[8252] in Commercialization & Privatization of the Internet
Re: ANS, the CIX, the rain, the park and other things
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Dick St.Peters)
Fri Nov 12 11:28:46 1993
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 93 19:38:14 EST
From: stpeters@spare-parts.crd.ge.com (Dick St.Peters)
To: karl@mcs.com
Cc: fair@apple.com, com-priv@psi.com
Reply-To: <stpeters@dawn.crd.ge.com>
> Over the <network>, I agree completely. If the NSF is paying for the
> conveyance of traffic and that traffic goes over a shared backbone I can't
> see how you can reasonably separate the two <on the backbone>.
>
> However -- to the <ENSS> nodes which are <R&E attachment points> without
> signed AUP agreements from the commercial attachment customers generating
> those packets?
>
> These two issues are not the same thing.
>
> It is <not> impossible to separate out that traffic, and require that
> commercial attachment customers (or gateway customers) have a signed
> statement on file respecting the AUP provisions when communicating with
> R&E attached sites or regional networks.
>
> Comments?
Well, yes. This thread has me confused. Is the argument that there
are places on the net that R&E people shouldn't be able to reach?
I can't imagine that's what the AUP is about. In fact, it reads to me
like its intent was to allow R&E types to reach anyone at all.
--
Dick St.Peters
GE Corporate R&D, Schenectady, NY stpeters@dawn.crd.ge.com
