As per Relevance of the word technology, we have this rfc below:
Network Working Group G.
Request for Comments: 1527 Cook
Category: Informational September 1993
What Should We Plan Given the Dilemma of the Network
Status of this
This memo provides information for the Internet community. It
not specify an Internet standard. Distribution of this memo
unlimited
Early last year, as the concluding effort of an 18 month
at the US Congress Office of Technology Assessment (OTA), I drafted
potential policy framework for Congressional action on the
Research and Education Network (NREN).
The Internet community needs to be asking what the most
policy issues facing the network are. And given agreement on
particular set of policy issues, the next thing we should be
is, what would be some of the political choices that would follow
Congress to make
It is unfortunate that this was never officially done for or by
Congress by OTA. What we have as a result is network policy
being carried out now by the Science Subcommittee on the House
in consultation with a relatively small group of interested parties
The debate seems to be more focused on preserving turf than on
sweeping understanding of what the legislation is doing. That
unfortunate
In the hope that it may contain some useful ideas, I offer
shortened version of the suggested policy draft as information
the Internet community
Table of
The Dilemma of an Unregulated Public Resource in a Free
Environment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
Regulation is a key NREN policy issue. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Technology Transfer Goals Achieved? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
The Context for Policy Setting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Whom Shall the Network Serve? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Access to the NREN is a key policy issue . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
How Far To Extend Network Access? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Cook [Page 1]
RFC 1527 Cook Report on Internet September 1993
A Corporation for Public Networking? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
The Dilemma of an Unregulated Public Resource in a Free
As currently structured, the NSFnet and american Internet
access to several million researchers and educators, hundreds
thousands of remote computers, hundreds of databases, and hundreds
library catalogues. Money being invested in the network as a
of the High Performance Computing and Communications (HPCC)
should considerably increase the numbers and variety behind
unprecedented collection of resources. No other computer network
earth currently comes close to providing access to the breadth
depth of people and information. If access to information is
to power, access to the national computer network will mean access
very significant power
Furthermore, access to the american Internet and NREN is
access to the worldwide Internet. According to the Director
International Programs at the NSF in February 1992, the
of the Internet over the past twelve years has been one
exponential growth
Date Connected
August 1981 213
October 1985 1,961
December 1987 28,174
January 1989 80,000
January 1991 376,000
January 1992 727,000
These hosts are computers to which anyone in the world with
access can instantaneously connect and use if there are
available files. Any host may also be used for remote computing
the system administrator gives the user private access. These
hundred thousand plus hosts are located in more than 38 nations.
they are only part of the picture. By system-to-system transfer
electronic mail they are linked to probably a million
hosts. According to Dr. Larry Landweber of the University
Wisconsin, as of February 10, 1992, Internet electronic mail
available in 106 nations and territories
Cook [Page 2]
RFC 1527 Cook Report on Internet September 1993
Unfortunately, our current regulatory system does not
between the unique nature of the Internet and commercial systems
Prodigy and Compuserve where perhaps a million people pay
fees for access to systems offering a few dozen databases run
two or three hosts and electronic mail to several hundred
people instead of many millions. (The picture is made somewhat
by the fact that Compuserve does provide electronic mail access
the Internet through a gateway and for an extra charge.) The
Communications Commission (FCC) considers all three to be Value
Networks (VANs) run by Enhanced Service Providers. All use
carriers to provide their enhanced services and the FCC, in
to regulate them, reasons that all services are roughly alike. If
for example, Compuserve charges too much, the consumer can
Compuserve and move to Prodigy. Or, if the monthly cost of access
the Internet were to become too much, access to Prodigy or
would be basically the same thing. Here unfortunately the
fails: the Internet now and the NREN to be, with its
resources, is not the same. Nevertheless, the FCC points out
without Congressional action it is powerless to regulate NREN
providers
Regulation is a key NREN policy issue
Perhaps there will be no need for regulation. Hopefully,
marketplace for the provision of network services will
competitive and higher prices and cream skimming will not keep
national network out of the reach of the general public who wish
