The Unpredictable
CERTAINTY

Information Infrastructure Through 2000

NII 2000 Steering Committee

Computer Science and Telecommunications Board

Commission on Physical Sciences, Mathematics, and Applications

National Research Council

National Academy Press
Washington, D.C.
1996



The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement



Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page R1
--> The Unpredictable CERTAINTY Information Infrastructure Through 2000 NII 2000 Steering Committee Computer Science and Telecommunications Board Commission on Physical Sciences, Mathematics, and Applications National Research Council National Academy Press Washington, D.C.1996

OCR for page R1
--> NOTICE: The project that is the subject of this report was approved by the Governing Board of the National Research Council, whose members are drawn from the councils of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine. The members of the steering committee responsible for the report were chosen for their special competences and with regard for appropriate balance. This report has been reviewed by a group other than the authors according to procedures approved by a Report Review Committee consisting of members of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine. Support for this project was provided by the National Science Foundation, the Advanced Projects Research Agency, and the National Institute of Standards and Technology under grant number IRI-9421465. That support does not constitute an endorsement of the views expressed in the report. Library of Congress Catalog Card Number 96-67383 International Standard Book Number 0-309-05432-X Additional copies of this report are available from: National Academy Press 2101 Constitution Avenue, NW Box 285 Washington, DC 20055 800-624-6242 202-334-3313 (in the Washington Metropolitan Area) B-728 An electronic version and information about the publication can be found at the NRC World Wide Web site http://www.nas.edu. Copyright 1996 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America

OCR for page R1
--> NII 2000 Steering Committee LEWIS M. BRANSCOMB, Harvard University, Chair CYNTHIA H. BRADDON, The McGraw Hill Companies JAMES A. CHIDDIX, Time Warner Cable DAVID D. CLARK, Massachusetts Institute of Technology JOSEPH A. FLAHERTY, CBS Incorporated PAUL E. GREEN, JR., IBM T.J. Watson Research Center IRENE GREIF, Lotus Development Corporation RICHARD T. LIEBHABER, MCI Communications (retired) ROBERT W. LUCKY, Bell Communications Research LLOYD N. MORRISETT, John and Mary Markle Foundation DONALD W. SIMBORG, KnowMed Systems LESLIE L. VADASZ, Intel Corporation Staff MARJORY S. BLUMENTHAL, Director LOUISE A. ARNHEIM, Senior Staff Officer (through August 1995) JOHN M. GODFREY, Research Associate LESLIE M. WADE, Research Assistant GLORIA P. BEMAH, Administrative Assistant

OCR for page R1
--> Computer Science And Telecommunications Board WILLIAM A. WULF, University of Virginia, Chair FRANCES E. ALLEN, IBM T.J. Watson Research Center DAVID CLARK, Massachusetts Institute of Technology JEFF DOZIER, University of California at Santa Barbara HENRY FUCHS, University of North Carolina CHARLES GESCHKE, Adobe Systems Incorporated JAMES GRAY, Microsoft Corporation BARBARA GROSZ, Harvard University JURIS HARTMANIS, Cornell University DEBORAH A. JOSEPH, University of Wisconsin RICHARD M. KARP, University of California at Berkeley BUTLER W. LAMPSON, Microsoft Corporation BARBARA LISKOV, Massachusetts Institute of Technology JOHN MAJOR, Motorola ROBERT L. MARTIN, AT&T Network Systems DAVID G. MESSERSCHMITT, University of California at Berkeley WILLIAM PRESS, Harvard University CHARLES L. SEITZ, Myricom Incorporated EDWARD SHORTLIFFE, Stanford University School of Medicine CASMIR S. SKRZYPCZAK, NYNEX Corporation LESLIE L. VADASZ, Intel Corporation MARJORY S. BLUMENTHAL, Director HERBERT S. LIN, Senior Staff Officer PAUL SEMENZA, Staff Officer JERRY R. SHEEHAN, Staff Officer JEAN E. SMITH, Program Associate JOHN M. GODFREY, Research Associate LESLIE M. WADE, Research Assistant GLORIA P. BEMAH, Administrative Assistant GAIL E. PRITCHARD, Project Assistant

