Re: user pays and bans on CUSM in Australia

Geoff Huston (EST)
Wed, 30 Nov 1994 17:58:50 -0500


>However, what concerns me is that there is some talk that such pressure is
>coming from beyond the institutions themselves and might be being brought
>to bear by providers of established proprietary videoconferencing systems
>or infrastructures, to whom CUSM is posing somewhat of a threat.
>
>Would anyone care to comment?

This really is nonsense. No such pressure existed in any way shape or
form.

[Following is background to the Australian University Internet charging.
cu-seeme list members can delete this response right now if they want!]

The charging decision was taken by the Vice-Chancellors as the
owners and operators of the university network as a management
strategy for determining how much each institutional entity
should be paying for network services. As a cost apportioning
mechanism it has its advantages and weaknesses.

As an observation, it _costs_ some 70c to pull a megabyte of data
across the Pacific into Australia. The resultant observation is that
while Internet services are relatively cheap, they are not free of
cost. How that cost is apportioned is effectively a management
decision, taken in the case of AARNet by the Vice-Chancellors
who own the network. If you don't like their flavour of cost
apportioning then you should be speaking to them.

(This is really a long way removed from the cu-seeme list - and
again I do apologise for this.

I've attempted to be very brief in this response, and I don't
intend to bother the list with any postings from myself on this
subject.)

Geoff Huston
AARNet