avail themselves of what it has to offer. However, given the
and power of what is contemplated here, Congress should realize
there are important considerations of social and economic
behind the question of access to the network. This is
true since libraries and groups representing primary and
schools are demanding what could be considered as universal access
the network without having any knowledge of how such access might
funded
The economic stakes are huge. Other players such as US West'
Advanced Communications division are entering the market and AT&T
expected to do so by the spring. When combined with the award of
EINet backbone to Uunet, their entry should help to level the
field. While one company is less likely to dominate such
uncontrolled, unregulated market, those concerned about
affordable access to the network would do well to watch
events with care
Cook [Page 3]
RFC 1527 Cook Report on Internet September 1993
Technology Transfer Goals Achieved
Policy makers may ask how much priority the Federal government
continue to give technology transfer in a market where the
that allegedly still needs aiding is showing remarkable signs
maturity? As they debate the course on which they wish to take
network over the next five years, policy makers may find that
answer to the apparent disparity between the emphasis in
legislation on the provision of the network by the government,
the growing number of commercial sources of network availability
that the market matured very rapidly while the HPCC
remained unchanged
In view of all the remarkable commercial achievements (outlined
this essay) in the four years since the NREN idea arose, perhaps
policy objective of technology transfer for economic
could be considered to be achieved! A commercially viable high
data networking industry, with the entrance of Sprint in January 1992
and the anticipated entrance of AT&T, has reached maturity
Therefore, having successfully achieved its technology
goals, the Congress must decide whether to continue to underwrite
network as a tool in support of science and education goals.
seems reasonable to assume that this support could be undertaken in
way that would not seriously undermine the commercial TCP/IP
networking market place
The Context for Policy
In order to make informed choices of goals for the network,
must understand the context of a rapidly commercializing network
The resulting context is likely to produce serious impacts both
the user community and the development of future network technology
It is likely to make some goals more easily attainable than others
Given its maturity, the commercialization of TCP/IP wide
networking technology is inevitable
Some have already begun to question whether the government should
providing backbone services where commercial alternatives
currently available and are expected to grow in number
Supporters of the NREN vision argue that the NSF is using
funds to build a leading edge network faster than the
alternatives. They say that use of public funds on such
development is appropriate. Their critics state that the T-3
technology (also called DS-3) is dead end and point out that the
logical step is refining the network so that it can use ATM
SONET. For aggregate gigabit speeds along the backbone, use of
Cook [Page 4]
RFC 1527 Cook Report on Internet September 1993
and SONET will be necessary. Critics claim that the T-1
could be engineered to accommodate the network for a while
while Federal funds would be more appropriately invested now in
ATM and SONET development effort. They say that Federal policy
being used to enable IBM to have a testbed for the development
DS-3 TCP/IP routers when Network Technologies makes a
product that is already proven and reliable. Whether the
Government should be providing backbone services or merely
for access and improved network features is a key policy issue
Finding the best answer to the questions raised by this issue
likely to center on the ability of the Federal mission
involved in high speed network development to articulate a long
plan for the development of new network technology over the
decade. How we shall use what is learned in the gigabit testbeds
not yet been clearly addressed by policy makers. Continuation of
testbeds is currently uncertain. There is also no plan to apply
outcome to the production NREN. These are areas deserving of
involvement. The current players seem to be incapable of
them. Some possible courses of Federal action will be identified
the discussion of a Corporation for Public Networking to follow
In the meantime, we face a period of four to five years where the
is scheduled to take the NSFnet backbone through one more bid.
Federal support for the current production backbone may
questionable on technology grounds, policy makers, before
different alternatives
- must understand very clearly the dual policy
behind the NREN
- must define very clearly the objectives of the network
- must carefully define a both a plan and perhaps
governing mechanism for their achievement
A sudden withdrawal of Federal support for the backbone would
likely to make a chaotic situation more so. However, the
of focused planning could define potentially productive
to current policies that could be applied by the time of the
award announcement in April of 1993.
