I still read mail with RDRLIST and I somehow managed to confuse this
message with a bug report I didn't find time to look into until today.
Sorry for the late reply.
On Mon, 13 Dec 1993 18:02:43 EST David Nessl <[log in to unmask]> said:
>Since none of the original conditions that justified BITNET now exist,
>I've got to wonder do we still need it? From a cost-benefit perspective,
>why pay both CREN dues and a LISTSERV license when I could be paying for
>just a LISTSERV license?
Actually, this very problem is one of the reasons it took so long to get
an agreement with CREN. L-Soft's goal was to sell software and services
at a lower rate through volume discount arrangements that solve the
annoying "spring budget" problem, letting US academic sites have access
to the software right now rather than this summer. The idea of not having
to send 161 copies of custom-selected federal certificates to guarantee
we don't make experiments on live animals and don't discriminate against
war veterans is also appealing. But setting aside the little details, all
we wanted to do is a volume sale. It is unfortunate that CREN is having
problems keeping its members, but that isn't L-Soft's fault. Through this
discounted sale we hoped to help CREN enough that they would feel they
are getting something for their effort and money. Furthermore if CREN
becomes a large customer there is no reason why L-Soft wouldn't help it
to a reasonable extent. The problem is that CREN and L-Soft didn't agree
on the definition of "reasonable". We think "reasonable" means that new
CREN members can get the CREN discount on a prorated license getting them
in synch with the main CREN contract, which they can later join - that
sort of things. CREN thought the adjective included things such as a free
license for LISTSERV-TCP/IP. While this would clearly help them retain
their membership, it would be like letting CREN sell LISTSERV to the US
academic community and keep the profits, which is not very different from
the "before L-Soft" situation when you think about it.
Anyway, I think it is important not to confuse CREN and NJE technology in
this debate. NJE technology still has its uses, especially in third world
and eastern countries where people simply can't afford a 64k line (in
some countries, the PTT can't *deliver* a 64k line because the
infrastructures are not yet present). NJE is very cheap, both for the
individual sites and for the organizations providing the tables and
coordination. EARN runs on a budget of around $600-700k (don't know the
current ECU exchange rate), and for that price they provide all sorts of
other services, and in particular documentation and assistance to third
world and eastern countries. Granted, there are a lot more NJE sites in
the US, but I'm sure that with say $750k one could provide a top-notch
NJE service, including centrally managed INTERBIT gateways, full-time
staff to answer technical queries, well-maintained information services
(gopher and the like), and there would even be some money left to make a
profit. The only thing not included in this scenario is the purchase of a
mainframe, as this alone could cost more than $750k, but I'm sure cycles
can be obtained at a reasonable rate or even for free (in exchange for
free membership or some other token contribution). There are around 500
CREN members so NJE doesn't need to cost more than $1500/year for each
site, and if it includes a helpdesk it becomes a piece of cake to sell it
to your management (barring political or religious problems).
Another reason to dissociate CREN from NJE is that CREN's stated intent
is to move away from NJE. While they will probably provide this service
for as long as there are customers, CREN's strategy does not rely on NJE
and they shouldn't be judged on NJE, but on the new services mentioned in
the brochure (not including LISTSERV, which wouldn't have been mentioned
if they had asked L-Soft for permission to take credit for what is not
theirs, but that's another story).
To conclude, I think that the futures of LISTSERV, NJE and CREN are three
separate issues, even though there are clear ties at the moment. LISTSERV
will go on with or without NJE, but preferrably with. NJE will go on for
as long as there are people interested in that technology. If for any
reason CREN were to decide to "dump" NJE, I'm sure another organization
will pick up the service (although CREN holds a monopoly on NJE at this
time, being a non-profit organization they would have to open the
monopoly if they decided not to offer the service any longer). NJE users
need not worry that the service will be killed from the inside. Finally,
CREN will go on with or without LISTSERV and NJE, adjusting its offering
to what it perceives to be the new needs of the community it represents.
Its continued survival will depend on the success of these new services,
and not on NJE.
Eric
|
