From: Majdi Abbas <majdi@puck.nether.net>
Date: Mon, 25 Oct 1999 16:20:55 -0400 (EDT)
Sender: owner-nanog@merit.eduHeads up:
Yes, but before getting excited, please read the full text including
the part about participants at the MAEs, PAIX, AADS, and PacBell being
exempt.
R. Kevin Oberman, Network Engineer
Energy Sciences Network (ESnet)
Ernest O. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (Berkeley Lab)
E-mail: oberman@es.net Phone: +1 510 486-8634
Hello Kevin,
> From: Majdi Abbas <majdi@puck.nether.net>
> Date: Mon, 25 Oct 1999 16:20:55 -0400 (EDT)
> Sender: owner-nanog@merit.edu
> Heads up:
> https://www.merit.edu/radb/fee.html
Yes, but before getting excited, please read the full text including
the part about participants at the MAEs, PAIX, AADS, and PacBell being
exempt.
Is this supposed to make me feel better ? Hmmm, I don't have any
relationships there & I'll bet so DON'T alot of others . These
continual .05 & .10 antics of every frigging organisation that
has anything todo with the internet today is getting -WAY- out
line (not the prices I saw there) . Next some idiot is going
to say Because I provide toilet paper to Cisco/Bay-Networks/...
I'm going to bill all of you with a wipe your backend surcharge.
Signed Prodtor&Grumble or somesuch . Gawd where does this end .
Twyl, JimL
I might suggest that it will end when our infrastructure gets out of the
red. It may surprise many to know that the major infrastructure has been in
the red from day-one. Volunteer services are on the debit-side of the
ledger. Without some offsetting credits, the entire system is off-balance
and potentially unstable.
Why does it not bother anyone that most of our top-level infrastructure is
1) Paid for, or subsidized, by USG/NSF funding
2) root-servers.net is strictly voluntary (and unpaid)
3) IANA has no detectable revenue stream
4) The BIND-master (Vixie) has to go begging for funding (ISC)
5) IETF is strictly voluntary.
6) Generally insufficient financial support for the whole mess.
Why is that? In spite of all this, the system keep running. When they
finally figure out that they actually have to take care of "brick and
mortar" (you know, roof overhead and bread on the table) issues a bunch of
whiners show up to complain.
Free is fine and good, but sooner or later the landlords need to be paid and
the fields need harvesting in order to make the bread such that the kids can
eat. I don't mind nominal fees if it assures the continued existance of the
service.
My personal concern is that some of these high-dollar dot-com maniacs don't
feel that they have a need to contribute towards the infrastructure.
"Roeland M.J. Meyer" wrote:
I might suggest that it will end when our infrastructure gets out of the
red. It may surprise many to know that the major infrastructure has been in
the red from day-one. Volunteer services are on the debit-side of the
ledger. Without some offsetting credits, the entire system is off-balance
and potentially unstable.Why does it not bother anyone that most of our top-level infrastructure is
1) Paid for, or subsidized, by USG/NSF funding
Where?
2) root-servers.net is strictly voluntary (and unpaid)
We will know that is a problem when we run out of volunteers. Until then,
it must be a "good thing".
3) IANA has no detectable revenue stream
Hmmm, I seem to remember that the ISoc/IAB/IETF is funding its share.
4) The BIND-master (Vixie) has to go begging for funding (ISC)
This is a crying shame. But, I thought it was working out. Am I uninformed?
5) IETF is strictly voluntary.
Goodness gracious, a founding principle! You would prefer what, instead?
6) Generally insufficient financial support for the whole mess.
Why is that? In spite of all this, the system keep running. When they
finally figure out that they actually have to take care of "brick and
mortar" (you know, roof overhead and bread on the table) issues a bunch of
whiners show up to complain.
WSimpson@UMich.edu
Key fingerprint = 17 40 5E 67 15 6F 31 26 DD 0D B9 9B 6A 15 2C 32