Whom Shall the Network Serve
The HPCC legislation gives the FCCSET a year to prepare a report
the Congress on goals for the network's eventual privatization
Thanks to the NSF's decision to rebid the backbone, this task may
Cook [Page 5]
RFC 1527 Cook Report on Internet September 1993
longer be rendered moot by premature network privatization.
FCCSET Report needs to address many questions
One question is the extent to which, in the higher
environment, Congress through the National Science Foundation,
perhaps through another entity of its own choosing will continue
underwrite networking. A related question is whether or
Congress should act in order to preserve a competitive
provider environment. A question subsidiary to this is whether
competitive commercial environment is adequate to ensure a
data networking technical R&D environment? Another related
centers on what is necessary to preserve network access that is
widely available to post-secondary education as possible?
issues center on what type of access to promote. Should
support the addition to the network of many of the
capabilities promoted by the advocates of the NREN vision? What
funds spent here mean that other constituencies such as K-12 do
get adequate support
Access to the NREN is a key policy issue
If network use is as important for improving research and
as its supporters allege it to be, Congress may wish to address
issue of why, at institutions presently connected to the network
only a small minority of students and faculty are active users.
it examines the network reality carefully, Congress may sense that
is time to leverage investment in the network by improving
network's visibility and usability within the communities it
supposed to serve through improved documentation and training
than by blindly underwriting massive increases in speed
How Far To Extend Network Access
With the broadening discussion of the NREN vision, expectations
many segments of the population not originally intended to be
by the network have been raised. An avid group of educators
to use the network in K-12 education has arisen.
commercialization brought significant price increases, it
endanger the very access these educators now have to the network
Native Americans have begun to ask for access to the network.
will Congress respond to them? And to the general library
which with the Coalition for Networked Information has been
pressing its desires for NREN funds? And to state and
government networks
Congress should recognize that choices about network access for
broader constituencies will be made at two levels. Access for
Cook [Page 6]
RFC 1527 Cook Report on Internet September 1993
numbers could be purchased by the government from
providers at considerable expense - an unlikely development in
of the Federal budget deficit. In the meantime, given the
mix of government supported and commercial providers, the
for these user classes is quite competitive. Those who are able
pay their own way can generally gain access to the network from
choice of providers at reasonable cost. Congress can act on
of these constituencies by ensuring that the market for
provisioning of network services remains open and competitive.
of either regulating the industry or establishing a new
operated network, careful use of subsidies will have the most
on ensuring an open and competitive network. Congress can
choose to view access as a function of price. If Congress does
for this course, it has several choices to ensure that prices will
affordable. It could seek to impose regulations on the
providers through the FCC at a national level or urge the state
to do it at the local level. (Of course the viability of state
regulation, becomes questionable by the near certainty that
would be little uniformity in how the PUCs in each state would
a national service.) Congress also could impose a tariff on
providers profits and use the tariff to subsidize universal access
It should, of course, understand that these courses of action
raise touchy questions of conflicts between Federal and
jurisdiction
Congress may also have been vague in dealing with these
network constituencies, because it wishes to sidestep making
difficult choices. The origin of most of these choices may be
to the addition of education policy goals for the Network
by the changing of its name from the National Research Network to
National Research and Education Network in the OSTP Program Plan
September 1989. While this action got the attention and support
new constituencies for the Network, it did not bring any
shift to the science and mission agency oriented direction of
development. The legislation remained essentially unchanged
"educators and educational institutions" were as specific as
language of the bills ever got. Perhaps this was almost on purpose
Having goals that were more specific might imply the need to
with some precision why some individual segments of the
community deserved service while some did not
Unless Congress were able to construct a separate rationale for
needs of each of the network constituencies - from
users to grade school students - specific goal setting by
might imply that Congress was arbitrarily judging some
constituencies to be more worthy than others. This would be
difficult course to follow because those who were left out would
to know what the basis for such a judgment would be? Solid
Cook [Page 7]
RFC 1527 Cook Report on Internet September 1993
would be difficult to come by because networking as
educational technology is so new that no one is as yet quite sure
to measure its value. Without such assurances, it may be
for Congress to know how to justify its spread on any other
than equity of opportunity
Indeed there is a constituency of grass roots-oriented, small-
network builders allied with elements of the library community.
