From tomj Mon Apr 12 13:22:14 1993 Received: by fido.wps.com (5.67/1.34) id AA13238; Mon, 12 Apr 93 13:20:56 -0700 From: tomj (Tom Jennings) Message-Id: <9304122020.AA13238@fido.wps.com> Subject: The Little Garden / RAINnet / CIX? To: washburn@cix.org Date: Mon, 12 Apr 1993 13:20:55 -0700 (PDT) Cc: gnu@cygnus.com (John Gilmore), randy@psg.com (Randy Bush), pozar@kumr.lns.com (Tim Pozar), tomj (Tom Jennings) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL21] Content-Type: text Content-Length: 6354 Status: OR re: information on our peer network joining CIX Thanks for the reciprocal interest. You replied to my inquiry about a week ago (at end of message); sorry it's taken me so long to get back to you. We have two networks spanning Washington, Oregon and California; during the switchover to a new carrier (such as CIX) we will consolidate into a single network by running a T1 between us, and taking our feed to the Internet preferably from the California end. Our net, The Little Garden (TLG), has 22 members, each a subnetted stand-alone network. Two of our sites are medium-sized businesses; the others are social/political support groups, public BBS access to Internet resources, etc, as well as some small businesses. We have a T1 feed to our IP supplier. RAINnet, out of Portland OR, is the other network. They have approx. 25 sites. Their members are mainly research into very-low-cost IP networking. They have a 56K feed, and an immediate need to increase this. Both TLG and RAINnet have similar paradigms; we are explicitly not providing "services", we don't gaurentee 100% up time (though we are quite reliable). Both TLG and RAINnet exist to push the limit of networking down. (TLG currently charges $70/mo for 14,400 baud connection, plus $250 installation.) Both of us have reached the limits of our growth as concerns our current IP suppliers. Both of us have immediate plans to connect a number of additional network members. We want to be able to expand our networks as required, without restriction. So I guess what we need to talk about is pricing for a T1 to our combined networks, via TLG in Mountain View CA. Here are the "hard questions" that seem to bother IP carriers (aka ("service providers"). I know some of them flatly don't apply to CIX, but I include them for your amusement/information: o Does your, or your upstream's, AUP prevent all the uses we plan? o Will you advertise all NSFNET approved networks to the NSFNET? o Will you limit the hosts, sites, networks, users we hook up? o Do you limit to and from whom we may pass on data? o What about access to regional networks which are not part of CIX (eg. NEARnet)? Sincerely, Tom Jennings ADDENDUM: > One thing that would be very interesting for me to know is what you > see as the larger context for IP services in the Bay Area/Northern > California vicinity. BARRnet, NetCom, PSI, ANS CO+RE, etc. are doing some > things there, I believe but I would imagine there is much more that might > be done. Thanks, Bill W. I think we are approaching things from a different angle; rather than value-added suppliers to industry, we're approaching people who want communications first. It's not quite the "IP dialtone" stage, nor will it probably ever quite get that ubiquituous (it'll all probably mutate by the time it gets *there*), but not the comfy high-end it is today. We provide raw IP, and not much else; we do cooperatively provide name service and such, and we're slowly coordinating news feeds. Because of this we remain somewhat "techy"; however as the ease of putting up a TCP/IP capable system increases, we're getting more interest (IBM's OS/2 TCP/IP implementation is pretty nice, for example, and 386BSD is now pretty functional). Members provide their own hardware; we don't insist on one brand of modem, and so on. We use mostly POTS for the final link to each site. We're using a mixture of commercial and homegrown routers; RAINnet is using homegrown routers almost exclusively. (Homegrown meaning versions of KA9Q and PC/ROUTE.) Our members remain closely involved in our network's operation, relative to other nets. We're not a supplier with customers. The more technically savvy take an interest and help out with problems, configuration, etc. So I think we have a different basis from which we approach Inter-networking from other regionals, who are doing a value-added service for customers who want/need that. There certainly doesn't seem to be any lack of that! ---------------------------------------- Your reply and my original inquiry follows. > > Hi Tom-- > Nice to hear from you. I would love to hear more about your > operation and what your vision for the next couple of years might be. I > lived in Palo Alto for nearly 15 years (did graduate studies and then > worked at Stanford as well as the U of Santa Clara) and so I'm pretty > familiar with the Bay Area. Indeed, I think of it as home in many > respects. > I've attached a little "blurb" or introduction and general overview > of CIX that we are putting the finishing touches on right now. I could > certainly share plenty of information with you and would like to get well > acquainted. Please let me know more about your operation and the niches > you fill or want to fill. > One thing that would be very interesting for me to know is what you > see as the larger context for IP services in the Bay Area/Northern > California vicinity. BARRnet, NetCom, PSI, ANS CO+RE, etc. are doing some > things there, I believe but I would imagine there is much more that might > be done. Thanks, Bill W. > > > >Hi Bill -- > > > >Mitch Kapor suggested that I contact you. Could you please send me > >information on CIX membership and network services, specifically on > >long-distance carrier services for Internet protocol? We're growing and > >now need to change our IP carrier and rethink things. > > > >FYI, I am the manager for The Little Garden, an internet cooperative in the > >Bay Area, with POPs in San Francisco, Palo Alto and Mtn. View. We have > >sites in Santa Cruz, Fremont and other areas we will be expanding into > >hopefully shortly. > > > >We have approx. 22 sites with 50 - 75 hosts online, arranged into 20 or > >so domains. Our members are medium and tiny businesses, and various > >small social/support groups. We do our own maintenance, name-service, > >buy and build our routers, etc. We are also researching new > >communications technologies, such as low-cost microwave, PC-hardware > >based routers, etc. > > > > > > Tom Jennings > > tomj@fido.wps.com -- Tom Jennings / tomj@fido.wps.com / World Power Systems / San Francisco CA -- Tom Jennings / tomj@fido.wps.com / World Power Systems / San Francisco CA