[432] in Commercialization & Privatization of the Internet
TCP/IP export restrictions: extension of acceptable use?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Manavendra K. Thakur)
Mon Mar 25 01:28:10 1991
To: com-priv@uu.psi.com
Date: Mon, 25 Mar 91 01:15:11 EST
From: "Manavendra K. Thakur" <thakur@zerkalo.harvard.edu>
I didn't know that the TCP/IP protocols were restricted from export to
Soviet Union and other Eastern bloc countries. I'm actually quite
surprised to find that TCP/IP is restricted, since the RFCs defining
the protocols are publicly available, as are various textbooks,
published papers, and other documentation.
What's to prevent someone on the other side of the Iron Curtain from
reading these documents and writing their own implementation? What if
the Finns and the Soviets simply decide to create an IP link between
them? Who would have the authority to stop them? (Who else beside
the American government would *try* to stop them!?) Would this mean
that NSF would pressure JvNCnet to sever their transatlantic link to
NORDUnet? Even that wouldn't solve the problem, since there are many
other transatlantic links (or hell, even transpacific links) that the
packets could fly over.
And if I email some source code - or even uuencoded binaries for that
matter - for a small part of a TCP/IP implementation (like an include
file) to a correspondent in the Soviet Union, am I then guilty of
espionage? Or trading with the enemy? Or will some other charge be
trumped up against me? The mind boggles at the very thought.
Not only does the export restriction seem incredibly stupid on its
face, but it would seem to be virtually unenforceable as well --
except to the extent that SRI-NIC and NSF could try to deny access to
the NSFnet backbone.
Another point that brings home the silliness of the export
restrictions becomes clear if you consider what might happen if and
when OSI starts getting used widely. Will the American government try
to restrict export of OSI protocols too? What justification could it
possibly use, given that the OSI protocols are being developed by ISO
-- an international organization -- under the auspices of CCITT, which
is sanctioned both by the United Nations and international treaties?
Or will the US government try to pressure these bodies into denying
Eastern bloc countries access to OSI as well? Again the mind boggles
at the very thought; it also makes me wonder just how thought (if any)
much the bureaucrats in charge of technology exports have given to the
issues they have jurisdiction over.
Anyway, assuming that this policy of "TCP/IP squelch" has actually and
truly been imposed by the American government, can anyone provide a
pointer to a particular official document that specifically declares
TCP/IP to be restricted from export?
Or is the notion that TCP/IP is restricted from export based primarily
on someone's non-official (i.e. personal) interpretation of what is
exportable and what isn't?
Basically, what I'm trying to get at is this: can anyone provide a
reasonably comprehensive list of the US government agencies that have
jurisdiction over TCP/IP, the Internet, and US computer networking in
general? If NSF can put out an acceptable use policy, and the
Commerce (State?) Department can say we can't export TCP/IP to the
Soviets -- well is there any other agency we should watch out for?
The reason I'm bringing this export restriction issue up in this forum
is that it seems that both export restrictions and commercialization
issues have certain similarities and can be dealt with in similar
ways. For example, it's possible to view TCP/IP export restrictions
as an extension of existing acceptable-use policies: both attempt to
keep certain traffic off the government subsidized parts of the
Internet.
But in the case of the TCP/IP squelch, the "acceptable use" is being
defined not by the content of the data being transferred but by the
technology that is being used to transfer that data in the first
place. This is a critical difference, and one whose implications I'm
asking others to speculate on.
Another difference I can immediately think of is that the TCP/IP
squelch extends well beyond the NSF's prohibition of commercial use of
the Internet. In other words, while the NSF's acceptable use policy
doesn't proscribe private independent networks like Alternet and
PSInet from carrying commercial traffic, the TCP/IP squelch would seem
to prohibit *any* American firm or individual from providing or even
describing ("exporting") TCP/IP technologies to anyone in the Eastern
bloc.
Despite these differences, I do see at least one very tangible
parallel between the commercialization debate and this TCP/IP squelch:
namely, without policy-based routing, how can a sender possibly ensure
that his/her packets aren't being sent over networks that use
restricted technologies and/or have strange acceptable-use policies?
And without policy-based routing, can such a sender (be it a
commercial user or a member of the Soviet Academy of Sciences) be held
liable if their packets somehow get transferred over the NSFnet
backbone or over some future TCP/IP link between the USSR and Finland?
So to my mind, then, the question arises: are the two issues (export
restrictions and the commercialization debate) similar enough that we
can deal with them in similar ways?
And then the question arises: SHOULD we deal with both issues in
similar ways? Or would it be more effective to address the two issues
separately while approaching Congress, the administration, NSF, etc?
(I can see Jesse Helms now, filibustering against the NREN bill once
he gets wind that those nasty evil commies might one day deign to gain
IP connectivity to NREN/NSFnet/whathaveyou.)
Final irony: if policy-based routing protocols do become widely
implemented, you can bet that some idiot bureaucrat in the American
government will add those protocols to the list of things that cannot
be exported to Eastern bloc countries! Pretty pathetic state of
affairs, isn't it?
Comments, anyone?
Manavendra K. Thakur Internet: thakur@zerkalo.harvard.edu
Systems Programmer, High Energy Division BITNET: thakur@cfa.BITNET
Harvard-Smithsonian Center for DECNET: CFA::thakur
Astrophysics UUCP: ...!uunet!mit-eddie!thakur
