From: raisch@Control.COM (Robert Raisch)
Newsgroups: alt.internet.services
Subject: Re: commercial use of Internet
Keywords: internet imp
Date: 6 Sep 92 20:35:53 GMT
Organization: Control Technology Corp., Hopkinton MA

sheth@cs.scarolina.edu (Vipul Arun Sheth) writes:
>kd1hz@anomaly.sbs.risc.net (Michael P. Deignan) writes:
>>scoggin@snow-white.ee.udel.edu (John K Scoggin) writes:

>>>>If an organization charges its users for Internet access, is it
>>>>commercial or non-commercial ?
>>>	Hmmm.  I would say commercial in general.
>>This is incorrect. 
>>If it were correct, then the various regional service providers
>>who provide IP connectivity for a price would not be allowed to pass
>>any of their traffic over the NSFnet, since, after all, they would be
>>a commercial enterprise.
>>It is not the service provider, but the type of traffic passed, that
>>is the issue.
>In that case what if a person intends to make commercial use of the
>network and is willing to pay a price for the service ? can he/she still
>use it ?

You are, so far, correct.  Paying for access is not, a priori commercial 
use.  It has to do with what the traffic contains.

And, it's not the same everywhere.  You must realize that there is no 
such thing as "THE INTERNET", (in terms of a single object).  The Internet
is a collection of thousands of various networks, each with it's own
definition of 'proper use'.  

The reason that there is any problem, in a general sense, with commercial
use of the Internet, has to do mainly with the manner in which your 
traffic crosses the country.  I'll give you a 'what if':

	My machine 'cthulhu.control.com' is used for commercial purposes,
	as well as to support a number of non-profit user societies, and		to support my own personal research efforts.

	The net from which we receive service, CENTnet, is a commercial
	carrier, so I can use this net for all the purposes mentioned above.

	Ditto for NEARnet, which is where CENTnet gets it's network feed.

	Now, assume that I am going to be talking to Michigan, and the 
	easiest way to get a packet from MA to MI is over the NSFnet.

	Whoops!  The NSFnet, based on it's current federal funding, is
	a "No Commercial Traffic" network.  So I can use it to pass
	information back and forth, for two of the three mentioned 
	purposes, but commercial use is right out.

	But there is hope!  Enter the CIX (pronounced "kicks") Commercial
	Internet eXchange.  The CIX is a group of network service providers
	who allow commercial traffic, and who currently have a cross-country
	backbone network to carry it's traffic.  So if I chose to use it,
	my commercial traffic could be carried by the CIX.  Unfortunately
	it is currently, (IMHO), too expensive to join the CIX.

     +----------+ *CENTnet* *NEARnet* [NSFnet] *PSInet*  +----------+
     | Cthulhu. |     |         |        |         |     | Heifetz. |
     | Control. +-----+         +--------+         +-----+ Msen.    |
     |          |     +---------+        +---------+     | Com      |
     +----------+     +         +        +         +     +----------+

	*network* = commercial allowed
	[network] = commercial not allowed

There is one REALLY SERIOUS problem with all of this, and it's enough to make
any network admin severely itchy, and that is called "Content Based Routing".

In a nutshell, if you can answer this question, you will solve a lot of 
problems currently plaging the Internet community:

	o	Given any packet, how can I decide whether or not it contains
		Commercial information or NonCommercial information?

	<chuckle> It's a puzzler!

>>For instance, you can provide dial-up IP access for a fee. A student
>>researcher using said access for educational purposes would be allowed
>>to access the NSFnet. A CEO using the same service to communicate
>>daily bookings figures with regional offices would not be allowed
>>to access the NSFnet. In both cases, the IP provider is the same.

	Yes, BUT... Who decides?  The truth of the matter is that Content
Based Routing is just not possible, since the definition of commercial vs.
non-commercial is not a hard and fast rule.  And some of a single user's
use will be commercial and some of it, non-commercial.  Some of a single
machine's use is commercial and some of it, not.  Some of an entire domain
is commercial and some, not.  See where this is going?  <grin>


>What about the people who post job listings, for sale ads etc on the net
>? are they making commercial use ? what about the postings in this group
>itself on services provided for a fee ? 

In order:  (assuming that every user is obeying the rules)

	"the people who post job listings" -- if they are to benefit the 
	research community, (most job postings can be said to do this,
	after all, a lot of people move from the public to the private 
	sector...) 

	"for sale ads etc on the net" -- once again, it depends.  Define 
	commercial use...

	"on services provided for a fee" -- same rules apply.

Of course, you should be aware that:  

	USENET (the news service) is not the INTERNET, (the collection of 
	interoperable networks).  And vice versa.

Anyone can say anything they please on USENET, since there is no centralized
authority or management.

Now the bottom line is this:

	The limitations of commerciality on the NSFnet are out of date and
	retrogressive.  They are in the midst of being changed, even as we
	speak(write/read?).  RSN, there will be no restrictions on the 
	NSFnet's use, because soon there will be no NSFnet.

	No one has the time nor patience to be able to monitor any of the
	traffic over the NSFnet backbone.  Thus, the Acceptable Use Policy
	(AUP) is unmanagable in the real world.  (How much of the available
	bandwidth on the NSFnet is used currently for commercial purposes?  
	You'd be VERY surprised.)

If you are interested in how I come to know about this, it's because I am
president of the aforementioned CENTnet.  CENTnet provides 19.2k and 56k
Internet connections to small entrepreneurial sized companies in Massachusetts
for 1/8th the going rate.  ("Get Connected.  Ask Me How!"  -- makes me sound
like a health food salesman!)

		</rr>

-- 
I hate 3 things: Ignorance, Poverty, and Moving.  Well, maybe not in that order.