Transcript Implementation of the Recommendations

UKERNA Strategic Drivers &
Implications for RNOs
Robin Arak
Chief Executive, UKERNA
[email protected]
Agenda
• Strategic Drivers
• Change to UKERNA’s corporate
structure
• Issues for RNOs
Drivers – JANET stakeholders
• Higher Education
• Further Education
• Research
+ Partners and collaborators
• Funding bodies
Funding Flow (UK)
Customers
Institutions
IS/IT support
Network support
Regional Networks
Customers
Taxes
Government
Funding Bodies
JISC
UKERNA &
JANET
Customers
Regional/National
Strategy Flow
Institutional strategies
IS/IT strategy
Network strategy
Regional Network
strategies
Regional strategies
Government objectives
HE & FE Funding Councils
missions and strategies
JISC strategy
UKERNA
corporate plan
& strategy
Research
Councils’
Strategies
Drivers – JISC Funding
HEFCE
LSC
SHEFC
SFEFC
ELWa HE
ELWa FE
DELNI HE
DELNI FE
48%
35%
7%
3%
3%
2%
1%
1%
TOTAL HE 59%
TOTAL FE 41%
Common Themes
• Widening & increasing participation
• Lifelong Learning
– More options for learning and modes
•
•
•
•
Partnerships and increased collaboration
High quality education
Increased use of ICT
Improving the “wealth” of the UK
Drivers – DfES Priorities
•
•
•
•
Improving primary education
Transforming secondary education
Increasing and broadening participation in HE
Developing the skills of the workforce –
particularly the basic skills of some adults.
• Opening up learning- eLearning,
– UK online centres
– Digital TV
Drivers – funding bodies
HEFCE
• Promote and support productive interaction
between HE and business and the
community
• Encourage institutions to increase access to
support lifelong learning
Drivers – funding bodies
LSC
• Extend participation in education,
learning and training (80% 16-18 year
olds in structured learning by 2004)
• By the end of the decade 2010 half of
18-30 year olds should be capable of
accessing higher education
Drivers – funding bodies
SHEFC
• Look for other opportunities for increased
integration with other public sector networks
• Promote the increase of effective
collaborations and strategic alliances among
higher education institutions, with other parts
of the education sector, and with other users
of HE.
Drivers – funding bodies
SFEFC
• Create a sustainable funding platform to
deliver lifelong learning and wider access
• Improve students’ learning experience, by
developing an integrated quality improvement
framework, supporting learning innovation,
and investing in information technology
Drivers – funding bodies
ELWa
• Promote collaboration between the further
and higher education sectors
• Reduce number of working age adults who
don’t have qualifications from 1 in 4 to 1 in 8
by 2004
Drivers – funding bodies
DELNI
• Develop a piloted approach to enhanced
linkages between the further education sector
and SMEs.
• Introduce an FE/HE MAN (develop elearning)
Drivers – funding bodies
Research Councils
• Advancement & dissemination of knowledge
• Promotion and support of high quality basic,
strategic and applied research
• Promoting the transfer of knowledge from
scientific research into practice to benefit the
UK
• World class collaborative research
• E-Science
JISC Strategy
• High quality network
• Managed IP bandwidth
– Flexible automatically bookable network resources
between 384Kbs and 20Mbps for teaching
• Interoperability (GEANT, Internet 2)
• High bandwidth for research (GRID)
• “Last mile” technologies for student learner
and researcher access
JISC Strategy
• SuperJANET 5 (100’s of Gbps)
• Upgrades to MANS
– (In place by 2005)
• 750 primary connected sites @ 200Mbps =
150Gbps
• 750 primary connected sites @ 1Gbps =
750Gbps
JANET Backbone Bandwidth
Bandwidth in bps
1E+15
1E+12
1E+09
1E+06
1000
1
1980
1985
1990
1995
2000
2005
Year
Backbone BW
Backbone BW/site
Site BW
2010
JISC Strategy –
content delivery
• Network Management
– Traffic management
• Caching
• Mirroring
• Security & Authentication
– Access to content
– Access to network resources
UKERNA Strategy Drivers
• Increased collaboration
– For learning and teaching
– For research
• Lifelong Learning support
• Widening participation
• Support for research- E-Science
Collaboration
• Between HE, FE, research communities and
other organisations
requires
• Peering arrangements
• Connections to other networks
- connection policies
- acceptable use policies
• Support for network applications for
collaboration e.g. multi-cast video
Lifelong Learning
• Providing services “off Net”
– Home
– Workplace
• Peering arrangements
• Last mile outreach services (e.g. ADSL)
• Support implications
– Working with partners
Widening Participation
• Delivery of “broadband” JANET services to
learners at home and at work
• Links to other networks used by learners e.g.