constituency suggests that computer networks will very quickly
such powerful means of access to information that lack of access
them will soon will carry serious implications for social
economic equity within the nation
These groups can be expected to be very vocal in their demands
some minimal level of access to the national network be
available and affordable. They are likely to ask that Congress
its attention to the feasibility of establishing the goal
universal access to the national network. Although the
and economic conditions are quite different from the conditions
the 1934 Communications Act, they are likely to demand
analogous to that
Motivated by these concerns, Mitch Kapor has been arguing
eloquently for the building of the NREN as a National Public Network
Asked to define what he saw as being at stake, he said the
to the author in September 1991:
"Information networking is the ability to communicate by means
digitally-encoded information, whether text, voice, graphics,
video. Increasingly, it will become the major means
participation in education, commerce, entertainment, and
important social functions. It is therefore important that
citizens, not just the affluent, have the opportunity
participate in this new medium. To exclude some is to cut
off from the very means by which they can advance themselves
join the political social and economic mainstream and so
them to second-class status forever. This argument is
to that which was made in favor of universal voice
service - full social participation in American life would
access to a telephone in the home."
Kapor through his Electronic Frontier Foundation, (EFF) is
hard to make sure that Congress is compelled to address the
of universal network access. The EFF has also begun to press for
use of ISDN as a technologically affordable means of bringing
benefits of a national network to all Americans
If Congress wishes to promote widespread access to the network and
Cook [Page 8]
RFC 1527 Cook Report on Internet September 1993
design an network that is amenable to widespread use, it will do
to examine carefully the position that the EFF is articulating.
would also do well to look outside the confines of the
Networking Council (FNC) and the FNC Advisory Commission that is
up of members similar in orientation to the FNC and is scheduled
only four meetings and a two-year-long existence. If it wishes
increase secondary and elementary school access to the network,
could investigate enlarging the very small role granted by
legislation to the Department of Education. Unfortunately,
careful planning what would be gained by this is unclear.
Department of Education has never played a significant role
computer networking. The immediate needs of the K-12 arena
focused mainly around maintaining the existence of affordable
bandwidth access and the support of successful pioneering efforts
When Congress states its intentions for the scope of access to
network and, as a part of doing so, sets priorities for investment
network bandwidth versus ease of use, it can then turn its
only to one other area
A Corporation for Public Networking
Network governance and oversight are key policy issues
If Congress has doubts about the current situation, it might want
consider the creation of an entity for NREN management, development
oversight and subsidization more neutral than the NSF
Action should be taken to ensure that any such an entity be
representative of the full network constituency than is the NSF.
Congress decides to sanction network use by a community broader
the scientific and research elite, it must understand the
of creating a forum that would bring together the complete range
stake holders in the national network
While such a forum would not have to be a carbon copy of
Corporation for Public Broadcasting, given the half billion
to be spent on the network over the next five years and the
confused and contentious policy picture, it might make sense to
perhaps a million dollars a year on the creation of an
oversight and planning agency for the network. Such an entity
report its findings to the Congress and respond to goals
by the Congress
Congress could declare the development and maintenance of a
public data network infrastructure a matter of national priority.
could make it clear the government will, as it does in issues
national transportation systems, the national financial system,
Cook [Page 9]
RFC 1527 Cook Report on Internet September 1993
national communications systems, maintain an interest in
development and control of a system that serves both the goals
improved education and new technology development
To carry out such a mandate, a Corporation for Public
(CPN) could have fifteen governors nominated by the members of
network community and subject to the approval of the Congress
Each governor would represent a network constituency
1. The
2. Department of
3. National Aeronautics & Space
4. Advanced Research Projects
5. Corporate
6. K-12
7. Higher
8. Public Libraries & State and Local
9. Commercial Network Information Service
10. Interexchange Carriers such as AT&T, MCI, Sprint, etc
11. The Regional Bell Operating
12. Personal Computer
13. Computer
14. Disabled
15. University
Since the legislation calls for backbone nodes in all 50 states,
a structure would be a reasonable way to coordinate Federal
for the network on a truly national basis - one that,
acknowledging the network as a national resource, would
representation to the full breadth of its constituencies.
