[8657] in Commercialization & Privatization of the Internet
Re: CIX connectivity
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Erik E. Fair" (Your Friendly Postm)
Tue Nov 30 03:07:01 1993
From: "Erik E. Fair" (Your Friendly Postmaster) <fair@apple.com>
In-Reply-To: <9311282139.AA01531@spare-parts.crd.Ge.Com>
To: stpeters@spare-parts.crd.ge.com (Dick St.Peters)
Cc: com-priv@psi.com
Date: Tue, 30 Nov 93 00:06:18 -0800
Date: Sun, 28 Nov 93 16:39:15 EST
From: stpeters@spare-parts.crd.ge.com (Dick St.Peters)
Subject: Re: CIX connectivity
> From: "Erik E. Fair" (Your Friendly Postmaster) <fair@apple.com>
> It has always seemed to me that agreement to abide by the NSFNET AUP
> is a *precondition* to having one's networks routed over the NSFNET
> backbone.
>
> Put another way: if a site's network adminstrator has not signed off on
> the NSFNET AUP, why should their network be routed on the NSFNET
> backbone? I believe that they should not be.
Eric, the NSFNET AUP says that commercial use in support of R&E is
acceptable. There are hundreds of GE CT and MRI scanners at university
medical centers. GE using the NSFNET to reach them for service is an
allowed commercial use under the AUP.
I reiterate: the AUP is not about whether someone can be routed via
NSFNET but about what they use it for.
You are absolutely right - we agree completely on the fact that the AUP
says nothing about who can or cannot be routed; it is about what use
you make of the network. Please note that I did not characterize the
hypothetical site at all - the AUP is for *all* users of the NSFNET.
The point I'm making is that your network should not be routed across
the NSFNET until you have agreed to abide by the conditions of its use,
i.e. the AUP. This is similar to getting a driver's license (and
thereby demonstrate that you know and agree to abide by the rules of
the road) before you go out driving on a public street.
My concern is that it appears that not all sites whose networks are
routed across NSFNET have agreed to abide by the AUP in the first place.
If you're gonna have rules, then they should apply to everyone, equally.
Otherwise, let's do away with the rules (or rewrite them to more
closely fit reality).
Erik E. Fair apple!fair fair@apple.com
