[Latest draft of Internet regulation bill]

Fri Nov 11 04:35:37 UTC 2005

On Nov 10, 2005, at 11:25 PM, Christopher L. Morrow wrote:
>
> most likely... and video-on-demand sorts of things seem like the next
> problem child for bandwidth on the local link. (atleast in the  
> short term)

That's what I believe, too.  And along with that, we have people  
hungry for incremental revenue to pay for infrastructure upgrades and  
go beyond the 'little Cu wire that could' *cough*.  To me, those are  
fundamentally incompatible business models.. so, it'll be interesting  
to see how that one shakes out.

>> is part of a general trend, unless this industry has reached a mature
>> plateau.  (which would be very sad, imho).
>
> just wait for ipv6 and toasters with webservers! :)

You realize that spelling out that 4 letter (well, 3+1) word on nanog  
is like screaming fire in a crowded theatre, followed by no less than  
2 wks of debate over the merits of multihomed toasters.  ;-)  We all  
desperately need multipathing to ascertain the burntness of one's pop  
tarts.

> Actually, as
> more things get a network stack I imagine more interconnection will  
> occur
> requiring more bandwidth and taxing the infrastructure even more :)

Yes.  That is very true.  And question is what will happen with  
liability once even more clue exempt manufacturers will enter the  
ring.  Capitol hill seems hell bent on wanting to tag ISPs (or BITS!  
*groan*) with that liability.

Somehow, it feels like the wild west days are over.  Or am I just  
getting old?  I think when inet turns into a pstn regime, I'll switch  
to basket weaving.

Best regards,
Christian