09998WAS%MSU@PUCC.PRINCETON.EDU ("Bill.Simpson") (10/31/90)
> Christopher Raczka <chris@ecdnt5.enet.dec.com> writes: > > I also think the "other side" of the story does need to be told > and this much I do know... Sometime in September, Merit, IBM > Corp, and MCI established Advanced Network and Services Inc. > (ANS) ANS, a NOT FOR PROFIT organization, is to manage and > operate the NSFNET backbone under subcontract to Merit > > Funny to see the NOT FOR PROFIT emphasis. > > Wasn't NYSERNET also started that way? > > /jordan First, the new structure (as I understand it) is pretty strange: Merit holds the NSFnet grant --> ANS holds a sub-contract to manage the grant --> Merit was hired by ANS to operate the network Looks to me that ANS is a rather unneccessary intermediary! This is IBM's point of control. Second, note the incorporation of ANS. Merit is a Michigan academic non-profit consortium. MCI is also a Michigan company. But ANS is incorporated in New Jersey (near IBM). The new president was hired directly from IBM (a former VP there). As far as I can ascertain, ANS exists solely to pay this fellow's salary. Third, when I suggested a few months ago that NIS.NSF.NET be moved to to a more capable machine (because of problems accessing the RFCs stored there), I was informed that IBM wouldn't allow the use of non-IBM equipment in the NOC. It seems to me that IBM is already firmly in (political) control. Fourth, has anyone actually looked at the ANS incorporation charter? Is ANS *really* a non-profit? By what definition? How are the corporate directors selected? Fifth, I've heard of the NYSERnet/PSI debacle, but don't know the history. Could someone take the time to post a summary of events to this group? Sixth, I'll go read the com-pri archive at PSI.com, but believe this discussion is appropriate to this group, as the general network administration/questions base. Bill Simpson 09998was@msu.bitnet 09998was@ibm.cl.msu.edu [ANS is usually pronounced the same as the bodily orifice -- a particularly bad choice of acronym. Of course, ANSI was already taken....]
mis@Seiden.com (Mark Seiden) (11/01/90)
as usual, several of the important little details seem to be wrong... 09998WAS%MSU@PUCC.PRINCETON.EDU ("Bill.Simpson") writes: >[...] note the incorporation of ANS. Merit is a Michigan academic >non-profit consortium. MCI is also a Michigan company. But ANS is >incorporated in New Jersey (near IBM). The new president was hired >directly from IBM (a former VP there). As far as I can ascertain, new jersey is near ibm, in new york? it's also near washington dc... what relevance does state of incorporation have other than limiting director's liability in the case of a nonprofit? this is a non-issue. weis' most interesting job was at ibm research where he directed the computing systems department (i.e. the comp center and research internet as well as tcp and nsfnet development)... by the way, he retired after 30 years at ibm. >ANS exists solely to pay this fellow's salary. i suspect you haven't tried too hard to "ascertain" that there seem to be several other employees. the ex-ibm corporate officers reportedly are precluded from any "right of return" to ibm should something go awry. they do seem to be hiring, or at least looking. >Third, when I suggested a few months ago that NIS.NSF.NET be moved to >to a more capable machine (because of problems accessing the RFCs >stored there), I was informed that IBM wouldn't allow the use of >non-IBM equipment in the NOC. It seems to me that IBM is already >firmly in (political) control. i agree that a good test of independence is how equipment is chosen. i believe ANS was founded partly because of frustration experienced in getting a difficult job done within the confines of large organizational politics. the problem you cite (if accurately) would be a perfect example of how hard such things would be to do this within IBM (or many other large organizations) compared with as an independent entity. >Fourth, has anyone actually looked at the ANS incorporation charter? >Is ANS *really* a non-profit? By what definition? How are the >corporate directors selected? yeah, i've heard it really is, though i haven't looked. nonprofit is an IRS term. i'm not sure what x value is (for 501c(x) of the tax code). looked to me like the directors were a pretty good distribution of folks. >[ANS is usually pronounced the same as the bodily orifice -- a particularly >bad choice of acronym. Of course, ANSI was already taken....] thanks for your delicacy in pointing out this important issue to all of us... (now go away...) i usually pronounce it like the Brooklyn department store: A&S. >>dricejb@drilex.UUCP (Craig Jackson drilex1) writes: >>they're actually trying to make a buck. Quite a few, in fact. >john dearmond replies: >Precicely. Which has NOTHING to do with our being able to actually >USE what they provide for us. Witness, the PC Jr. Or any Series/1. >Etc. (what an idiotic argument.) yes, companies make mistakes sometimes, and in retrospect it's easy to point them out. these people are supposed to be independent of ibm. >>The principal reason why IBM would volunteer to run the NFSNet, etc would >>be to enhance their standing in the academic technical community. >john dearmond replies: >No, according to IBM's news release, they will be in it along with >Compu$erve and McGraw-Hill and others STRICTLY to make a buck. well, i'll bet john is the usual loose cannon on the facts. what did that quote say EXACTLY? it isn't legal for IBM to derive special benefit from the *nonprofit* status of ANS. in particular, taking money out of ANS isn't possible. maybe the partners are thinking they'll make more money in the longterm if there's a better internet. there are lots of products and services that can't be provided without a better internet. so what? some others of us will doubtless benefit as well... (well, at least he didn't call anybody a slut this time)...