sgoldste@CISE.NSF.GOV (Steve Goldstein--Ph 202-357-9717) (02/12/91)
Dear colleagues, Referencing the following paragraph from your report: "The Connectivity and Infrastructure Working Group reported that its aim is to foster capability and not to mandate what is done or how. It recognizes, however, that currently Internet is the standard for connectivity in the U.S. The working group recommended that all genome centers and genome data resources should be Internet accessible and that the funding agencies should provide guidance and support for these connections. The group pointed out that the availability of these resources on the network would create a second cycle of demand from individual researchers (not resources or centers) who need access to the resources. The NIH and DOE should be aware of this demand and prepared to provide for it. Finally, the group urged the NIH to join the Internet consortium. There is anecdotal evidence that NIH-funded chers have been refused network connections on Internet-connected campuses and given the reason that their research is not funded by an Internet-member agency. [Editor's note: John Wooley, NSF, assures me that that is not a valid reason: the Internet agreement requires all connected campuses to "work with" all researchers on campus to provide them with Internet connections. The term "work with" has been subject to a variety of interpretations at various institutions.] Dr. Lipman pointed out that DHHS is "one of the players" in the High Performance Computing Initiative and that the NLM is the DHHS representative at the HPCI discussions. The JITFF asked that the topic of connectivity be put on the agenda for the next meeting." The NSFNET is available for all research and scholarly activity performed at or in support of not-for-profit research and academic institutions. Funding by an Internet-member agency is not a criterion for use. I believe that the NLM and the NCI are among DHHS institutions already connected to the Internet (in this case, to the NSFNET portion of the Internet) through the NSFNET regional network, SURANET, at the University of Maryland. DHHS is indeed one of the players in the HPCC (final "C" for "Communications") Initiative. In addition, Dr. Larry Dusold of DHHS's FDA represents DHHS on the Federal Engineering Planning Group (FEPG) which advises the agencies which operate the federal portion of the US Internet on technical networking matters. Please inform your colleagues that the NSFNET, the Energy Science Net (ESnet) and the NASA Science Internet, inter alia, as the core of the US federal Internet, have been implemented to serve the science and academic communities. Special commitment has been expressed for supporting the "Grand Challenges", including the Human Genome Project. Also, we have built, and we are expanding, robust networking connections to Germany (including EMBL) and to Japan (including Kyoto University) as well as to UK (MRC-Harrow) and to most of Europe, North America and the Pacific Rim, all with TCP/IP access. This is a joint (DARPA, Energy, NASA, NSF) undertaking in cooperation with international partners who operate research and academic networks abroad. I will append the NSFNET [Interim] Acceptable Use Policy for your information. Please let us know if there is any specific assistance we can render in support of your work, both domestic and international. Best regards, Steve Goldstein + ======================================================================== + || Steven N. Goldstein || || Program Director, Interagency & International Networking Coordination || || Div. of Networking and Communications Research & Infrastructure || || National Science Foundation || || 1800 G Street, N.W., Room 416 || || Washington, D.C. 20550 || || Tel: +1-202-357-9717 || || FAX: +1-202-357-0320 || || goldstein@NSF.GOV (Internet); goldstei@NSF (BITNET) || + ======================================================================== + ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Interim NSFNET Acceptable Use Policy 6/14/90 The purpose of NSFNET is to support research and education in and among academic institutions in the U.S. by providing access to unique resources and the opportunity for collaborative work. This statement represents a guide to the acceptable use of the NSFNET backbone. It is only intended to address the issue of use of the backbone. It is expected that the various middle level networks will formulate their own use policies for traffic that will not traverse the backbone. (1) All use must be consistent with the purposes of NSFNET. (2) The intent of the use policy is to make clear certain cases which are consistent with the purposes of NSFNET, not to exhaustively enumerate all such possible uses. (3) The NSF NSFNET Project Office may at any time make determinations that particular uses are or are not consistent with the purposes of NSFNET. Such determinations will be reported to the NSFNET Policy Advisory Committee and to the user community. (4) If a use is consistent with the purposes of NSFNET, then activities in direct support of that use will be considered consistent with the purposes of NSFNET. For example, administrative communications for the support infrastructure needed for research and instruction are acceptable. (5) Use in support of research or instruction at not- for-profit institutions of research or instruction in the United States is acceptable. (6) Use for a project which is part of or supports a research or instruction activity for a not-for-profit institution of research or instruction in the United States is acceptable, even if any or all parties to the use are located or employed elsewhere. For example, communications directly between industrial affiliates engaged in support of a project for such an institution is acceptable. (7) Use for commercial activities by for-profit institutions is generally not acceptable unless it can be justified under (4) above. These should be reviewed on a case-by-case basis by the NSF Project Office. (8) Use for research or instruction at for-profit institutions may or may not be consistent with the purposes of NSFNET, and will be reviewed by the NSF Project Office on a case-by-case basis.
kristoff@genbank.bio.net (David Kristofferson) (02/13/91)
Steve, I think it would be helpful if you posted a note explaining to researchers the steps they should take to get their campus connected to the Internet, i.e., who should they contact to get the ball rolling. Questions like this come up all the time. Sincerely, Dave Kristofferson GenBank Manager kristoff@genbank.bio.net
kristoff@GENBANK.BIO.NET (David Kristofferson) (02/13/91)
Help! I am trapped on the list and can't get off!
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Phil
----------------------------Original message----------------------------
Steve,
I think it would be helpful if you posted a note explaining to
researchers the steps they should take to get their campus connected
to the Internet, i.e., who should they contact to get the ball
rolling. Questions like this come up all the time.
Sincerely,
Dave Kristofferson
GenBank Manager
kristoff@genbank.bio.netsgoldste@CISE.NSF.GOV (Steve Goldstein--Ph 202-357-9717) (02/16/91)
Dave, Thanks for the suggestion. My colleagues are preparing a list of what to do, and we shall take it as an action item. Steve G. > > >Steve, > > I think it would be helpful if you posted a note explaining to >researchers the steps they should take to get their campus connected >to the Internet, i.e., who should they contact to get the ball >rolling. Questions like this come up all the time. > > Sincerely, > > Dave Kristofferson > GenBank Manager > > kristoff@genbank.bio.net >