[9113] in Commercialization & Privatization of the Internet
Re: The Buffalo Free-Net / NYSERNet / PSI problems
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Glenn S. Tenney)
Fri Dec 17 19:28:14 1993
Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1993 16:27:55 -0800
To: com-priv@psi.com
From: tenney@netcom.com (Glenn S. Tenney)
At 6:12 PM 12/17/93 -0500, Dick St.Peters wrote:
>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".
Let me see if I understand you, Dick... The Buffalo system is logically a
single machine (although it could be more than one) with gobs of users;
these users contact the Buffalo sysadmins for support and are not supposed
to be contacting PSI since they aren't even supposed to know or care how
the Buffalo system is connected to the net.
Then please tell me what special load there is... How can the delta cost
burden to PSI not have been nil????
Do you mean that a single Unix system with 1,000 userids should be
considered more of a load (cost or any other form) than a machine with one
user -- if one is paying for the size of the pipe -- ???
Something just doesn't click yet with how I've interpretted your comments
above. It strikes me that some Internet providers are almost bothered by
people buying a pipe from them -- some are downright paranoid, especially
if you want sell multiple access (full IP, ie. SLIP).
---
Glenn Tenney
tenney@netcom.com Amateur radio: AA6ER
(415) 574-3420 Fax: (415) 574-0546
