Partnering with Internet2 to Develop Next-Generation Campus Services

1. Partnering with Internet2 to Develop Next-Generation Campus Services Ben Teitelbaum <ben@internet2.edu> Dennis Baron <dbaron@mit.edu> Tyler Johnson <Tyler_Johnson@unc.edu,> Walt Magnussen <telecom@ppfs4.tamu.edu> Jeremy George <jeremy.george@yale.edu> Spring 2005 VON San Jose, CA 8 March 2004

2. Internet2 Who? Elevator Explanation • Internet2's mission is to develop and deploy advanced network applications and technologies, accelerating the creation of tomorrow’s Internet Who we really are • Membership organization of 200+ US research universities • Parent 501.3c (UCAID) has board of university presidents • Project supported by numerous partnerships (government, industry, international) Goals • Enable new generation of applications • Re-create leading edge R&E network capability • Transfer capability to global production internet

3. Internet2 Corporate Members Speaking or Presenting at VON

4. Internet2 Universities206 University Members, March 2005

5. High Performance Networks

6. Internet2 Partnerships • Internet2 universities are recreating the partnerships that fostered the Internet in its infancy • Industry • Government • International • Additional Participation • Over 60 Internet2 Corporate Members • Over 40 Affiliate Members • New Association Member Category • Over 30 International Partners

7. Sponsored Education Group Participants

8. Internet2 Focus Areas Advanced Network Infrastructure • 10 GB Abilene backbone • Advanced regional networks • 100 MB to the desktop • National fiber-optic facility Middleware • Directories • Authentication • Authorization Engineering • Multicast • IPv6 • Measurement • New Arch Advanced Applications • Gigabit+ file transfer • High-end video• Remote instrumentation • Distributed computation • Virtual co-laboratories • Distance learning • Integrated Communications

9. Internet2’s Secret Sauce • Demographics • ~3.8 million students (tech-savvy, talk a lot, adapt easily) • And, by the way, they graduate (tech-transfer à la email) • Institutional Commitments • Internet2 members have committed to advance IP communications and promote collaborative apps • Commitment to advance communication way beyond POTS • Connectivity • Great networking connectivity and campus middleware • High-bandwidth, low-loss, low-jitter • End-to-end transparency (few NATs) • Emerging middleware infrastructure for authentication & authorization • IPv6 and multicast too! • Strong commitment to open standards

10. Applications:Advanced Networking in Action

11. Post-POTS Communications • Many ways to improve collaboration and communications… • Multi-media integration • Integration with campus IT • Use of IPv6 and Multicast • Fidelity • Privacy • Survivability • Addressing • Mobility • Emergency services * Drawings by VoIP user, Louis Teitelbaum (age 6)

12. ?! !? Alice Bob Scaling Advanced Real-Time Communications High-performance, end-to-end IP connectivity is necessary, but not sufficientto connect Alice with Bob Network-LayerConnectivity high-performance, end-to-end IP transit Campus /Enterprise Campus /Enterprise User Host WANs/MANs/LANs Host User

13. Bob Jonesemail: bob@bigu.eduSkype: bob2_bigu.eduFWD: 654321Yahoo!: bobj26 BU ? ? Alice Alice Bob Bob Today: 3rd Party ASPs Provide the Missing Middleware Skype FWD Yahoo! … 3rd Party ASPs Applications However, communications is Balkanized by competing 3rd parties, who are unable to provide strong authentication, identity management, or rich presence for their users Network-LayerConnectivity high-performance, end-to-end IP transit Campus /Enterprise Campus /Enterprise User Host WANs/MANs/LANs Host User

14. Bob Jonesbob@bigu.edu BU Alice Bob Alice Bob The Missing Piece:Campus / Enterprise Middleware Identity management, authentication, call routing, and rich presence are best implemented and scaled by campus / enterprise middleware Applications Identity Management,Call Routing, Authentication, Presence Identity Management,Call Routing,Authentication, Presence CampusMiddleware Network-LayerConnectivity high-performance, end-to-end IP transit Campus /Enterprise Campus /Enterprise User Host WANs/MANs/LANs Host User

15. ASPsITSPs Hard / SoftClient Vendors Alice Bob Proxies, Directories,Feature Servers… Market Maker Role Bridging,Gatewaying, Messaging,… Bridging,Gatewaying, Messaging,… Bridging,Gatewaying, Messaging,… AuxiliaryServices ...or... ...or... Open campus / enterprise SIP communications creates a communications commons, creating vast new markets Applications Identity Management,Call Routing, Authentication, Presence Identity Management,Call Routing,Authentication, Presence CampusMiddleware Network-LayerConnectivity high-performance, end-to-end IP transit Campus /Enterprise Campus /Enterprise User Host WANs/MANs/LANs Host User

16. Need for New Campus Communications Services • Voice was once revenue-generating for many schools; no longer • Users have adopted consumer services to meet personal / profession needs • Cellular • Consumer IM&P (e.g. AIM, YIM, MSN) • Consumer VoIP (e.g. Skype, FWD) • How can universities develop services to: • Recapture these customers? • Enhance the campus life experience? • Facilitate collaborative research? • Improve productivity?

