The Internet was launched more than three decades earlier, when the U.S. government is funding the project. Internet has been the source of several universities and government, he eventually rose to some private companies / research institutions belong. Thus, the first users of the Internet to be a scientist / engineer who was also in the running of the network (and who had no intention of modern pirates) know. Motivated the Internet at that time was to create a national network of reliable communication, and the opportunity to exchange research results / resources around nation1. The original architecture of the Internet is often described as the architecture from end to end. From one end to the other decentralized architecture ", a mechanism should not be placed on the network if it can be placed at the endpoint," in which second heart This construction gives the network simple and universal.

Since then, however, the scope of the Internet has grown exponentially. It has become more difficult for the network supported by the government on a scale of measurement so that the government released gradually into a network by the private sector. Since the government is not responsible for Internet access, private companies - Internet Service Provider (ISP) - were created to ensure access to this vast network. These vendors, of course, to private companies, the main objective to make a profit - a radical difference to the original purpose of the supplier, the U.S. government. The growth of the Internet service provider, today as the dominant players of the Internet was the catalyst for a more centralized network that goes from the original end to end design was injured this change negatively related to their group The most important of the Internet - the end user.

One of the fundamental changes in the early days of the Internet was now the transition to privatization. The provider-end profits that controls their actions, and it is this interest that vendors are trying to move the Internet from its end to start. To make a profit, Internet service providers must first attract a large number of customers to buy their services, and then get a nice profit for the services they provide. Have a free market economy, ISPs compete with each other to compete in the market for customers, ISPs need to have a certain charm to offer our customers: low prices, with no limit the connection time, high-speed access, or other attractive services that are unique to the ISP. It could be argued that some of these tasks are not necessarily fall on the supplier, but the service now believe that what they do. As Marjory Blumenthal and David Clarke explains, ISPs now the position that these functions are "something to make the party a competitive advantage." 3

It is this need for customers to centralize the network provider to compete away from the simple end to end design on the move. One of the ISP's most successful, AOL, for example, announced a number of unique features: AOL Instant Messaging, and parental control features, exclusive content, AOL, such as streaming audio / clips Video and AOL keyword search4. Most of these functions call your ISP to add the infrastructure network - not the ends. Streaming audio / video content, for example, may require AOL, the nature of the device cache for web users to add the contents of the flow is regular and continuous basis. Parental control, requiring AOL, something like a firewall Add to certain content inaccessible to some users may. Recognize the need for the provider, such a function of pressure is released from start to finish the design. Providers can try out all these functions at the end, but the ISP would be to install for end users (computer users often inexperienced) to maintain and update the system software of the confidence of some. Formulated as Blumenthal and Clark said. "Provider implements the heart of the network ... so that the supplier is likely to add the benefits and limitations to change one part of the network under their control" fifth Thus, the need the leading supplier to the customer in conjunction with easy access to the network core to compete with Internet service providers by the original end to end principle.

In addition to the inherent need to compete, there are several external groups, such as corporate pirates, the government and others that have an impact on Internet service providers. A major concern today is network security. Since the early days of the Internet, the threat of hackers, and users who maliciously hoarding of resources has increased significantly. Thus, suppliers have a strong interest in maintaining a secure network is not only satisfied customers but also to minimize the financial loss for repairs and downtime. Suppliers are now faced with pressure from the government. Agencies like the FCC to adopt rules that providers must follow. Moreover, the government listens to a telephone line for many years, the government could also access the Internet to determine the data content of e-mails or other. Because providers are responsible for the provision, the government can put pressure on suppliers to put information about their customers to open and control their activities and communications. Responding to these requests by the government, ISPs may be additional components in the network is capable of tracking e-mails. In addition to malicious individuals and governments, ISPs face pressure from other companies interested in the growth of the cyber-market. Individual companies can contact the supplier and provide financial incentives for ISPs to integrate their services. For example, a content provider, such as CNBC and CNN, in the vicinity of the supplier and ask them to new exclusive content, including streaming clips of their new site, which also means that the supplier should serve - perhaps a Web cache or mirror - for this content provider. E-commerce may for example be convincing. A similar approach can shop online and ISP partnerships with them to sell their products online directly from the ISP. To reuse a familiar example, AOL has been online stores integrated into the software they offer to their customers. As these cases demonstrate a range of pressure groups outside suppliers.

The problem with these external pressures is that they push from suppliers from start to finish the model. Of course, many of these functions can be implemented either at the end or the network. But in many cases it is advantageous (or necessary) to implement for the supplier to perform the duties in the network. Adding new features requested by the end of the provider-client application or an interface that integrates these functions, such as changing the browser interface. This, however, adds development costs for the supplier and can be a burden on consumers - Internet users in particular novice who has no experience with computers. The user must use the specific interface for all web activities, and the user has to do with the software update. In addition, as described by Blumenthal and Clark said, is quoted ISPs simply trying to change the heart of the network because they have direct access to it. So it is beneficial to ask the ISP, only an external pressure in the heart of the network - it's cheaper and easier. In other words, the various players in the Internet service provider pushing away from the original end to end design.