could use the network to sample and help to articulate the
concerns of their respective constituencies
If it adopted these goals, Congress could give a CPN a range
powers
1. The CPN could be a forum for the expression of
interests of all NREN constituencies. In the event
network were to be administered by the NSF, it could
serve as a much more accurate sounding board of
user concerns than the FNC or the FNC Advisory Council
2. The CPN could be authorized to make recommendations to
and other agencies about how funds should be distributed
Such recommendations could include truly
assessments of the technical needs of the
Cook [Page 10]
RFC 1527 Cook Report on Internet September 1993
community and the most cost effective ways of
them
3. The CPN could itself be given responsibility for
distribution. Such responsibilities would incur
increase in administrative costs and staff. Nevertheless
by creating an opportunity to start a process from
and one that would consequently be free of the
interests of the National Science Foundation in high-
network solutions, Congress would likely get a
picture of where and how effectively public monies
being expended. With such responsibility the CPN
also keep extensive pressure on network providers
remain interconnected. When thinking about cost,
should also remember that effective oversight of
funneled through NSF would imply the hiring of extra
within that agency as well
4. Congress might want to ask a CPN to examine the use of
$200 million in NREN R&D monies. Policy
dictating the spending of Federal funds is still
from the fuzzy boundaries between the network as a
for leveraging technology competitiveness into
networking environments and the network as a tool
facilitate science and education. If Congress
that the major policy direction of the network should
to develop the network for use as a tool in support
science and education, then it may want monies
toward ARPA to be focused on improved databases,
interfaces and user tools like knowbots rather than
faster network used by fewer and fewer people. A CPN
was representative of the breadth of the network's
constituencies could provide better guidance than
FCCSET or ARPA for spending Federal subsidies aimed
adding new capabilities to the network
5. Additional levels of involvement could have the CPN act
a national quasi-board of networking public utilities.
could be given an opportunity to promote low cost
plans developed by commercial providers. If it
some of the fund raising structure of National
Radio, it should be able to raise very significant
from grass roots users at the individual and
business level who are made to feel that they have a
in its operation
6. If congress wanted to increase further the role given
CPN, it could decide that with network
Cook [Page 11]
RFC 1527 Cook Report on Internet September 1993
and technology transfer goals completed, the majority
the NREN funds go to the CPN which could then put out
bid for a CPN backbone. In effect Congress could
that the backbone announced by the NSF for
in 1993 be implemented and run as a joint project
the NSF and a CPN
All entities should be considered eligible to join and
the CPN in support of research and education.
companies who wanted to use the CPN to interact with
academic community should pay a commercial rate to do so
With the availability of a parallel commercial network
commercial restrictions on the CPN could be very
loosened to include anything in support of research
education. The CPN would study and report to Congress
how gateways between commercial TCP/IP networks and
CPN network could be maintained
7. Some suggest that the Congress go even further.
people emphasize that a replacement for the R&D aspects
the Internet in the context of commercialization
privatization is uncertain. Bell Labs and Bellcore
as the research arms of the Public Switched
Network. However neither of them have ever
major strengths in wide area data networking. Nor do
appear to be likely to do so in the near future.
