; Hatfield 2000). There is no reason to believe a priori that giving preference to innovations oper- ating at the network's edge over innovations in the network's core will prove to be beneficial in all cases. Two examples from the early days of the Internet introduced in Chapter 8 illustrate the problem. The introduction of digital transmission tech- nologies required the deployment of protocols that were not interoperable with the existing analog network. This necessitated the introduction of computer processing into the core of the network to engage in "protocol conversion." The emergence of "voice messaging services," such as voice mail and advance calling, posed similar problems. Voice messaging services appeared to function best when their capa- bilities were designed directly into the telephone switch. Both developments were inconsistent with the regime of transparency and interoperability envisioned by the 16 The discussion that follows draws on the more extended analysis in Yoo (2004b). 17 See, e.g., Lemley and Lessig (2001); Lessig (2002); Cooper (2003); Solum and Chung (2004); Wu (2004). Saltzer et al. (1984); Clark (1996); Reed et al. (1998); Blumenthal and Clark (2001). To take but one example, the desirability of end-to-end depends in part on the length of the file. If a system drops one message per one hundred messages sent, the probability that all packets will arrive correctly decreases exponentially as the length of the file (and thus the number of packets composing the file) increases (Saltzer et al. 1984, pp. 280-81). Networks in Telecommunications second Computer Inquiry as well as the simplistic reading of the end-to-end argu- ment. Both required specific waivers from the FCC's rules in order to be deployed. Had the FCC adhered to its policy of preserving the ability of unaffiliated providers to obtain transparent access to the network, these innovations would not have been allowed to emerge. Simply put, any choice of standardized protocol has the inevitable effect of favoring certain applic