Having established that groups cause competition and external suppliers of the deviation from end to end principle, the question arises whether this change was positive or negative. Assess the significance of this change, some item or standard can be defined. This is what is best for the Internet? Is the economic interests of competition, technological development or the interests of users? Position that the interests of end users should be considered a priority. Rationale for this position is that the Internet was created, not to sell as a product but also as a tool to communicate to users. The official goal of ISPs and other groups linked to the Internet for customer service in any way. Therefore, priority should be placed on the development of the Internet for the benefit of users. How positively or negatively to judge the end of End-to was Internet service providers and service providers that meet, must first be considered justified.

Ideally, Internet service provider for all groups to which they react under pressure. Of course, ISPs should be sensitive to customers at the end of the supplier of the life force. Another principle of network security is certainly of vital importance for all who use the network to service providers must take steps to secure their networks. When it comes to government, service providers have little choice. Regardless of whether the policy is positive or not, providers must follow to obtain the consent of their legitimate activities. Suppliers should also other commercial interests behind it is often a "good deal". Other companies may bring a lot of revenue for the ISP, should increase profit margins, to allocate resources to explore the network, new technologies to improve and perhaps even below the cost to the consumer. As a result, providers should try to all interests, to put pressure on them to receive the benefit of the Internet Service Provider. The peak due to the fact that these interests require different responses from the manufacturer. Government, business and other security issues is likely to add a product provider's network and away from one end of philosophy. He is to receive the benefit of consumers, but the architecture from end to end.

This tension between maintaining the design from end to end for the consumer and away from it for commercial reasons are usually to the detriment of consumers. In general, government and private sector as a major influence, power, money and men organization. Usually, people do strong institutions that represent them. Moreover, if all suppliers to follow the same practice, people are losing their influence with competing sources, choose to move beyond. Thus, from a business perspective, ISPs are faced with strong incentives for the establishment of government and business groups - which is to go on the Internet from one end to the ideal. However, end to end architecture to limit the control, instead of that other groups may be on the Internet. Limiting the control of other groups leads to freedom for the user and limits the ability of suppliers or other companies to monopolize the Internet. It is based on the Internet are based must be an open network connection who share their thoughts and communicate with other users will be allowed until the end of the beginning. The weakening of one end of the structure the balance of power towards ISPs and commercial interests of restrictions on the freedom that modern users have changed. As Lawrence Lessig in his book Code: "the invisible hand, through trade, an architecture that perfects control building - an architecture that allows to control very effective" 6 This type of control is not in the interest of users. As David Clark and others. other side. suggest that "ensure that users are not in what they can do no more capable than the preservation of limited fundamental design principle of the Internet .... User empowerment is the basic element of "7 Thus, the supplier of the original Internet architecture, which was a negative phenomenon of Internet users have weakened. In short, the Internet service providers to date, not a high priority "user empowerment" given.

While the Internet is not a victim of an "architecture of control" development suppliers have the potential to carry this line of control in the future perfect. The new policy will be vendors, increased competition in broadband services rate and government decisions about a project. idea of how providers make the Internet in the future September-October 2002 Dollars & Sense folders are a very bleak picture of what the Internet can be in hands of the suppliers: "The Internet of today could soon resemble something much like cable TV, with higher prices, limited access and a monotonous diet, the specific content of the company. "Article 8 states that service providers can benefit from certain Web sites to which they have partnerships so that the pages load much faster (according to the article, the cable companies already have the technology to do , and AOL has set priorities for specific sites). The article also describes how providers can different packages that allow users to only visit certain sites to all sites on the Internet, users must pay extra, and the current packages of cable TV. As the elements wisely observes, these measures are a bit short of censorship, with a small individual sites are not running now included in packages9 expensive. The picture becomes even more acute in the vertical integration is considered. As in other industries, the ISP will certainly strive for vertical integration to increase sales. According to Clark et al. other side. "Vertical integration ... requires the removal of some forms of the opening. The user could be forced to use only certain content providers, or to pay for certain protocols, etc. is" 10 Integration Vertical allows Internet service providers has made the use of competitive providers of broadband services, to prohibit, for example. How to merge with the main suppliers of telephone companies and cable for vertical integration, the situation could get worse. Potential FCC decision could stop, the major airlines to share their lines, lines that could cause a sharp rise in prices for small businesses, broadband access and an appreciable restriction of competition in the broadband market11. With such amazing features in mind, we can conclude that the growth of Internet service providers is limited and will continue to be the freedom that Internet users are limited.

In general, it appears that the growth of access to Internet service providers to the Internet is rapidly growing in importance, after the U.S. government stepped in to provide. However, the growth of Internet service providers to a deterioration in the Internet architecture from start to finish led home. This compromise is in the original construction of the Internet for more complex network, which resulted in more controls and regulations. This development will harm individual users of the Internet and has the potential to completely transform the Internet with a network of open communication in a network controlled with little freedom to the user. These events can be neutralized if the supplier to protect people and the recovery from end to end design as the central principle of the end of the Internet are committed. Nevertheless, the prospect of such suppliers movement - remains dark - in the absence of a consumer lobby