this situation, the major private investment made in
Gigabit Testbeds indicate that the
telecommunications industry feels a need to invest
continued research. This is something that the
commercial players are too small to do. Furthermore,
is something that the larger players driven by pressure
report quarterly profits may find difficult to do
Congress could make a decision that Federal investment
the technology should emphasize less pump-priming
increase the pace of what most see as
commercialization and more the continued building of
networking technology for both technology transfer
support of the technology as an enabling tool. In
case Congress could direct the CPN to plan, deploy
manage a state of the art public
infrastructure. With goals for constituencies and
of service defined, the CPN could produce for
multiple scenarios for developing and maintaining
networks
Cook [Page 12]
RFC 1527 Cook Report on Internet September 1993
The first would be an experimental network where the
newest technologies could be explored. It could be
similar to the current gigabit testbeds but this time
all five projects linked together. The second would be
state-of-the-art operational network that can provide
spread field trials of technology developed on
experimental network. With the maturation of
technology on the operational network it would
available for open transfer to commercial service.
should be remembered that such a continuous
network R&D environment would provide wide spread
experience for graduate students that would otherwise
unavailable
Initial seed money would come from public funds. However
the bulk of support could come from a percentage
profits (as cash or in kind contributions)
participating companies would be required to contribute
the CPN as the price of admission for developing
benefiting from new technology. Care should be taken
structuring contributions in a way that small start-
firms would not be locked out. To ensure this,
could mandate that the CPN commissioners (perhaps
appropriate oversight from the National Academy
Sciences, the IEEE, or the ACM) develop a plan to
that the cost of entry to such a testbed not exceed
capitalization of the current small commercial players
It could also require the development of proposals
handle the issues of interconnection billing, billing
actual use versus size of connection, and
among network providers
A different financing model could be explored if the
were instructed to report on the feasibility of
shares to commercial carriers in a national
testbed and R&E network where carriers could, over a
term basis, develop and mature new networking
before transferring them to the commercial marketplace
8. In its November 1, 1991 recommendations to the
Science Foundation, FARNET suggested that the NSF
consider the issuance of several separate
for the development of software tools for end-
applications and network management and operations.
emphasize its point it added: "we believe that the
of useful tools for information retrieval and display
one of the biggest impediments to the productive use
Cook [Page 13]
RFC 1527 Cook Report on Internet September 1993
the network and has impaired the credibility of the
in the eyes of the target user populations."
admonished the NSF to emphasize open architectures
standards in its solicitations, adding that "
standards are not adequately understood or developed,
NSF should support programs to test, evaluate and
them."
FARNET concluded by
"that the NSF, working with the user community
the providers, define and implement clear
for the award of additional funding to mid-level
campus networks . . . The new criteria should
designed to further . . . goals such as the
of network services to new or underserved
(for ubiquity); the improvement of
operations, procedures and tools (for reliability);
the enhancement of existing services
development activities, upgrading of
connections to 'have not' institutions; leveraging
state, local, and private funds (to maximize
impact of Federal investment), and training
support for end-users (in cooperation with
and local programs)."
If a CPN is created, it should be directly involved
working toward these important goals. If
of the network is left to the National Science Foundation
Congress should emphasize the importance of the NSF'
meeting these goals
9. Finally, a strong and broad-based CPN might be able
make recommendations to Congress on the identification
resolution of problems of telecommunications
engendered by the continued growth of this
technology. It could perhaps play an educational role
advising state Public Utilities Commissions on the
term implications of their decisions
Policy makers must soon decide whether the National Research
Education Network is a public or a private good.
privatization appears to be proceeding apace, since the
backbone will be rebid, there should be time for some
planning for the development and evolution of what can, within 10
20 years, become an extraordinarily powerful system that is
Cook [Page 14]
RFC 1527 Cook Report on Internet September 1993
ubiquitous as the current telephone network and provides
Americans with access to information in much the same way as
libraries were created for a similar purpose a century ago
Congress must understand that the NREN is not just a new
(indeed much is of it is old technology), but has the potential
become the most powerful means of access to information ever created
Within this context it must decide whom the NREN shall serve.
must decide whom shall have access to the NREN
Once it has done this further options fall into four major areas
First: Congress must decide degree of
that is necessary to extend to the network.
