[493] in Commercialization & Privatization of the Internet
Re: CIX
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Kent England)
Fri Mar 29 15:39:43 1991
From: kwe@bu-it.bu.edu (Kent England)
Date: Fri, 29 Mar 91 15:37:59 -0500
To: mckenzie@BBN.COM, steve@cise.nsf.gov
Cc: com-priv@psi.com
The NSFnet subsidy is to the membership and not really to the
network. If the backbone subsidy stops, NEARnet is perfectly capable
of passing on those new charges. But until those charges exist,
NEARnet doesn't have any national transport costs to pass on. NEARnet
is fortunate to have a T3 NSS on the new NSFnet backbone, but it got
by without any direct NSFnet connection for a very, very, very long
time (well, it seemed long).
So I don't see the fine line of distinction between NEARnet
and PSInet, in regard to alleged subsidy differences, compared to the
gulf between those national and regional networks (like PSInet and
NEARnet) that do not receive any infrastructure subsidy and those
regionals that always have been directly subsidized for their regional
infrastructure by the NSF.
--Kent
