Merit Network
Can't find what you're looking for? Search the Mail Archives.
  About Merit   Services   Network   Resources & Support   Network Research   News   Events   Home

Discussion Communities: Merit Network Email List Archives

North American Network Operators Group

Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical

[bmanning@vacation.karoshi.com: Re: Two Tiered Internet]

  • From: bmanning
  • Date: Wed Dec 14 23:32:02 2005


	somhow, this esacped into a private thread.  i'm pretty
	sure that there is a fairly high thermal component to this
	thread and not too many photons... so this is it for me
	on this thread... 

----- Forwarded message from bmanning@vacation.karoshi.com -----

> > > You start with a flawed assumption, you end up with wrong conclusions.
> > > Who said this had anything to do with "the Internet"?
> >
> > 	well... the press?  the telco marketing droids??
> 
> It seems to be the press and the Google lobbyist droids trying to stir
> things up that use the "Internet" word the most.  A problem is some
> reporters think anything that uses IP (Internet Protocol) means the
> same thing as "the Internet."

	that is common... in part 'cause you can't ever tell if its
	-not- part of the Internet.  (I note the subject line of this
	thread talks about a two-tier Internet... which we are both
	actively responding to... :)  If its not Internet, then lets 
	call it what you claim it is,  private virtual pipes, some of
	which touch the commodity Internet and some which run a private,
	IP-based network for Telcos use only.  Right there next to the
	dedicated copper, lambdas, and glass that they lease to others.
 
> Most, but not all, of the telco droids have tried to stay on message,
> that this is about bringing more competition to video.  It is not the
> Internet, it is not cable TV, it is IPTV.  But when people expand the
> acronym IPTV, it seems to come out as Internet video.  Much like VOIP
> seems to turn into Voice over the Internet, even though a lot of VOIP
> uses private networks.

	-IF- we can be assured that the telco/  folks -REALLY- will keep
	                             (or cable co)
	parts of thier network fabric isolated and disconnected from 
	the Internet, and have the ability for random, third-party 
	inspection that these closed, private networks that use IP
	-STAY- that way, then sure.

> > 	they should not call it "the Internet" then should they? :)
> Maybe it would have helped if the technologists had chosen less similar
> names for the network ("Internet") and the networking protocal ("IP").
> There are lots of networks using IP which are not the Internet.

	again, its nearly impossible to tell when/if an IP network is
	or is not part of what might be part of the Internet.  Mobil
	nodes are common and mobil networks are becoming so.  Virtually
	every (save two) IP based network that I have touched in the 
	last 25 years has at one point or another touched other IP based
	networks... thus becoming part of the Internet... as seen by others.
	That said, there are many IPbased networks which rarely touch
	what most think of as the Internet.  I've come to the conclusion
	that the commodity or commercial services Internet is a small subset
	of the larger Internet. as usual, YMMV.

--bill
----- End forwarded message -----




Discussion Communities


About Merit | Services | Network | Resources & Support | Network Research
News | Events | Contact | Site Map | Merit Network Home


Merit Network, Inc.