Re: Mis-information
- Date: Tue, 29 Sep 92 12:48:24 +0100
The real problem behind this is that taxpayers money is spent
build something that we already have in the first place:
- X.25 connectivity for PAD and public X.400 interconnectivity
- a Ebone structure taht will be able to allow a multitude of
different service providrs to interact with Internet IP and
soon ISO IP.
We don't need taxpeyers to put up risk capital to "develop" X.25 and
IP as a service.
I argue that if a service provider wnat to try his luck on this
market he should do so without risk capital from me.
The effect is counter productive, by subzidizing one service provider
the others may loose customers, are you all aware of this out there?
We have been able to initialize a market, don't spoil it
Waht we do need is risk capital from tax payers to show new
applications so taht the service providers will invest in higher
bandwidth network solutions for mulitmedia mail and video
conferencing.
Step 1 34 Mbps addtional bandwidth support to Ebone, maybe PTT telcomm
is interested to prowide this for the same amount of money?
Step 2 Separate testbed to try new concepts and protocol structures
--mats
Who would want to participate in an IP *pilot*, when
we have a globe-wide, reliable, and well-managed IP
*service* right behind our keyboards???
