Ronda Hauben <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Greg I don't understand what you are trying to say in your abouve
> statement. What I understand happening in the period when the NSFNET
> allowed commercial traffic onto the NSF backbone wasn't that they
> were allowing an ecommercenet.
That's not what I wrote. I wrote that the NSFnet agreement allowed
NSFnet to communicate with other networks, including "ecommercenets."
> It was that those who didn't fit in with the restrictions imposed by
> the Acceptible Use Policy, i.e. which forbid any form of commercial
> entity to use the NSF backbone
Gordon Cook or someone else may know the exact answer, but I believe
that the agreement specified that no commercial traffic should be
allowed to *transit* the NSFnet backbone, but they could communicate
with commercial providers, etc. as they wished.
> I thought that the Internet principle of making changes that one
> wants for ones own network on an end to end basis, and not to impose
> them on the whole network sets the foundation for how a commercenet
> could function. They could have their own domain name systems
> situation, but that would only function within the commercenet, not
> by taking over the whole of the Internet.
As I have written, anyone who wishes is free to ignore anything that
ICANN is doing. Some people, it seems, are already doing that. ICANN
does not have authority to stop people from setting up their own
registries, registrars, etc. Neither can they stop anyone from
setting up a parallel DNS where they can set up whatever
root-server/TLD hierarchy they wish.
> I would have to think if I have seen examples of how this might work
> -- but for example IBM has its own network. It can do what it wants
> in that network, and can also connect that network outside to the
> Internet. Somehow if IBM wants to do something special in its own
> network, it needs to figure out how to do that internally, not
> impose that requirement on all the other networks of the Internet.
I don't know of anything that any network operator is doing that is
"imposing" a requirement on any other network. From what I have seen,
some sites have extensive firewalling and filtering capabilities that
restrict any "impositions" that someone might make on someone else.
So I don't know what it is you are concerned IBM or some other network
operator might do.
My guess is that the networks you use have made agreements to allow
certain types of traffic from other networks that you might not like.
For example, you might not like getting ads on a search engine, but
the networks you use have allowed their member sites to receive ads.
You should probably contact the net admins for the networks you use
and ask them why they are allowing this traffic.
--gregbo
