1 / 63

Global-E-Workshop

Global-E-Workshop. Patcharee Basu, Shoko Mikawa Wunca19 Pathumthani, Thailand. What is SOI Asia ? Multilateral partnership on higher education among Asian universities. 27 universities & institutes in 13 countries in 6 time zones since 2001. SOI Asia : Lecture Sharing Platform.

kanan
Download Presentation

Global-E-Workshop

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Global-E-Workshop Patcharee Basu, Shoko Mikawa Wunca19 Pathumthani, Thailand

  2. What is SOI Asia ?Multilateral partnership on higher education among Asian universities 27 universities & institutes in 13 countriesin 6 time zonessince 2001

  3. SOI Asia : Lecture Sharing Platform Policy Routing Mechanism 13 Mbps UDL Sharing Real-time Classes & Course content mirroring by IPv6 Multicast Gateway Site @ Keio Univ. High quality Digital Video Communication DVTS site OR Portable IPv6 tunneling site Internet 128kbps～1.5Mbps Using existing connectivity as a return path (UDLR) Lecturer Sites @ various places SOI Asia Student Sites @Asian Partner Universities

  4. SOI Asia : Partners27 universities/institutes in 13 countries Indonesia - 5 Brawijaya University Sam Ratulangi University Hsanuddin University Institut Teknologi bandung Univesitas Syiah Kuala Thailand - 4 Asia Institute of Technology Chulalongkorn Univeristy Chulachomklao Royal Military Academy Prince of Songkla University Laos - 1 National University of Laos Myanmar – 2 University of Computer Studies, Yangon University of Computer Studies, Mandaley Malaysia - 2 University Science Malaysia Asian Institute of Medicine, Science & Technology Vietnam - 3 Institute of Information Technology Vietnam National University Hanoi University of Technology Philippines -2 Advanced Science and Technology Institute University San Carlos Singapore -1 Tamasek Polytechnic Mongolia -1 Mongolian University of Science and Technology Cambodia -2 Institute of Technology of Cambodia Asian Institute of Medicine, Science & Technology Bangladesh - 1 Bangladesh University of Engineering Nepal -1 Tribhuvan University Japanese Partners Keio University NAIST

  5. What is SOI Asia doing on the platform? (1) • Sharing university lectures of global issues, global & local interests from Japan and other area, in real-time and archived. • IT, Bio-technology, Bio-informatics, Marine science and technology, Renewable energy, Disaster management, etc • 25 lecture courses, more than 250 hrs of lectures to approx. 6,000 students • Helping remote participation to the international conference and seminar. • More than 70 realtime sessions • Disaster management seminar, Expo 2005 Aichi, ACM Sigcomm 2007, World Rice Research Conference, etc

  6. What is SOI Asia doing on the platform? (2) • Creating opportunity for joint research and studying in Japan. • 3 Indonesianstudents are studying in Keio • 1 Indonesian, 1Lao student are studying in NAIST • Training technical staffs at partner universities • Operators Workshops • Every year since 2002, E-global workshop since 2006 • Internship programs • 9 batches, 18 operators from 9 countries Shoko Mikawa, Patcharee Basu, Yasuo Tsuchimoto, Keiko Okawa, Jun Murai: "Multilateral Distance Lecture Environment on the Internet for Asian Universities", The journal of Information and Systems in Education, Vol. 5, pp84-93 (2006)

  7. Global-E-Workshop

  8. Need for training operators • To train SOI-Asia operators to be able to operate SOI-Asia network, server and classroom environment • Turn over of staff in project • The number of partner expands, new operator joins each year • To achieve more cost-effective, more sustainable model of trainings

  9. Annual Operators Workshop2002-2005 • 1st Workshop • August 30th - September 4th 2002 at Keio University, SFC, Japan • 21 participants from 9 organizations in 5 countries • 2nd Workshop • February 17th - February 24th 2003 at Asian Institute of Technology, Thailand • 21 participants from 9 organizations in 5 countries • 3rd Workshop • August 9th - August 17th 2004 at Institute Teknologi Bandung, Indonesia • August 16th - August 25th 2004 at Asian Institute of Technology, Thailand • 27 participants from 10 organizations in 5 countries • Special Workshop • April 4th– 8th 2005 at Asian Institute of Technology, Thailand • Participants from Tribuvan University, Nepal • 4th Workshop • August 28th - September 1st, 2005 at Brawijaya University, Indonesia • 33 participants from 20 organizations in 11 countries

  10. Curriculum • DAY1 • Orientation, Quiz • Introduction to TCP/IP on IPv6 (Hands-on with FreeBSD) • DAY2 • Introduction to TCP/IP building a network (hands-on with FreeBSD) • DAY3 • SOI Asia UDL router configuration / trouble shooting (hands-on with FreeBSD) • DAY4 • SOI Asia archive Server configuration (hands-on with Linux Fedora Core) • DAY5 • Satellite Receiver configuration • Distance education applications • Closing, Quiz

