[653] in Commercialization & Privatization of the Internet
Re: Must Privatization Come As a Blank Check?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Edward Vielmetti)
Fri May 3 00:53:41 1991
To: tmn!cook@uunet.uu.net
Cc: com-priv@psi.com
In-Reply-To: Your message of Fri, 03 May 00 19:91:23 +0000.
Date: Fri, 03 May 91 00:52:39 EDT
From: Edward Vielmetti <emv@ox.com>
off the cuff comments, it's late at night...but these remarks don't
reassure me all that much. i don't think that "blank check" is what
the current privatization struggles are about.
re 1, "entity with the power to ensure that gateways remain open".
i can't say that I'm worried about private industry shutting down
connections; the current crop of commericial internet players seems eager
to make new gateways and interconnections between their services. (cf CIX)
On the other hand, the Feds (esp. the Milnet boys) seem more than
willing to snip off access to networks because of perceived network
transgressions, e.g. the recent "dutch hackers" for which someone
on the milnet (Bill Murray) would have all of the Netherlands cut off
from the Internet. from comp.risks 11.58, blknowle@frodo.jdssc.dca.mil
(Brad L. Knowles, Defense Communications Agency):
Since the Defense Communications Agency (DCA, soon to be changing our
name to Defense Information Systems Agency (DISA)) has the right, nay
the RESPONSIBILITY to keep up (and presumably to police) the Internet,
then I think I can safely say that this [cut off the Netherlands from
the Internet] might actually get implemented if the folks over at the
University of Utrecht keep it up.
caps in original. i'm not aware who hired DCA to be the net.cops.
re 2, "entity with standards for software at the switch level".
the marketplace has reacted positively to interoperable products;
standards setting is expensive, but vendor- and user-led efforts to
make sure that the things they sell and buy interoperate have a lot
better track record & cost effectiveness. besides, we don't need another
standards body ...
re 3, "entity with authority to rule on access rights to the network".
again, i don't see the U.S.Government playing many positive roles in
this regard. the history of government rules on access to the Internet
has been improving over time but is still fraught with all kinds of
uncertainty, blurry lines and rules and regulations, and weak NSFnet regional
networks in some parts of the country. commercial nets on the other
hand are willing to take anyone who is willing and able to pay. to
the extent that access rights have been infringed, it has been the likes
of the Justice Dept. and the FBI (Operation Sun Devil) who have been
doing the infringing. i would hope that the existing legal system
would have enough strength to it that cases where internet service
providers conspired to deny access to the commerical part of the Internet
could be forced to yield.
--Ed
