Did Internet Founders Actually Anticipate Paid, Prioritized Traffic?

Barry Shein bzs at world.std.com
Mon Sep 13 17:20:59 UTC 2010

The article seems to jump around between 1973 and 1998 pretty
easily. I guess for some "10 years ago" will always be "the early

That said, the author says AT&T hinges on the use of the word
'pricing' in RFC2475 which is dated December 1998, founders?

Besides, "pricing" is a term of art, like "cost". It could well have
been intended to mean money, just like "a big pile" could be referring
to money or it could be referring to horse leavings.

THAT SAID, I agree that the only problem is lack of competition.

I don't care if someone implements network non-neutrality so long as
there is a realistic opportunity for someone else to compete with a
neutral network.

Right now the net has oligopolized, largely through govt granted

*THAT SAID*, my suspicion is that the whole thing is a bluff and they
(for some value of "they") can't implement network non-neutrality.

It's some kind of big bluff to accomplish something else, probably
just to sell FUD to large customers -- ooh, we better get a link to
XYZ, otherwise when this non-neutral thing flies we're gonna be out in
the cold! Then they're gonna REALLY charge the big bucks to get on
their net.

Something like that, I could propose other motivations more in the
regulatory realm these players live in.

        -Barry Shein

The World              | bzs at TheWorld.com           | http://www.TheWorld.com
Purveyors to the Trade | Voice: 800-THE-WRLD        | Dial-Up: US, PR, Canada
Software Tool & Die    | Public Access Internet     | SINCE 1989     *oo*

More information about the NANOG mailing list