  11. Annual Operators Workshops

  12. Introduction • Workshop cost • Travels • All participants/teachers travel to same location • Equipments • Temporary equipments prepared by hosting sites OR • Equipments prepared at remote site and using remote connectivity • Human works • Teacher/TAs to prepare equipments before/during/after workshop

  13. Concerns • Scalability • Difficult to gather/prepare big lots of equipments • Travel cost/time • Reusability • Equipments are temporary

  14. Idea • Apply distance learning to make workshop in live online model • Communications • Our distance learning + newer tools for workshop • Remote laboratory • Richer environment somewhere • Minimum requirements at participant sites • On the process of exploring good scheme • It will also contribute to other similar workshops in region

  15. Distance learning environment • Activities in workshop is not only conversation + Presentation • Conversation + Presentation = vic/rat/irc/livepresenter • Demonstration • Monitoring + troubleshooting • Lab supervision • Lab verification • Progress tracking to decide the pace of teaching

  16. Conversation (VIC/RAT)

  17. Conversation (IRC) • Text communication • Sub channels for group communication

  18. Presentation (LivePresenter) • Web-based Flash presentation • Raw materials (PDF, PPT) -> convert to flash • Web controller/Web viewers • http://sfc-cpu.ai3.net/~husni/LivePresenter/manage.php

  19. Presentation (LivePresenter)

  20. LAB demonstration on Unix • Earlier year • Lecturer PC screen -> VIC, not clear picture , bandwidth usage • Remote-mcast6 , clear , save bandwidth, need to manipulate at RR -> need TA to prepare • This year 2008 • A web based tool -> LiveTTY, clear, easy access through web at student PCs, not much bandwidth, still have some troubles in operation -> may be Java version

  21. Lecturer site Participant Site Lecturer site Participant Site Local TA Lecturer Lecturer Local TA Local TA (b) Proposed model (a) Related work model Lab supervision tool • Earlier year • Query progress/ lab check manually by asking through RAT/ IRC • Many students, it’s difficult to maintain states • We wrote status on a whiteboard at lecturer site manually • This year 2008 • A web-db based tool -> Progress tracking • Teachers defines verification steps in db • Student report their own progress, TA verifies • Teacher, others can see class progress

  22. Laboratory system • Requirements • Support lessons • Support remote access – low bw • Remote monitoring/troubleshooting • Remote administrations (turn on/off/console access) • Good lab management ( install, network switch) • Bridge to Internet • Keys • Rich environments at lecturer site, minimum requirements at participant sites • Commitments from partners 

  23. DAY1-2 Topology X 6 sets (FreeBSD) Internet through SFC VLAN Legend IPv6 Internet via AI3 Host-to-Host link 2001:d30:101:EE::/64 em0 ::1 2001:d30:xEE:1a::/64 RxL em2 ::1 X= Group Number em1 ::1 2001:d30:xEE:1a::/64 em0 ::1:1 em0 ::3:1 em0 ::5:1 em0 ::7:1 Rx1 Rx3 Rx5 Rx7 em1 ::1:2 em1 ::3:2 em1 ::5:2 em1 ::7:2 2001:d30:xEE:12::/64 2001:d30:xEE:34::/64 2001:d30:xEE:56::/64 2001:d30:xEE:78::/64 em0 :2:1 em0 :4:1 em0 :8:1 em0 :6:1 Rx2 Rx4 Rx6 Rx8 em1 ::4:2 em1 ::6:2 em1 ::8:2 em1 ::2:2 2001:d30:xEE:68::/64 2001:d30:xEE:24::/64

  24. DAY3 Topology X 6 sets (FreeBSD) Legend Internet through SFC VLAN IPv6 Internet via AI3 Host-to-Host link 2001:d30:101:EE::/64 em0 ::1 X= Group Number Rfeed/udbox 2001:d30:1EE:1a::/64 10.205.0.0/16 192.168.0.0/24 em1 ::1 .1 .1 em0 ::x8 .x8 .x8 em0 ::x1 .x1 .x1 em0 ::x2 .x2 .x2 o o o o o o o o o o o o Rx1 Rx2 Rx8 ospf id =10.205.0.x8 ospf id =10.205.0.x1 ospf id =10.205.0.x2 em1 ::1 .1 .1 em1 ::1 .1 .1 em1 ::1 .1 .1 2001:d30:xEE:x1::/64 10.200.x1.0/24 200.200.x1.0/24 2001:d30:xEE:x2::/64 10.200.x2.0/24 200.200.x2.0/24 2001:d30:xEE:x8::/64 10.200.x8.0/24 200.200.x8.0/24