17. Our Beleaguered CIOs • Difficult times to innovate • Tight budgets • Staff stretched by network security demands • Carrism (“IT is not strategic”) • Fear, uncertainty, and doubt over industry directions, regulatory environment, etc. • CIO’s need your help • Thinking beyond POTS migration • Understanding the value of new services • Building operationally supportable service models

18. How Do We Do What We Do? • Working groups • Build testbeds • Develop prototypes, standards, and best practices • Disseminate / educate (workshops) • Infrastructure • National • Regional • Campus • Services • Abilene • Commons • InCommon

19. Next Up... • Dennis Baron (MIT) • SIP.edu • Tyler Johnson (UNC-Chapel Hill) • Middleware for Videoconferencing • Walt Magnussen (Texas A&M) • Texas A&M ITEC • NG911 Project • Jeremy George (Yale) • Presence and Integrated Communications

20. SIP.edu Working Group • Goals • Grow SIP connectivity in Internet2 • Increase value proposition for end-user SIP adoption • Promote convergence of voice and email identity • Low entry-cost means for campuses to... • Provide a useful service • Get their feet wet with SIP • Means • Publishing “cookbook” with several alternative “recipes” • Obtaining corporate sponsorship and promotional pricing • Cisco • Avaya

21. Why Phone NUMBERS? • Users should not be burdened with device addresses, when it’s people they really care about • Addresses should be mnemonic and empower enterprises to manage the identities of their users sip:dbaron@mit.edu • It’s time to put E.164 phonenumbers behind us! • A.G. Bell did not say: “+1-617-252-1232, come here. I need you!”

22. DNS CampusDirectory SIP.edu Architecture Proxy Partnerships Gateway Partnerships SIP User Agent INVITE (sip:bob@bigu.edu) DNS SRV query sip.udp.bigu.edu bigu.edu SIPProxy SIP-PBXGateway PRI / CAS INVITE(sip:12345@gw.bigu.edu) PBX telephoneNumberwhere mail=”bob” Bob's Phone

23. If Bob has registered, ring his SIP UAs; Else, call his extension through the PBX. DNS locationDB SIP.edu Architecture (real soon) SIP User Agent IP Voice, Video, IM, ... INVITE (sip:bob@bigu.edu) DNS SRV query sip.udp.bigu.edu bigu.edu SIPProxy INVITE (sip:bob@207.75.164.131) SIPRegistrar REGISTER(Contact: 207.75.164.131) Bob's SIP Phones

24. Campus Deployments

25. Future Directions • Support models for student/faculty UA registrations • Let them come with any SIP appliance or soft-phone • Support for advanced media-video, IM, wideband audio, etc. • Interdomain SIP authentication • Voice SPAM prevention • Interoperability with other SIP services • PSTN Caller-ID integration

26. A Global Dialing Scheme that uses H.323 to interconnect hundreds of universities and research networks for VoIP and video conferencing Vendor partnerships promoted the development of scalable H.323 routing from RADVISION Cisco GNU (open source) VCON Polycom First Virtual Tandberg Partnership: GDS

27. Partnership: ViDeNet • Interconnecting hundreds of universities and research networks using GDS formed an international community for video conferencing • Sharing knowledge • Providing leadership and direction to the community at large • Enabling inter-institutional conferencing • Unearthing issues that are key to scalable technology, such as global routing issues, directory services and federated security. • This project grew the market for IP video conferencing

28. Provides an enterprise or carrier with a standardized way to store and access conferencing information including VoIP, video and IM. Directory Services for: Multimedia conferencing H.323 H.235 SIP Non-standard protocols Call preferences (forwarding) XMPP (jabber) in draft Developed in partnership with RADVISION Tandberg Polycom VCON Internet2 Video Middleware Group National Science Foundation Internet2 partners were first to market because of early test beds and access to working code and conceptual understanding Partnership: H.350

29. ITEC.tamu.edu Established July of 2004 One of four Internet2 Technology Evaluation Centers Focus on VoIP and Information Assurance Housed at Research Park, TAMU Supporting Vendors Agilent Alcatel Anritsu Broadsoft Cisco IPTel IXIA Nortel Pingtel Siemens Shoreline TAMU ITEC