oversight could range from legislating that
FCC regulate the network, to strict reviews
the NSF's actions, to vesting oversight
in a Corporation for Public Networking
Second: It must decide whether the appropriate place
subsidize technology transfer is within
privatized operational NREN or within
experimental gigabit testbeds. Without a
understanding both of how the technologies
evolving in the commercial market place, and
evolution of both the testbeds and the NREN,
will be difficult to make make a wise decision
In addition, we must expect that the nature
its choice will be further influenced by
decision on whom the network is to serve
Third: It must decide whether to subsidize a
for an NREN. If it does subsidize such
backbone, it must decide whether it shall
built as a private network or as a part of
PSTN
Fourth: It must decide whether to subsidize
connectivity or broader use within
institutions or both. In other words,
more institutions be connected to the network
or should the network be made easier to use
the members of those institutions
connected
To the extent that Congress chooses to pursue options three and four
it will want to explore the scenario for the Corporation for
Networking discussed above
Cook [Page 15]
RFC 1527 Cook Report on Internet September 1993
Access to information is access to power. The creation of a
Research and Education Network based on the NSFnet and the
of the american Internet will mean the creation of a
information access system of unprecedented power. In its ability
affect the lives and well being of Americans, the NREN, if
designed, will be just as significant as the national
highway system and the national electric power grid. The
highway, or the national power grid, or the national telephone
could serve as models for implementation. The Federal
provides a public but otherwise unregulated Interstate highway
with universal access available to all Americans. Private
provides our electric power. However, it was allowed to do so
in return for submitting to Federal and state regulation designed
ensure affordable national access by all citizens. The
telephone system has been established under a similar "
contract". If the nation is not to be dangerously split
information rich and information poor classes, policy makers
about five years in which to choose a Federally provided
network, or a privately provided but nationally regulated network
During the development and maturation of the national network,
makers should also be very attentive to its impact on the
switched telephone network (PSTN). The technology involved and
speed with which it is changing will only increase the
serious impact from the freedom of unregulated components of
telecommunications industry to pursue market solutions that will
regulated companies from becoming viable players. We must
that we are about to enter a power struggle for the control of
information resources of the 21st century that promises to be
bit as harsh and bruising as the power struggle for natural
was at the end of the last century
While the intentions of most appear to be good, as this study
shown, the playing field is terribly confused. Gigabit technology (
properly understood) is desirable. Still we should take great
that its cost does not raise the price of low bandwidth or "low end
entry into the network
Lack of a specific definition of communities to be served, lack of
agreed upon plan for how they shall be served, and lack of funds
serve everyone have combined to create the present chaotic
in which many of the players have been motivated primarily by
desire to increase their institutional role in order to get
Federal allocations of funds
In the absence of both a well-thought-out plan agreed to by
parties and adequate monetary support, the grand push to
both the speed and scope of the technology could have the ironic
Cook [Page 16]
RFC 1527 Cook Report on Internet September 1993
of weakening the entire foundation of the network. Until
Congress provides more direction, the squabbling that has
is likely to continue. In the absence of such direction, at
large sums of public funds may be ineffectively spent, and at worst
picture of empire building could emerge that would make any
support for research or educational networking unlikely
Such an outcome should be avoided because the potential of a
designed and developed network to do great good in both policy
is very significant. Unfortunately with the NSF under
criticism, ANS on the defensive and rumored to be
weakened, and Congressional hearings scheduled for mid-March,
potential for a destructive free-for-all is very great
Security
Security issues are not discussed in this memo
Author's
Gordon Cook, Editor and
COOK Report on
431 Greenway
Ewing, NJ 08618
Phone: (609) 882-2572
EMail: cook@path.
Cook [Page 17]
if you see any problems within the linking, don't worry be happy,
this is version 0.1 of the Relevance System and you gotta expect some crappy subroutines sometimes,
just be content we did not write this in Java, which would have made this "bigger and better" HAHAHHA.
RFC documents can be found at I.E.T.F.
Relevance System Copyright © 2002 Spectrum WorldResearch
other technical nosh by ServerMasters Corporation
collaboration of BobX
