Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83 (MC830713); site mcvax.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!mcvax!teus
From: teus@mcvax.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.news
Subject: Re: The poster should pay for news
Message-ID: <5306@mcvax.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 27-Jul-83 15:27:37 EDT
Article-I.D.: mcvax.5306
Posted: Wed Jul 27 15:27:37 1983
Date-Received: Fri, 29-Jul-83 12:42:04 EDT
References: <5574@watmath.UUCP> <2063@alice.UUCP>
Organization: Math.Centre, Amsterdam
Lines: 47

I'm in favour to let the author pay for his article in some way.
This to keep the number of articles low and the quality high.
But I know this is not the solution to the problem.
Newspapers let their subscribers pay for the transport costs
as well. Even there exist some special oversea pricing.
But if there is some way to do something to some high transport costs
it is ok to me.

In the US the uucp system seems to work. However the problem of
phone bills is coming up now.
Here in Europe we had already that transport cost problem.
To solve that problem mcvax created some structure in the net in Europe.
mcvax is calling two sites in the US (decvax and philabs). 
For news mcvax knows exactly to whom it is forwarding. 
The costs are split among those sites.
It is up to those backbone sites to split the costs to them as well.
(ukc is doing that for the UK, etc).
Only in this way Europe can afford receiving news.
Yes of course some site can play a trick by receiving and forwarding
news cheaper. So it withdraws itself as backbone site from mcvax.
And the price for transport costs to other sites increases, etc ...

The plan is to use X25 between the backbone sites in the different countries.
The transport costs will then not so depending on the amount of traffic
(which is the problem now in the US).
So you create a certain amount of highways between backbones for data.
Still there exists a need for a cheap communication to the US (Tymnet,
DABAS, EURONET). (And if you know please send mail).

The advantage of creating such a structure is:
- people are not posting as wildmen for they know they are billed.
- there is some site looking after the transports.
- there is some site acting as a corrective agent (which is a must!).
- also poor sites can receive news.
And there are disadvantages:
- not sending all groups (which is done by vote now here)
- depending on the willingness of some people to do work (mostly universities).
- it can be ran by dictators.
- some bureaucracy is needed to let everybody pay.
  However most of the time to let money roll is more problematic, then
  to let data flow. But perhaps it is the difference: from money you want
  to have more, from data you want to get rid of ...

I thought the US was growing in this direction of structuring the net.

		Teus Hagen, Math Centre, Amsterdam
		...{decvax,philabs}!mcvax!teus