  25. DAY4 Topology x 6 sets (FC6) Legend Internet through SFC VLAN IPv6 Internet via AI3 Host-to-Host link 2001:d30:101:EE::/64 em0 ::1 X= Group Number RR 2001:d30:1EE:11::/64 10.200.11.0/24 em1 ::1 .1 eth0 .x1 ::x1 eth0 .x7 ::x7 eth0 .x8 ::x8 eth0 .x2 ::x2 eth0 .x3 ::x3 eth0 .x4 ::x4 Sx1 Sx2 Sx3 Sx4 Sx7 Sx8 o o o o o o o o o o o o

  26. LAB environment year 2006

  27. Remote laboratory environment • Year 2006 : Virtualization technique (VMWare) • Advantages • Less equipment resources, one physical PC can support many virtual PCs for students • Used 8 Servers for 42 students + spare VMs • 1 Server = 6 VMs • Easier to prepare lab(lab computers + networks) compared to physical PCs • Can bridge to real Internet-> more reality hands-on • Topology switching time is short compared to physical change • Student work monitoring is possible through VMconsole (high bw), ttysnoop/watch after remote connections to VMs

  28. Remote laboratory environment • Year 2006 : Virtualization technique • Some concerns • Server response time is slow since 1 server is loaded with many VMs • a study[6] found the CPU utilizations of a VMware server host (3.0GHz Intel Xeon dual-core, 2MB cache, 1GB memory) were 30% to run 6 virtual FreeBSD machines and 10% to run 6 virtual Fedora Core4 machines in their idle states. • Peak is around 90% and happens • This need to be improved

  29. LAB environment year 2008

  30. Remote laboratory environment • Year 2008 : StarBED environment • Large scale computer testbed • 680 high-performance computers and network switch clusters • realistic computer and network environment to support research and education • First time to deploy in workshop / remote education

  31. Remote laboratory environment • Year 2008 : StarBED environment • a cluster of 168 StarBED nodes • Tested with our freebsd/fedora OSes , early march

  32. Remote laboratory environment • Year 2008 : StarBED environment • Advantages • High performance physical machines • No problem with slow response time • the average CPU usages are 0.63% and 0.59% for FreeBSD and Fedora Core6 respectively in the workshop • Identical HW set -> hw compatibility test is reduced • There is a good management of large number of physical PCs

  33. Remote laboratory environment • Year 2008 : StarBED environment • Advantages • Remote management can be done • In case of severe configuration failure • KVM over IP for console access • IPMI for open/shut down PC

  34. Remote laboratory environment • Year 2008 : StarBED environment • Some concerns • Not full remote management compared to VM • Physical HW, need to check HW compatibility in advance -> good that hw is identical • Need to book lab for longer time test

  35. The 2006 workshop • 22-26 August, 2006 • Lecturer site: • Keio University, Japan (SFC) • Participants sites: 19 Universities from 10 countries • 42 participants, 24 local TAs

  36. The 2008 workshop • March 31 - April 4, 2008 • Lecturer site: • Asian Institute of Technology (Thailand) • University of Sains Malaysia (Malaysia) • Institute of Technology, Bandung (Indonesia) • WIDE Bangkok Office (Thailand) • Keio University, (Japan) • Participants sites: 16 Universities from 10 countries • 42 participants, 24 local TAs

  37. Travels

  38. Evaluation from participating sites(2006) • Questions with 1-5 rating answers • 1,2 considered negative response • 3 is fair • 4,5 considered positive response • 40 participant feedbacks(from 42) • 14 sites TA feedbacks (from 15) • 4 teachers feedbacks (from 4)

  39. Evaluation result(2006)

  40. Workshop overall evaluation(2006) • If the workshop is effective for future operation 95% positive, 5% fair • If they want to participate the future workshops 87% positive, 13% fair

  41. Evaluation(2008) • Questions with 1-5 rating answers • 1,2 considered negative response • 3 is fair • 4,5 considered positive response • Feedbacks from the questionnaires collected at the end of the workshop • 24/42 participants • 4/6 lecturers

  42. Response on Distance learning env(2008)

  43. Overall evaluation(2008)

  44. Some concerns • If problem with RO site, some partners can’t join • Offline version can be done? • Numbers of TAs • Fulltime participations required for participants/TAs • Direct IRC from student -> lecturers , sometimes too much, some tasks should be taken care by local TAs first • Need TA training session, especially contents that they are not familiar and to improve our understanding of workshop organization together • How to improve human network?

  45. Conclusion • Distributed realtime workshop Model • Feasible, positive responses • Less cost/ resources • More participants, more frequent • Local language TAs

  46. Conclusion • More pedagogical concerns has to be addressed • Alternative to ordinary model • Trade-off • Use model that is appropriate to each project’s condition

  47. Future challenges • Combinations of • High performance system • Virtualization • More automated trainings • Pedagogical concerns • TA quality

  48. Pictures from workshop

  49. Pictures

More Related