OCR for page R1
--> Commission On Physical Sciences, Mathematics, And Applications ROBERT J. HERMANN, United Technologies Corporation, Chair STEPHEN L. ADLER, Institute for Advanced Study PETER M. BANKS, IBM Corporation (retired) SYLVIA T. CEYER, Massachusetts Institute of Technology L. LOUIS HEGEDUS, W.R. Grace and Company JOHN E. HOPCROFT, Cornell University RHONDA J. HUGHES, Bryn Mawr College SHIRLEY A. JACKSON, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission KENNETH I. KELLERMANN, National Radio Astronomy Observatory KEN KENNEDY, Rice University THOMAS A. PRINCE, California Institute of Technology JEROME SACKS, National Institute of Statistical Sciences L.E. SCRIVEN, University of Colorado LEON T. SILVER, California Institute of Technology CHARLES P. SLICHTER, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign ALVIN W. TRIVELPIECE, Oak Ridge National Laboratory SHMUEL WINOGRAD, IBM T.J. Watson Research Center CHARLES A. ZRAKET, MITRE Corporation (retired)­ NORMAN METZGER, Executive Director ­­­

OCR for page R1
--> The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of distinguished scholars engaged in scientific and engineering research, dedicated to the furtherance of science and technology and to their use for the general welfare. Upon the authority of the charter granted to it by Congress in 1863, the Academy has a mandate that requires it to advise the federal government on scientific and technical matters. Dr. Bruce Alberts is president of the National Academy of Sciences. The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964, under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences, as a parallel organization of outstanding engineers. It is autonomous in its administration and in the selection of its members, sharing with the National Academy of Sciences the responsibility for advising the federal government. The National Academy of Engineering also sponsors engineering programs aimed at meeting national needs, encourages education and research, and recognizes the superior achievements of engineers. Dr. Harold Liebowitz is president of the National Academy of Engineering. The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the National Academy of Sciences to secure the services of eminent members of appropriate professions in the examination of policy matters pertaining to the health of the public. The Institute acts under the responsibility given to the National Academy of Sciences by its congressional charter to be an adviser to the federal government and, upon its own initiative, to identify issues of medical care, research, and education. Dr. Kenneth I. Shine is president of the Institute of Medicine. The National Research Council was organized by the National Academy of Sciences in 1916 to associate the broad community of science and technology with the Academy's purposes of furthering knowledge and advising the federal government. Functioning in accordance with general policies determined by the Academy, the Council has become the principal operating agency of both the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering in providing services to the government, the public, and the scientific and engineering communities. The Council is administered jointly by both Academies and the Institute of Medicine. Dr. Bruce Alberts and Dr. Harold Liebowitz are chairman and vice chairman, respectively, of the National Research Council.

OCR for page R1
--> Preface In October 1994, the Computer Science and Telecommunications Board convened, at the request of the Technology Policy Working Group (TPWG) of the Information Infrastructure Task Force, a steering committee to assess medium-term deployment of facilities and services to advance the nation's information infrastructure. The project was designated NII 2000 by the steering committee, and its tasks were the following: To reach out to a broad range of industries with a stake in the future of U.S. information infrastructure—those industries expected to be major market drivers as well as those expected to be major service providers—to explore their expectations and motivations for technology deployment in the next 5 to 7 years; To infer from this exploration the extent to which there is a shared vision of the importance of common features of system architecture, such as interoperability or open system interfaces, and the alternative likelihood that major parts of the system will develop along proprietary, incompatible lines; and To conclude with suggestions to the U.S. government on public policy choices that might serve both the rapid, orderly, and successful development of information infrastructure and its satisfaction of important public interests. To achieve these goals, the steering committee was asked by the TPWG to undertake a specific series of activities: convene a workshop of

