Arpa address 3489

actually there are two, somewhat separate heterogeneous capability provided by gateways ... one is somewhat the technology-protocol heterogeneous ... and the other is the administrative heterogeneous.

while the internal network appeared to single corporation ... the individual plant sites and individual countries had their own profit responsibilities, cost centers and administrtive control (i.e the internal network didn't evolve with any sort of corporate hdqtrs cooperation and-or funding).

in fact, several times internal network connectivity went on in spite of corporate hdqtrs ... many times you get into corporate hdqtrs and you encounter people that believe that they must be in control of something. there was a different inhibitor to the growth of the internal network. there was a strong corporate and business requirement that all links leaving company premise had to be encrypted. at various time, there was the comment that the internal network had over half of all link encrypters installed in the world. talking different countries into allowing encrypted links between two different company facilities in two different countries ... where the links cross country boundaries ... could be a real pain.

the gateway capability greatly simplified being able to deploy in environments where there was different networking protocols (even if they tended to be platformed many times on a variety of different OSes that happened to operated on the same hardware architecture) ... as well as totally different administrative and responsibility boundaries.

my claim has been that the cut-over of the arpanet-internet on 1-1-83 ... removed a significant inhibitors to interconnecting a large number of different nodes across various protocol, processor as well as administrative domains

... something that had been found in the 70s with growing the internal network.

in the late 70s, i was told a number of times that the reason that the inter-IMP links had to be 56kbits ... was because of the significant inter-IMP protocol chatter trying to maintain a real-time globally consistent network-wide view of all detailed IMP operation (i.e. somewhat implying globally consistent administrative and policy operation).

the acceptable use policy (AUP, non-commercial) stuff with the NSF backbone did introduce some inhibitor to growth ... until enough of the commercial ISPs deployed their independent stuff. actually much of the NSF backbone was done by corporate enbreasties under the umbrella of the NSF contract.

however there is a lot of folklore that the commerical enbreasties providing resources under the NSF backbone contract umbrella ... actually contributed resources many times what was actually paid for by NSF. the scenario at the time was that there was significant unused bandwidth in the form of dark-fiber deployed and nobody had been able to come up with a transition strategy i.e. extensive existing fixed cost infrastructure was being paid for mostly by the existing voice tariffs. If you cut the tariffs to encourage the next generation of bandwidth hungry applications ... there would be a long stretch before the tariff*bandwidth product was again able to cover the fixed costs (bandwidth use increased to offset the cut in the tariff). the transition strategy then required a isolated incubator environment where the new generation of bandwidth hungrey applications could evolve ... w-o significant impact on the existing income infrastructure.

one of the old AUPs:

NYSERNet, Inc. ACCEPTABLE USE POLICY (Revised 12-14-89) NYSERNet, Inc. recognizes as acceptable all forms of data communications across its network, except where federal subsidy of connections may require limitations. In such cases use of the network should adhere to the general principle of advancing research and education through interexchange of information among research and educational insbreastutions in New York State. In cases where data communications are addressed to recipients outside of the NYSERNet regional network and are carried across other regional networks or the Internet, NYSERNet users are advised that acceptable use policies of those other networks apply and may, in fact, limit use. The President of NYSERNet, Inc. and his designees may at any time make determinations that particular uses are or are not consistent with the purposes of NYSERNet, Inc. which determinations will be binding on NYSERNet users. NYSERNET - ACCEPTABLE USE POLICY (Adopted July 16, 1987) This statement represents a guide to the acceptable use of NYSERNet facilities. 1. All use must be consistent with the purposes of NYSERNet. 2. The intent of the use policy is to make clear certain cases which are consistent with the purposes of NYSERNet, not to exhaustively enumerate all such possible uses. 3. The President of NYSERNet Inc. and his designees, may at any time make determinations that particular uses are or are not consistent with the purposes of NYSERNet. Such determinations will be reported in writing to the Board of NYSERNet Inc. for consideration and possible revision at the next meeting of the board. 4. If a use is consistent with the purposes of NYSERNet, then activities necessary to that use will be considered consistent with the purposes of NYSERNet. For example, administrative communications which are part of the support infrastructure needed for research and instruction are acceptable. 5. Use for scientific research or instruction at not-for-profit insbreastutions of research or instruction in New York State is acceptable. 6. Use for a project which is part of or supports a scientific research instruction activity for the benefit of a not-for-profit insbreastution of research or instruction in New York State is acceptable, even if any or all parties to the use are located or employed elsewhere. For example, communications directly between industrial affiliates engaged in support of a project for such an insbreastution is acceptable. 7. Use for scientific research or instruction at for-profit insbreastutions may or may not be consistent with the purposes of NYSERNet, and will be reviewed by the President or his designees on a case-by-case basis. .. snip ...

--