|
In the 20-some-odd years the Internet has spent evolving into its
current form, the single constant of its existence has been
ceaseless change. It doesn't require much of a gift of prophecy to
predict that 1995 will continue the trend. Cloudy and cracked
though it may be, there are two major changes my crystal ball tells
me the Net will see in 1995:
Since 1984, the National Science Foundation has funded what has
historically been the highest-speed link in the network of networks
which is the Internet. The NSFnet backbone was originally
constructed to link the five NSF National Supercomputing Centers to
each other. As researcher demand increased, so too did the number
of research centers directly attached to the NSFnet. It was the
need to limit the torrent of traffic on this taxpayer-funded
backbone that led to the formulation of the NSF Acceptable Use
Policy (which, among other things, forbade commercial use of the
NSFnet infrastructure.) From that restriction sprang the
commonplace (and entirely mistaken) belief that commercial traffic
of any kind is forbidden on the Internet. Every two years since
1984, almost like clockwork, NSFnet has upgraded the bandwidth of
its backbone from 56KB to T1 to T3 to the latest high-speed
switching technologies.
Beginning this June and continuing for the next four years, the NSF
is scheduled to progressively defund the NSFnet backbone. In its
place, regional and larger commercial Network Service Providers
(NSPs) will take over responsibility for providing access to
backbone services for the Net.
Meantime, the NSF itself will fund the Very High Speed Backbone
(vBNS), a technological successor to NSFnet. The vBNS will connect
the original 5 National Supercomputing Centers (in San Diego, CA,
Boulder, CO, Champaign, IL, Pittsburgh, PA and Ithaca, NY) with four
Network Access Points (NAPs), which, theoretically, will be the only
points at which the NSPs' own backbone services will tap into the
vBNS. This is a VERY important transition in the evolution of the
Internet. Acceptable Use constraints will mostly disappear, since
the new technical architecture of the Internet will moot the issue
of commercial traffic on publicly-funded hardware. The increasing
commercialization of the Internet has already wreaked major changes
in Net culture--and the physical rearchitecture of the Internet will
accelerate this trend.
Then there's the Microsoft Network. At this writing, the Internet
claims somewhere between 20 and 40 million users (the numbers are
slippery because many of these 'users' are limited to email-only or
email-and-Usenet-only access.) If Windows95 is a commercial success
of the same order as Windows 3.x, it will boast something like 30
million users worldwide within the first two years after its
release. Every one of those users will have an initial trial
subscription to the nascent Microsoft Network (it will be packaged
with the front-end software and both will be included in Windows95
itself.) That's an instant user community of roughly the same size
as the Internet. (For comparison, let's note that CompuServe,
America Online and Prodigy combined have fewer than 10 million
users.)
The good news is that, based on the descriptions offered in job
postings for senior technical staff, Microsoft's plan appears to be
to model their network after the Internet. The Microsoft Network
will be based on the Internet Protocol Suite (IPS) and will offer
essentially all of the standard Net services (Gopher, WAIS, ftp and
so on,) as well as complete interoperability with the existing
Internet and value-added services for its users. The bad news is
that Microsoft has been one of the major obstacles in the effort to
finalize a model for Ipng (IP next generation or Ipv6), the
rearchitecture of the IPS. As usual, Microsoft wants to drive, and
would prefer to do so in its accustomed fashion: by declaring a
standard and using its dominance of the marketplace to force the
rest of the world to accept it as a fait accompli. At the moment,
Microsoft has been forced to negotiate. Once it boasts a user
community of approximately equal size to that of the Internet, it
may decide to become less cooperative--and that would be a bad thing
for everyone.
(Copyright© 1995 by Thom Stark--all rights reserved)
|