OCR for page R1
--> professionals and scholars to discuss and identify key issues related to technology deployment, call for white papers to gain further information on these issues, organize a forum to discuss the white papers and other key ideas, and write a synthesis report of its findings. As a preliminary step, the steering committee solicited inputs and suggestions via liaisons (listed in Appendix E) from trade, professional, and advocacy organizations, as well as government agencies, beginning in late 1994. The workshop, which was held in Washington, D.C., on January 17-18, 1995, brought together invited members from business, industry, and interest groups as well as federal government representatives. Panels during the 2-day proceedings focused on technology deployment, enduser hardware and software issues, domain-specific applications, the Internet as a national information infrastructure (NII) model, and what different industries meant when they used certain terms and concepts. For example, "architecture," "programming," ''service," and "network" are among the many fundamental terms (see Box 1.2 in Chapter 1 for a longer list) that are defined differently by different industries. See Appendix A for the workshop agenda and a list of participants. Following the workshop, the steering committee released a call for white papers (Appendix C) on issues related to architecture and facilities, enabling technologies, recovery of costs, middleware technologies and capabilities, applications, equitable access and public service obligations, and research and development. The call was distributed through various media (the Internet, press advisories, direct mail, and so on) to producers of communications, computer, and software systems goods and services; Internet access and other network-based service providers; scholars specializing in relevant technical, economic, and public policy research and analysis; and project liaisons and other representatives of industries and sectors believed likely to become major users of advanced information infrastructure (such as the arts, banking and finance, education, health care, government agencies, libraries, manufacturing, and transportation). The white papers (see Appendix D for a list of papers received and their authors) were distributed to participants at the spring forum and to interested federal agencies. Their content, representing a broad spectrum of views from knowledgeable participants in the evolution of information infrastructure, was a major component in the development of the steering committee's report, which quotes from and refers specifically to several of them. The white papers will be made available in a forthcoming companion volume. Shortly after the call for papers was issued, the steering committee received a letter (Appendix F) from Vice President Albert Gore underscoring the high-level interest in the project's potential to generate "an

OCR for page R1
--> objective assessment of the capabilities of different residential broadband architectures (e.g., hybrid fiber coaxial cable, fiber to the curb, and wireless alternatives) being deployed by the private sector." Explained the Vice President, "We would like to see an NII that allows individuals to be producers as well as consumers of information, that enables 'many to many' communication, and that provides a 'general purpose' infrastructure capable of supporting a wide range of services." The Vice President's letter contributed to the steering committee's preparations for the spring 1995 forum, which was structured to assess the difficulties inherent in developing a nationwide information infrastructure built largely with private resources, but having the capacity to further social and economic goals as well. (See Appendix B for the forum agenda and a list of participants). Like the evolving NII itself, the forum embraced a range of models that provided different perspectives on the possible roles of infrastructure: one-to-many distribution of large quantities of preselected video, combinations of television and telephony to support interactive programming, one-to-one voice telephony augmented by a variety of conveniences, many-to-many explorations over computer networks, most notably the Internet, and many-to-one interactions between consumers and information sources over the World Wide Web, in particular. This synthesis report represents the collective view of 12 experts who monitored and participated in a unique public policy undertaking. The NII 2000 project was an experiment of sorts, an attempt to hold other issues constant by focusing attention on technological and business models. Although each of the following elements is part of the overall NII "story," this report is not a description of an optimistic vision of future possibilities and benefits for various business and nonprofit entities, for the purpose of motivating interest in the NII; an analysis of legal and regulatory barriers to competition; or an attempt to resolve broad policy concerns such as universal access or the democratization of cyberspace. Nevertheless, comments from many contributors to the project convey the message that a complete assessment of NII deployment, and the role of government as well as industry in its evolution, must take these issues into consideration to at least some degree. Finally, it is also important to state that the NII 2000 Steering Committee's synthesis report is a technology deployment "road map" only in the most metaphorical sense. Participants described many roads, or in some cases territory through which roads might be constructed, but most of these roads have unknown, indeed unknowable, destinations. As the TPWG's Howard Frank observed at the January 1995 workshop:

