USENIX and South Africa

[Dominic Dunlop]

The trouble with getting objective information on this issue is that
everybody seems to be polarized.  I certainly am!

Joining those asking for more details, I'd like to see some
clarification of the status of the news paths apparently shown on the
map world-flow.ps which can be produced from materials recently posted
to news.lists.ps-maps.  (Thanks to Brian Reid.)  The paths seem to be
one-way links from sites in Capetown and Johannesburg to uunet (or
thereabouts).  This may or may not contradict, for example, John
Quarterman in "The Matrix" (page 358) ''Because UUNET has not yet been
declared a common carrier, there are a few legal glitches: certain
organizations in South Africa cannot be allowed to connect, and no
organizations in the USSR and certain Soviet bloc countries are
permitted, due to U.S. government restrictions.''  (Great index, by the
way, John.)   Depends whether uunet has applied for and been granted
common carrier status (whatever this entails, and whatever
responsibilities it brings), and whether the connected sites are
outside the class of ``certain organizations''.

In any event, it seems to me that USENIX involvement with and influence
on the operational/legal/moral/political decisions of UUNET is limited
to the voice of its one director on UUNET's three member board.  The
board of USENIX can presumably instruct that director to take a
particular line on a particular issue, such as the connection of a
South Aftrican university to the net via UUNET -- and possibly to get
outvoted.  Pesumably, that might be one intention of the item on the
recently-posted agenda for the up-coming meeting of the USENIX board of
directors (Message-ID <369 at usenix.ORG> -- hurry, before it expires.
Oh, OK then: ``16.   Should we continue to duck on the South Africa
question, and explore the issues of the Board's power and obligation to
limit memberships?'').  Am I correct?
-- 
Dominic Dunlop