Network Planning Task Force: Consensus Building, Preliminary Rate Setting and Recommendations

1. Network Planning Task Force “Consensus Building, Preliminary Rate Setting and Recommendations”

2. Today’s Agenda • N&T 5-year Cash Flow • Expense Variance FY ’08 vs FY’09 • Discussions and Voting • PennKey Support • Public Labs/ Central Pool Classroom Subsidy • Wireless • Preliminary Rate Setting and Recommendations

3. Projected N&T 5-Year Cash Flow

4. Variance FY ’08 – FY ‘09

5. FY 2006 Projected CSF Rates

6. PennKey • Review volume/nature of support services currently provided by ISC, evaluating the potential for each to be distributed to schools/centers. • Consider alternate support model and associated cost savings in ISC • Seek consensus on proposed model and approval for associated funding

7. PennKey As discussed last time, we implemented changes in the PennKey support process in FY04/05 with the goal of improving customer support and reducing support costs. Even with these efforts, the volume of support calls is up this year as use of PennKey continues to increase. PennKey requests via pennkey@isc: Jan-Oct 2003: 1821 Jan-Oct 2004: 2402 (+32%)

8. PennKey PennKey requests via pennkey@isc: • Estimated 2696 total May 04 – April 05 • 45% “generic”, 55% data or setup code overall • 70% in summer (May-August) – Campus Express an initial/primary driver currently • 40% “generic” (how to obtain, basic use) • 60% data or setup code issues (lost setup codes, data issues, international student issues related to SSN or setup code mailings) • 30% rest of year (September-April) • 57% “generic” • 43% data or setup code issues • Effort: 5% fac/staff, 40% ugrad, 55% grad (est.)

9. PennKey Pennkey@isc - .5 FTE / $40K • Issues • Need for direct and/or repeated contact with user to resolve data and setup code issues. • LSP must understand data issues (and have access to tools (Penn Community and Penn Names interfaces) to be effective as first tier. • Potential to Distribute • Generic issues: Good (“canned” responses can be used to answer/resolve most requests). • Data or setup code issues: • Summer – More difficult (lots of permutations of issues and exception processing – alternate addresses, etc.) • Academic Year – Good (users on campus)

10. PennKey PennKey Line (Telequent) - .2 FTE / $20K Allows users who can not show up in person to request a setup code sent via regular mail • Issues • Need for direct contact with user. Need phone(s) staffed or it can result in phone tag. • Potential to Distribute - ??? in current form • Potential to Automate • There is a group in ISC exploring ways we might make this more self service and still maintain a level of security we are comfortable with

11. PennKey Guest PennKey Requests - .03 FTE / $3K Forms filled out and faxed with information for creation of PennKeys for visitors • Issues • An alternate model that would simplify this process is under consideration • Potential to Distribute - Good

12. PennKey Phone/VoiceMail - .07 FTE / $7K Phone number provided within the setup letters that are mailed out for people who have questions or problems. • Issues • Need for direct contact with user. Need phone staffed or results in phone tag. • Could consolidate this with the primary pennkey@isc intake channel • Potential to Distribute – see pennkey@isc

13. PennKey General Issues: • Routing Support Requests • ACD not a good option (too many destinations – “for xxx, press 12…”) • Web page would work, but we would need to develop and maintain a new page with local contacts for PennKey • Challenge for small units to deliver consistent service given staffing and other responsibilities • Security concerns • Support “Bleed” – Potential confusion regarding where to go for what if this does not align with the regular support model.

14. PennKey Recommendations / Alternatives • Do not distribute fac/staff PennKey support (small percentage of volume and a larger number of LSPs would need to be trained/involved, raising support and security issues). • For students could distribute both the PennKey creation process (currently Telequent) and PennKey support

15. PennKey Alternatives - Assumptions: • ISC works with schools to develop central web pages, call routing, etc. • Schools maintain local web pages and services over time • ISC Information Security continues to act as the “owner” for the PennKey service, addressing issues that arise

16. PennKey Alternatives - Assumptions: • Each school will designate and train two (or more) IT staff to effectively address data issues. • ProDesk will continue to be the point of contact for school IT staff for issues that need to be escalated.

17. PennKey Alternatives - Costs: • ISC Costs • $13,500 ($3,500 fac/staff, $10K 2nd Tier) • ??? Transition/hard costs – Telequent or the cost of implementing an automated alternative to Telequent • Reduction in CSF costs: • Schools do support & creation - $56,500 • Schools do support only - $36,500

18. Subsidized Wired IP Addresses(Public Labs and Central Pool Classroom)

19. Wireless • Vision • Strategy • Future Direction • Next Steps

20. Wireless -Vision • Campus-wide development to support ever increasing need for mobility. • Cost approximatley $4M based on 200+ buildings x 10APs x $2000per AP installed. • Funding not available for full solution.

21. Wireless -Strategy • Use high quality, robust products that support • Strong security • Authentication • Options for service delivery • Build cost-effective wireless LANs with school and center based funding. • Currently these LANs together by creating wireless CSF subsidies as incentives for public spaces, in the absence of central funding. • Wireless viewed as supplemental to wired LANs. • Thus far, this approach has been successful. We have wide wireless coverage at a fraction of total costs.

22. Wireless - Questions • Does wireless connectivity ever replace wired? • Should we continue with our current strategy?

23. 1997 1999 2001 2003 2005 2007 Wireless:Performance, Security, Cost Improved range and throughput 802.11n 802.11i Improved Encryption and Authentication WPA Improved Encryption 802.11g 54Mb 802.11b 11Mb 802.11 Original wireless LAN standard, 2Mb

24. Cost per Enterprise Class Wireless Access Point $1500 $1000 $700 $400 1997 1999 2001 2003 2005 2007 Wireless:Performance, Security, Cost Improved range and throughput 802.11n 802.11i Improved Encryption and Authentication WPA Improved Encryption 802.11g 54Mb 802.11b 11Mb 802.11 Original wireless LAN standard, 2Mb

25. Wireless -Next Steps • Recommendation • Stay the course this year. • Develop and recommend longer term strategies to executive leadership and seek their decision on funding models.

26. FY 2006 Actual CSF Rates * Includes IP subsidies for central pool classrooms, public labs and public wireless IPs

27. Wireless Costs: Access Point Ongoing Costs(HW purchased separately) • Assumptions • Maintenance Fees are per AP Device in each wireless LAN. • AP Hardware Costs Have Dropped. • Does not include a 10/100Base-T or vLAN port connectivity charge to PennNet • Wireless Tool Charges Being Removed • 100Base-T port will be charged at 10Base-T Rate even though 11g can do 54mbps

28. NPTF Next Steps • NPTF makes rate recommendations. • Finalize N&T FY ‘05 - FY ‘09 budgets. • Rate recommendations presented to Provost. • Final FY ‘06 rates established. • Rates sent to ABA in late December. • Rates published in Almanac in January.