OCR for page R1
--> The government is not doing a road map that says how do we get from here to there.… If you look at the United States, and look at the interstate highway road map, or look at the road map of all of the roads in the United States, you can see that no path is dictated; there are a variety of ways of moving, as opposed to a specific formula. What we are trying to do is identify those capabilities and metrics of an NII, and the barriers associated with those various roads, [so that] we could speed the creation of the NII and eliminate some of the barriers. The NII 2000 Steering Committee shares this view. Like Howard Frank, we do not know where "there" is, and we observe many forks in the roads we can see. We do believe, however, that the future offers many very attractive options for U.S. society and its many business communities, if government and private interests collaborate in understanding how to enable that future to emerge in a way that best satisfies each other's needs, concerns, and expectations. This report is an effort to explore the limits of consensus on a broad array of fast-changing issues. As a result, it benefits from the work of many individuals, among them the participants in the January 1995 workshop and the May 1995 forum, and the authors of the white papers. We are grateful to them for the level and range of expertise they brought to the project. The steering committee gratefully acknowledges the assistance of several individuals and organizations, including Rupert Stow, who provided numerous suggestions for enhancing the discussion of broadcasting; Stewart Personick, who provided insights into technical and business perspectives from telephony; Duane Adams and Howard Frank, whose vision motivated and guided the establishment of the project; Y.T. Chien, John Hestenes, and Michael Papillo, whose ongoing questioning and suggestions on behalf of the TPWG provided regular encouragement and feedback; the liaisons, particularly Michael Roberts of EDUCOM, Suzanne Tichenor of the Council on Competitiveness, and Charles Brownstein of the Corporation for National Research Initiatives' Cross-Industry Working Team; and of course the anonymous reviewers, whose criticisms, reflections, and suggestions were essential to the strengthening of this final report. The members of the steering committee devoted much of their time for about a year to formulating the project and guiding its conduct. But more importantly, each member brought a level of professional knowledge and competence from many areas of technology, allowing the project to be authoritative in its coverage. I am particularly grateful to one member of the steering committee, David Clark of MIT, who gave much more than his share of devotion to this project, frequently filling in for the chairman. But the most especial thanks from all the steering committee members is due to Marjory Blumenthal, leader of a fine team from the

OCR for page R1
--> CSTB and now a recognized authority on public policy issues related to information technology. Among all of us, she should be considered the principal author of this work. Other members of the CSTB team to whom our appreciation is owed are John Godfrey, who amassed and analyzed considerable amounts of technology and industry data; Gloria Bemah, who tracked the large number of participants and documents associated with the project; Pamela Rodgers, who orchestrated the logistics for the spring forum; Leslie Wade, who transformed the draft into a fully documented and appropriately formatted final report; and Susan Maurizi, whose editorial assistance helped make this report more readable. Lewis Branscomb, Chair NII 2000 Steering Committee

OCR for page R1
This page in the original is blank.

OCR for page R1
--> Contents 1   INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY   3     Defining the National Information Infrastructure   3     Driving Deployment: Business Transitions, Business Models   7     The Significance of the Internet   11     As a Barometer of Potential   12     As a Laboratory for Development of Workable Standards   13     As a Basis for Critical Flexibility   13     As a Vehicle for New Market Structures   14     Whither the Internet?   15     Realizing the NII's Potential—The User Perspective   16     Deployment of Infrastructure Technology   18     Access   18     Flexibility and Interoperability   19     Additional Technology Concerns   20     User Interaction with Networked Infrastructure   21     Public Versus Private Objectives   22     Organization of This Report   24     Notes   25 2   MAKING TECHNOLOGY WORK: INDIVIDUAL AND ORGANIZED END USERS   27     Who Is the End User?   27     Why the NII Must Reach the Home   30     Evolving Demand for NII Capabilities   32     The End User as Consumer   37