NHSNet, schools, SMEs
• Outreach centre connections e.g. adult
education and community centres
• Links to entertainment networks e.g. Cable
TV.
• Authentication and security “issues”
E-Science - definition
“Science increasingly done through
distributed global collaborations enabled
by the Internet, using:
• very large data collections,
• tera-scale computing resources,
• and high performance visualisation.”
E-Science support
• IP Multicast- “Access GRID”
• Support for QoS
– Videoconferencing
– Remote visualisation and control
– Shipment of large volumes of data
(requires timely delivery without affecting other
production services)
– Distributed processing via the network
(databases)
E-Science implications
• Interoperation with other NRENS
• Interoperation with regional networks
• Move towards automatically setting up
network resources to support authorised
applications
– Authentication
– DEN
– Middleware
Common Requirements
• Reliability
– Resilience, redundancy, topology
•
•
•
•
Easy to manage, use and support!
Interoperability
Guaranteed Application Delivery
Ability to deliver new applications as they are
required
• Scalability (more bandwidth)
Conclusion
• UKERNA is indirectly driven by
government policies
• As policies have changed UKERNA has
provided network services to support
government policy and strategy
implementation
Summary
• To ensure that services are aligned to
stakeholder needs stakeholders need to
be represented:
– Membership
– Board
Why a review?
• UKERNA’s adoption of a wider remit to
deliver services to education and research
– FE, Lifelong learning communities, schools?
• JISC review conducted by Sir Brian Follett
– UKERNA to remain the network service provider
– Review UKERNA’s role, governance,
management
The review
• Funding Councils commissioned the
UKERNA Review
• Chaired by Fred McCrindle
• Review panels met over Summer 2001
• Report issued January 2002
Corporate Restructuring
1. Articles of association of UKERNA were
altered to create classes of membership.
2. Built in flexibility for the future to allow new
stakeholders to be represented
3. Membership of the Board restructured in
order to reflect all current stakeholder
communities.
Classes of Membership
1. HE and Research institutions
2. FE institutions
3. Individuals interested in networking
issues
Nominate an elect 3 board members
for period of 3 years (RNOs?)
Classes of Membership
4. Education, learning & research institutions
not eligible as HE, Research or FE
institutions
5. Public Body Members (UK HE, FE funding
councils and OST)
6. Representative organisations representing
education, learning & research in the UK
Nominate board members, change M&A,
vote on AGM and General meeting
business
New Board
Chair (non executive)
Executive directors
UKERNA Chief Executive
UKERNA Finance Director
• Appointed by
members in classes
4 –6
• Appointed by the
Board
New Board (cont)
Non executive directors
Nominated by members
in classes 4 – 6
Elected by the members
in classes 1 -3
•
•
•
•
•
HEFCE
LSC
SFC
ELWa
OST and research
councils
• DEL(NI)
• Three community
members
Issues affecting JANET and the
Regional Networks
Some Issues affecting JANET
• Supplier Stability & Performance
• JANET was designed to a price
– Bandwidth vs Resilience
• Regional Networks
– Resilience to regional networks?
– Resilience to end institutions?
