[8319] in Commercialization & Privatization of the Internet
Re: Follow-up ON DIGEX, ANS & CIX
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Rob Raisch, The Internet Company)
Sat Nov 13 17:18:38 1993
Date: Sat, 13 Nov 1993 13:46:57 -0800 (PST)
From: "Rob Raisch, The Internet Company" <raisch@internet.com>
To: Miles R Fidelman <fidelman@civicnet.org>
Cc: Russell Nelson <nelson@crynwr.com>, com-priv@psi.com
In-Reply-To: <Pine.3.87.9311121527.A319-0100000@world.std.com>
Ahhh.... the settlements issue. This will prove to be the death of the
Internet we have grown to love. A simple scenerio, (and if I am wrong in
this, please tell me. I would love to be completely pig-ignorant of the
real ramifications here. I fear I am bang on.) --
Network A has 220 customers, representing some 20,000 users.
Network A connects to their local NAP.
Network B has 50 customers -- two of whom are large universities.
Network B connects to their local NAP.
Network A wishes to have access to Network B, so...
Network A *and* Network B contract with a Inter-NAP connectivity
provider. A and B share the costs (settle) based on how badly they
wish to have access to each other's network and customer base.
We can assume for this example that both networks pay 50% of the
inter-NAP communications costs.
Enter Network C -- 15 customers, small entrepreneurial companies all.
Network C wishes to have access to Network B, but Network B has no
incentive to share the costs for the inter-NAP traffic, based on the
the lack of any real value access to Network C brings to the table.
Bzzzzzzzt! Wrong answer.
Network C wishes to share costs with Network A to get to Network B.
But Network A and Network C share the same market. Bzzzzzzzt!
Wrong answer.
Suddenly, Network C is placed in a position of having to pay for
*ALL* inter-NAP costs to get ANYWHERE!
Level playing field, my ass. Welcome to a brave new world where access
to the Internet is only available to companies sizable enough to pay
communications fees to all other networks. Or am I off base here?
</rr>
"Hello, this is New England Telephone. I'm sorry. Your call to
your grandmother in San Francisco will cost you $35 to place.
Of course, if you were famous or particularly interesting to
Pacific Bell, they might be interested in sharing the cost with
you.
Please insert 140 quarters."
On Fri, 12 Nov 1993, Miles R Fidelman wrote:
> On Fri, 12 Nov 1993, Russell Nelson wrote:
>
> > > Will there be any basic ground rules imposed on inter-NAP carriers and/or
> > > on NAP-to-end user carriers -- akin to the ground rules the FCC imposes
> > > on telcos (e.g. common carriage, same price to all comers, etc.)?
> >
> > Now, explain again to me why we need to regulate Internet prices?
>
> not so much the prices, as equal access -- i.e. if two local companies
> connect to a NAP and want inter-NPA transit from <your favorite national
> network here> -- the price, terms, and conditions should be the same
>
>
> **************************************************************************
> Miles R. Fidelman mfidelman@civicnet.org
> Executive Director 91 Baldwin St. Charlestown MA 02129
> The Center for Civic Networking 617-241-9205 fax: 617-241-5064
>
> Check out our gopher server:
> CCN - The Center for Civic Networking
> on the list of all gopher servers in the world.
>
> Information Infrastructure: Public Spaces for the 21st Century
> **************************************************************************
>
>
>