OCR for page R1
-->     Access Devices   40     The Personal Computer   41     The Television   43     Advanced Television   44     The Telephone and Other Access Devices   45     Toward a Fully Integrated Home System   45     What Increasing Use of General-Access Devices Implies for Networking Technology Deployment   48     High Data Rates to the End Point   51     Adequate Bandwidth in Both Directions   52     Multiple-Session Capability   52     Continuous Availability of Service   52     Real-time, Multimedia Communication   53     Nomadicity   53     Security   53     Concluding Observations   54     Notes   57 3   WHERE IS THE BUSINESS CASE?   63     Factors Shaping Investment in Information Infrastructure   63     Investment in Facilities   66     The Problem of How Much Bandwidth to Invest In   66     Federal Licenses as an Influence on Deployment of New Wireless Systems   70     Investing to Achieve Infrastructure Generality   71     From Facilities to Services and Applications   77     Balancing Investment—Software "Capital"   78     The Separation of Services from Facilities—Broadening the Potential Content   78     The Internet and Its Use for Business   81     Effects on Provision of Goods and Services   81     The Internet—Layering, Incrementalism, and Diversification   83     Incremental Increases   89     Arrangements for Interconnection   94     Economic Models   96     Usage-based Fees for Communications and Information Services   99     Embedded or Domain-specific Services   100     The Broadcast Model   101     End-User Devices Paid for by Consumers   103     The Access Subscription Model   104     Payment Models and the Internet Phenomenon   105     Notes   106

OCR for page R1
--> 4   TECHNOLOGY OPTIONS AND CAPABILITIES: WHAT DOES WHAT, HOW   115     The Changing Nature of Technology and Communications   115     How Trends in Technology Are Changing Communications Infrastructure and Services   117     Separation of Infrastructure Facilities and Service Offerings   118     Building Services on Each Other   119     The Tension Between Supporting Mature and Emerging Services   120     Resolving the Tension: The Internet as an Example   121     The Importance of the Internet   122     The Coexistence of New and Mature Services   124     Current Technology—Evaluating the Options   127     Hybrid Fiber Coaxial Cable   127     Fiber to the Curb   130     Digital Services and the Telephone Infrastructure   131     Data Over the Telephone System   132     Asynchronous Transfer Mode   135     Local Area Networks   136     Wireless   137     Broadcasting   141     Satellite   144     Power Industry as Infrastructure Provider   145     The Internet   145     Change and Growth   146     Transport Infrastructure to Information Infrastructure   148     Open Interfaces and Open Standards   150     Standards and Innovation in the Marketplace   151     Management and Control of the Infrastructure   155     Notes   157 5   TECHNOLOGY CHOICES: WHAT ARE THE PROVIDERS DEPLOYING?   161     Introduction   161     Wireline Telephony   163     Summary and Forecasts   163     Local Access and the Larger System   166     Integrated Services Digital Network   167     Telephone Industry Fiber Deployment   170     Demand for Telephone Services   172     Data Communications   173     Summary and Forecasts   173     Data Services Provided by Telephone Carriers   175     Business Networking   177

OCR for page R1
-->     Cable Television and Telephony: Advanced Services to the Home   181     Summary and Forecasts   181     Advanced Cable and Telephone Services to the Home   182     On-line Services and Internet Access for Consumers   186     Summary and Forecasts   186     On-line Services and Internet Access   186     Wireless and Broadcast Infrastructure   188     Summary and Forecasts   188     Wireless Telephony   189     Wireless Data Networking   192     Terrestrial and Satellite Broadcast Television   194     Wireless Cable   194     Direct Broadcast Satellite   195     Notes   195 6   PUBLIC POLICY AND PRIVATE ACTION   197     Introduction   197     Public-Private Engagement   199     NII Systems Issues   201     Defining Roles for Government   206     Regulation, Rules, and Norms   206     Protecting the NII: Ethics and Mechanisms   209     Security, Reliability, and Architecture   210     Government as User and Service Provider   212     Technology Development Through R&D   214     Architecture and Networking   215     Information Management and Ease of Use   218     Standards   222     International Issues   224     Systems Data and Analysis for NII Assessment   225     Government as Convenor   226     Conclusions   227     Notes   230     BIBLIOGRAPHY   235     APPENDIXES         A Workshop Participants and Agenda   251     B Forum Participants and Agenda   256     C Call for White Papers (Abridged)   265     D White Papers Received   269     E NII 2000 Liaisons   274     F Letter from Vice President Albert Gore, March 6, 1995   276     G Acronyms and Abbreviations Used   278