Path: utzoo!yunexus!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uwm.edu!rpi!bu.edu!bu-it!kwe
From: kwe@bu-it.bu.edu (Kent England)
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.tcp-ip
Subject: Re: Dial up access to Internet facilities
Message-ID: <57875@bu.edu.bu.edu>
Date: 29 May 90 17:24:02 GMT
Article-I.D.: bu.57875
References: <9005270423.AA19852@psi.com> <1990May25.163528.14300@ameristar>
Sender: news@bu.edu.bu.edu
Reply-To: kwe@bu-it.bu.edu (Kent England)
Organization: Boston University
Lines: 84

In article <9005270423.AA19852@psi.com>, schoff@PSI.COM ("Martin Lee
Schoffstall") writes:
 ...
> At least you could talk them into getting a good quality UUCP connection
> so they can do email.  I'm frightened by the lack of participation of
> many vertical industries in communicating with their customers, suppliers,
> except through phones. (Have you ever entered voice mail grid lock, where
> neither party ever gets through due to synchronization problems, and
> the use of voice mail systems as filtering devices.  Someday the only
> time you'll ever get an answer is by dialing 1-900.lovenow).
> 
 ...
>  	Please do make an announcement of any new services PSI introduces.  I 
>  	for one would like to hear what PSI is doing to moderate access fees 
>  	without having to ping your sales organization every few months.  
> 
> Maybe Kent England will radio you in reports from "The Front", rumored
> to have been named "Operation Fortress Beantown", BarHarborAirlines has
> guaranteed that they can airlift as many cisco's as they will need to
> sustain the battle.  :-)
> 
> Marty

	Glad to!  [BTW, it's not "Operation Fortress Beantown".  Only
folks from elsewhere and local sportswriters call Boston Beantown.  :-]

	We got the three inches of water pumped out of the main bunker
and the dehumidifier is fixed now, so it's bearable down here.  I have
a pretty good view of the harbor and Logan airport.  PSI has been airlifting
in dial-up servers, but we shot down most of them, since the visibility
was pretty poor and PSI didn't pay for good IFR gear.  Better luck next
time, Marty.  :-)

	Seriously, though, I share Marty's concern about a lack of interest
in commercial enterprises in supporting business using modern internetworks.
It would seem obvious to me what the benefits are, so perhaps we just need
to be more aggressive in touting the capabilities of the technology we know
and love.  Marty will see to that, as far as he can, since his livelihood
depends on it.  I see a definite interest on the part of commercial
organizations
wishing to join the research and education (R&E) Internet, but I see much
less interest from them in joining a purely commercial internet service-
they don't seem to understand who they would be able to talk to on a purely
commercial internet.  Come to think of it, neither do I.  But certainly
there is a lot of interest from commercial outfits in becoming a part of
our R&E Internet and in exploiting that technology to talk to the existing
base of constituents.

	NEARnet has had a phenomenal response from commercial organizations
joining NEARnet and the Internet.  There are a lot of research labs in the
Boston area, and they are very eager to be a part of the R&E Internet.
Perhaps it is just that they are able to move more quickly allocating budget
to the NEARnet connection, and are therefore able to connect more quickly
than some of our colleagues in the academic field in New England.  We'll see.

	Like the PSI folk, NEARnet is aware of an untapped potential base
for lower cost access to the Internet, from both the commercial organizations
and from academic organizations.  As might be expected, this is due mostly
to a scale pyramid=  there are simply more small sites than large.

	NEARnet is committed to broadening its base of support to include
smaller sites at lower cost.  We are chafing against technical issues in
being able to offer high quality service at lower costs, since we balance
hardware and people costs, and people costs are not really that bandwidth
sensitive.  We also have strict standards on quality of service, and we
do not wish to compromise these standards in offering less costly access,
since we know that later on our customers would regret the compromise as
much as we.  Then there is the issue of just what is part-time access;
is it terminal dial-ups, SLIP/PPP (host or router?), uucp, what?  We have
to keep in mind what services we provide and we have to make sure that
our clients understand what they can and can't do with new service offerings.

	All in all, though we have been able to keep costs quite
reasonable, so far as we can tell in comparing costs with our neighbors.

	As far as keeping up with new service offerings, you should
keep an eye on comp.newprod.  PSI always posts announcements of new service
offerings there, and NEARnet will as well.

	Must get back to work; we have air raid drills scheduled for 2pm
this afternoon and my anti-aircraft gun needs greasing.  I'll radio in 
future reports so long as my lines to Princeton aren't cut.

	--Kent England, Boston University