0
Ju
l-0
Se 0
p0
N 0
ov
-0
0
Ja
n01
M
ar
-0
M 1
ay
-0
1
Ju
l-0
Se 1
p0
N 1
ov
-0
1
Ja
n02
M
ar
-0
2
-0
0
ay
M
ar
-0
•
M
Availability
Network Reliability
Overall Availability
100.00
99.90
99.80
99.70
99.60
99.50
99.40
99.30
99.20
99.10
Mean Time Between failure
Mean Time Between Failure (hours)
4500
4000
3500
3000
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0
2000-03
2000-06
2000-09
2000-12
2001-03
2001-06
2001-09
2001-12
2002-03
Mean Time to Repair
Mean Time To Repair (minutes)
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
2000-03
2000-06
2000-09
2000-12
2001-03
2001-06
2001-09
2001-12
2002-03
Top 10 availability issues
Broken lines/line faults
24% (T)
Circuit faults
21% (T)
Telco equipment faults
12% (T)
Power failures
8% (U)
Telco Exchange problems 6% (T)
Router problems
6% (U)
Security maintenance
5% (U)
Switching equipment
4% (U)
Virus problems
3% (U)
Data service unit problems 3% (U)
(Issues causing monthly site availability to drop <99%)
RNO issues
• Long term regional network funding
– Merger of capital & recurrent funding
– More flexibility and stability in funding
– Alignment of funding with procurement
cycles
– Funding tied to agreed plans/outcomes
– Remove funding “micro-management”
RNO Management
• Corporate governance of MANs
– Board structure
– Management structure
– Risk Management
– Legal obligations
• Company law, Tax, VAT, PAYE, regulation, etc.
RNO Management
• Operational Management
– Technical Management
– Financial Management (Billing, Invoicing)
– Auditing
– Monitoring the SLA
Regional Networks
• Aligning regional network agendas with
national and regional agendas?
– Regional Network Corporate Strategies
• What does an individual regional network wish
to deliver if UKERNA’s remit widens?
• What regional strategies does a regional
network wish to support?
Challenges for RNOs
• Managing complexity
–
–
–
–
•
•
•
•
Multiple interoperating domains
Relationships with UKERNA, RSCs, etc.
Relationship with “customers”
Account management
Supplier “management” – telcos
Business Continuity Plans
Move to 24 X 7 support
User expectation
Challenges for RNOs?
• Value added services?
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Caching?, Web hosting?
E-mail, Managed router service?
Offsite backup?
Video services?
eLearning services?
Other application services, MIS?
Campus network monitoring and support?
Security services?
Helpdesk? Consultancy?
Challenges for RNOs
• How can RNOs help support the
strategies of:
– Institutions?
– Funding councils?
– Research councils?
– Regional organisations?
Collaboration with other organisations
Who can connect to regional
networks? (1)
• HE, FE & publicly funded research 
• Non commercial organisations involved with
lifelong learning funded by HE & FE 
• Broader educational organisations including
private colleges?
• Local education authorities ? 
• State schools 
• Private schools ?
Who can connect to regional
networks? (2)
• Commercial organisations engaged in
lifelong learning when JANET is only
used for learning ?
• Local councils for lifelong learning?
• Local councils for for other public sector
activities for the benefit of the
community?
• Public libraries ?
Who can connect to regional
networks? (3)
• Organisations conducting collaborative
research and/or learning with HE & FE
providing JANET is used just for this 
• Research partners but using JANET for other
activities as well?
• Science parks where there is collaborative
research and JANET is used for this 
• Science parks (some companies trading with
no research interests)?
• NHS requiring delivery of lifelong learning?
Who can connect to regional
networks? (4)
• SMEs and other companies who use JANET
only for collaborative research or to support
learning programmes 
• SMEs and other companies who also want to
use JANET for commercial purposes as well
as for collaborative research or learning?
• Organisations with no link to HE & FE where
connections are made for commercial profit to
offset costs and future investment by the
RNO?
Who can connect to regional
networks? (What next?)
• Paper to the JCN
• Consultation with funding councils
• Change to connection policy?
– RNOs to offer sponsored connections
– Cost recovery models
– Tariffs for connection
– Tariffs for internet transit bandwidth
DISCUSSION
&
FEEDBACK
Due Summer 2002
AbMAN
UHI Network
Clydenet
FaTMAN
EaStMAN
NNW
C&NL
MAN
University of
Manchester
connection to
test-bed
network
10Gbit/s
multiplexed
4*2.5Gbit/s
channels
Glasgow
Edinburgh
NorMAN
YHMAN
North Wales
MAN
Warrington
Leeds
EMMAN
MidMAN
London
EastNet
Reading
TVN
Kentish MAN
External
Links
Bristol
Portsmouth
Northern
Ireland
External
Links
South Wales
MAN
SWERN
LeNSE
LMN
University College
London connection
to test-bed network