From: jcurran@nic.near.net (John Curran)
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
Subject: Open Platform and NII (was: What the State of Iowa is doing)
Date: 22 Jan 1993 09:16:04 -0500
Organization: New England Academic and Research Network
Distribution: inet
NNTP-Posting-Host: nic.near.net

In article <C1805L.6x7@news.iastate.edu> john@iastate.edu (John Hascall) writes:
>Here is a brief sketch of what the State of Iowa is currently doing.
>
>The Iowa Communications Network is a network of fiber being laid
>to a `point of presence' in each of Iowa's 99 (rather smallish)
>counties.  From there, connections will be made to each of the
>3 State Universities, the dozen or so Community colleges, and other
>interested private colleges.  Then connections are envisioned to
>all (~500) public school systems.  Then connections to the state's
>public libraries (roughly another 500).  Also connecting will be
>various state agencies and interested companies.
>
>While this is an ambitious project for a small (~2M) rural state,
>it is, in my opinion, the correct way to bring electronic services
>to the people.  The way to build demand in adults for these kinds
>of services is through children (both through influencing their
>parents and as future adults themselves).  ...

The good news:  The project may easily meet its goals of bringing
		electronic services to the people.

The bad news:   The project appears to contain external funding,
		thus creating unstable economic model.  

In order to view the problem, ask the question "What happens when
one of those interested companies decides to use this resource as
a LAN-interconnection service to another site?"   Does:

	a) Additional funding appear "from above" to cover the cost?

	b) The company get told that their usage is not "appropriate"
		to this network?

Welcome to the National Information Infrastructure (NII) catch-22:
We'd like an AUP-free environment with wide open commercial use, 
but also desire significant funding to be inserted "someplace" 
into the model so that "everyone" can participate for a minimal 
cost.

Whether the funding is necessary or not depends upon your view
of the NII, and small questions like:

	o Are we providing datagrams in every garage, or just
		an email address for each family?

	o Does the NII provides "services" (such as email,
		news, directories) or just data transport?
		(Note that transport has been available for years, and 
		it alone does not represent infrastructure of real value)

	o Is the NII open for business use?  Presuming yes, are the 
		providers prepared to deal with the revenue erosion
		from low-cost service, or must residential/business
		differentials exist?

Building networks and building viable infrastructure models are two
entirely different activities.  From my reading, EFF's Open Platform
work is trying to establish a stable model for the future of cyberspace
as we know it today.  This means taking a stand on a number of issues,
and promoting this view consistently.  I may not agree with the exact
positions taken, but see the need for "a single plan" if any national
coordination is to be achieved.

EFF's pursuit of a single cohesive approach to these issues (via the Open 
Platform proposal) is definitely leadership in action.  Whether the EFF 
members wish to pursue such leadership is another matter.

/John

p.s.  Note that it may not matter in the end:  there exists today
	financial motivation to establish "BBS-like" services with
	internet connectivity for mail, news, telnet, etc.   As a 
	result, the proliferation of internet account providers is
	beginning to appear, and early market differentiation in 
	both price and services is underway. The only limiting factors
	to such growth is the number of personal computer systems
	with modems. Hence, the NII could emerge on its own without
	any prodding, and normal market factors will drive the 
	migration to new technologies (such as ISDN) if and when
	they make business sense.
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk