From randy@psg.com Fri Oct 15 17:46:25 1993 Received: from rip.psg.com by fido.wps.com (5.67/wps.com-hackery) id AA16415; Fri, 15 Oct 93 17:46:14 -0700 Received: by rip.psg.com (Smail3.1.28.1 #5) id m0onzmY-000308C; Fri, 15 Oct 93 17:46 PDT Message-Id: From: randy@psg.com (Randy Bush) Subject: Re: Wed's meeting's operating environment To: tomj@wps.com (Tom Jennings) Date: Fri, 15 Oct 1993 17:46:06 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <9310152209.AA15399@wps.com> from "Tom Jennings" at Oct 15, 93 03:09:47 pm Content-Type: text Content-Length: 5476 X-Status: Status: OR Just so you don;t feel entirely alone. And Alan is a sweet cooperative guy. >From agora.rain.com!batie Fri Oct 15 17:15:51 1993 Message-Id: From: batie@agora.rain.com (Alan Batie) Subject: Re: Internet connection for Health Data Research, Inc. To: randy@psg.com (Randy Bush) Date: Fri, 15 Oct 1993 17:15:36 -0700 (PDT) > > Last I heard we were going with BARRNet, and if we're quoting prices, > > I am not quoting prices. But I am working on a draft proposal which I will > append. I used the term loosely, as since I saw a dollar figure in the original message, assumed some thought had been given to the issue. Looks like I was right :-) > > I'm curious as to who's providing what, where and when and for how much... > So am I. Negotiating with all these bozos is not fun. And it pays a lot > less than poor Jeff is being paid for being a NOC operator. Yeah, he did go a bit overboard. His point is valid though, at least for some of us: we want to play and learn, and don't want commercial responsibilities and overhead. Those who want commercial service can pay for it. Those who want access without paying or working for it, well, they'll just have to live with occasional instabilities. I think you're doing a lot of work to lower the cost of commercial service, and it's appreciated by those of us who know what you're doing. I do, however, think there is some frustration that we usually don't know what you're doing until after it's done which: 1. disconnects us from the process (feeling left out and/or without enough information to help) and 2. diminishes the visibility of the work you're putting into keeping this thing going. I would say the general gut perception by most of us is that we put this thing together a couple of years ago and it's just been running itself without anyone doing particularly much since. The visibility problem is more general though: I know Marc and David have put a major amount of effort into getting bsd stable for routers, but are afraid to tell anyone because they're afraid they'll get their head shot off (that's oversimplified, of course, but the basic point is valid). I think Michael got that way at the end of the ka9q work too, and David definitely did, although he chose an unfortunately melodramatic way to express his displeasure with the situation. I think you're working on sensitive stuff that doesn't warrant much discussion, but would probably tell us more if it wasn't likely generate more heat than light. There's a common theme in all this (and it doesn't point at just 1 or 2 people). I'm not sure how to resolve it, but I'd sure like to. Anyhow, back to matters at hand... > The appended will give some clues, but is is only a first draft. With those startup prices, I assume you buy the equipment and the monthly charge is for maintenance and support? Those prices aren't much different than say netcom (although they're a lot better than Alternet). Of course the advantage here is no restrictions, I presume. Let me know when things solidify, and I'll go start saving pennies :-) 56K is going to hurt, even if agora gets a "good" rate. -- Alan Batie ______ batie@agora.rain.com \ / A life lived in fear +1 503 452-0960 \ / is a life half-lived. 45 28 59 N / 122 43 20 W / 440' MSL \/ Message-Id: From: randy (Randy Bush) Subject: Re: Internet connection for Health Data Research, Inc. To: batie@agora.rain.com (Alan Batie) Date: Fri, 15 Oct 1993 17:42:43 -0700 (PDT) > Those who want access without paying or working for it, well, they'll > just have to live with occasional instabilities. Or with finding themselves behind paying/working sites who are willing to share their bandwidth. > I do, however, think there is some frustration that we usually > don't know what you're doing until after it's done While I have sympathy with the frustration, I am unwilling to spend my time to write a daily or weekly gossip sheet. > ... I would say the general gut perception by most of us is that we put > this thing together a couple of years ago and it's just been running > itself without anyone doing particularly much since. Well, to be polite, that view is rather naive, and analogous to the perception that nobody is paying for the connectivity. Naievete is fine as long as someone else is shoveling. > [you] would probably tell us more if it wasn't likely generate more heat > than light. Nope. No one can really help me much at this phase, and no one is paying me to keep them informed. Amusingly, Martin Bush and crew, who are putting up the capital for the POP and sharing 1/2 the initial monthly expense, presume I know what I am doing and are downright disinterested. I have to beg Martin and Steve to come to lunch when I feel I need a bit of confirmation that I am doing the right thing. But I continue to be willing to gossip for a half hour over the phone or over a cuppa. That's fun, writing it up is miserable work. > Those prices aren't much different than say netcom Are you sure? They are intended to be. > no restrictions, I presume. Correct. > 56K is going to hurt, even if agora gets a "good" rate. RAINet is going to need a POP server and an NNTP server (and administration thereof) for dialup users. We might be willing to negotiate a non-trivial price break. randy