[9111] in Commercialization & Privatization of the Internet
Re: The Buffalo Free-Net / NYSERNet / PSI problems
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Dick St.Peters)
Fri Dec 17 18:16:32 1993
Date: Fri, 17 Dec 93 18:12:10 EST
From: stpeters@spare-parts.crd.ge.com (Dick St.Peters)
To: rciville@civicnet.org
Cc: com-priv@psi.com
Reply-To: <stpeters@dawn.crd.ge.com>
> From: Richard Civille <rciville@civicnet.org>
> But we all know that the Buffalo Free-Net placed no cost burden on PSI.
> None. Your argument about abuse of free dial-up facilities needs to be
> supported by some data -- at least. That is the only cost-related issue I
> can imagine.
Rich, as was pointed out to me in private (by a different provider),
community networks place a larger support load on their provider than
is typical of other networks. I don't know if the Buffalo Free-Net
qualifies as a 'network' in this sense, but I'm sure that any set of
users represents some additional support load. It's not correct to say
the cost burden was "none".
I'm picking a nit here, not making a general defense of PSI. I roughly
agree with your analysis that freenets represent future business that
providers would be wise not to overlook. We'll be more effective in
making that case if we aknowledge that there is an up-front cost.
--
Dick St.Peters
GE Corporate R&D, Schenectady, NY stpeters@dawn.crd.ge.com
