the
unconnected US colleges hoping to participate more equally as their
university brothers have for years. Just what is happening with the T-3
announcement and simultaneous apearance of the IBM/MCI Network?
[Concludes with a paragraph about PSI contributing to the good of the
community.]
Bill"
_____________________________end quote of 10/2/1990 posting
This message leaves me with several questions nearly two years later. I
will follow up with some later in the week. First I would welcome the
reaction of those who have had the opportunity to observe the events that
have unfolded since this rather interesting posting.
