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
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
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
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
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.
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
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
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:
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
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
This page in the original is blank. |