30. NG911 Project • NTIA-funded project to build out IP-enabled PSAPs using the SOS call architecture • Location information pushed to User Agent (SIP phone) which in turn reports location to PSAP • Cisco to support DHCP extensions in phones • Will compare existing Phase II location services to Proposed I911 architecture. • Adding graphical information to 911 call • Showing ability to reroute call to alternate PSAP • Will provide training to State Emergency Communications Coordinators • Demo planned 1st week of May in DC

31. Academic Texas A&M University Columbia University The University of Virginia Internet2 Corporate Cisco Nortel Association National Emergency Number Association (NENA) Government The State of Texas Commission on State Emergency Communications (CSEC) The State of Virginia Division of Public Safety Communications of the Virginia Information Technologies Agency (VITA) Brazos County Texas E911 District City of College Station, Texas NG911 Project Partners

32. Prototype * gray features in progress.

33. INVITE REFER INVITE media info INVITE INVITE REFER REFER INVITE media info Emergency call conferencing PSAP brings all related parties into a conference call Hospital Fire department INVITE Conference server Recorder 3rd party call control PSAP Caller

34. ADEC VoIP Beta Testing Goals and Objectives American Distance Education Consortium (ADEC) Tachyon Networks, Inc. Internet2 Technology Evaluation Center Department of Telecommunications Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77843 • Conduct instrumented tests of Tachyon’s VoIP capability. • Determine optimal configuration parameters and assess performance over satellite links for VoIP equipment from a variety of vendors. • Monitor field tests at multiple ADEC sites in a normal operational environment. Goals and Objectives Contact: Walt Magnussen Email: telecom@tamu.edu http://itec.tamu.edu

35. ADEC VoIP Beta Testing American Distance Education Consortium (ADEC) Tachyon Networks, Inc. Internet2 Technology Evaluation Center Department of Telecommunications Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77843 Concept and Design • Call is placed from SAT phone to LAN phone • Contending data is also transmitted over satellite link • Voice and contending data travels from Tachyon facilities in San Diego to the Internet2 network via the San Diego Supercomputing Center • Voice and data gets routed to Texas A&M University Network • Voice and data reaches the ITEC LAN switch • Data Quality Analyzer measures packets lost over the entire network • Voice Quality Tester takes transmitted voice and received voice then returns back a score (MOS) ranking the call quality Contact: Walt Magnussen Email: telecom@tamu.edu http://itec.tamu.edu

36. ADEC VoIP Beta Testing American Distance Education Consortium (ADEC) Tachyon Networks, Inc. Internet2 Technology Evaluation Center Department of Telecommunications Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77843 Lab Implementation Graduate student Karthik Kannan places a call from the satellite phone to the local network phone. Packetized voice conversation travels to Tachyon indoor units. Lab Testing Setup Tachyon Satellite Indoor Units Tachyon Satellite Antenna Packetized voice conversation is converted to an RF signal to be transmitted over the satellite antenna. Contact: Walt Magnussen Email: telecom@tamu.edu http://itec.tamu.edu

37. VoIP Phone Codec Testing Internet2 Technology Evaluation Center Department of Telecommunications Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77843 Goals and Objectives • Evaluate various VoIP codecs • Compare various vendor implementations of the codecs • Research Codec Testing Algorithms Contact: Walt Magnussen Email: telecom@tamu.edu http://itec.tamu.edu

38. VoIP Phone Codec Testing Internet2 Technology Evaluation Center Department of Telecommunications Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77843 Design and Implementation Network Diagram Network Lab Setup Above: Graduate students Clark Xu Yang and Karthik Kannan analyze results from voice quality test. • Ixia traffic generator loads one side of the network with generic TCP traffic. • Call is placed from one IP phone to the other. • Anritsu Data Quality Analyzer measures packet loss between the two phones. • Agilent VQT transmits audio file though one IP phone and receives the audio file with potential missing packets though the other IP phone. • VQT then compares the two audio files and returns a call quality score (MOS). Contact: Walt Magnussen Email: telecom@tamu.edu http://itec.tamu.edu

39. VoIP Phone Codec Testing Internet2 Technology Evaluation Center Department of Telecommunications Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77843 Results and Conclusions • G.729 codec degraded at a faster rate when packet loss exceeded 5% • Higher bandwidth applications such as LANs or MANs should use G.711 as default • G.711 codec provided acceptable audio quality (MOS >3.0) up to 5% packet loss. • GIPS codec significantly outperformed G.711 before declining in audio quality at 15%packet loss. Contact: Walt Magnussen Email: telecom@tamu.edu http://itec.tamu.edu

40. Paths-in-the-Snow Engineering • “We have a rare chance to get VoIP right… so don’t blow it.” - Jeff Pulver, Fall 2004 keynote

41. Rich Presence Communication That is: Faster Cheaper Better Quieter!

42. You Must Be Able to Get There From Here! • Balkanization and walled garden deployments may be the biggest threat to fulfilling the promise of IP communications

43. Disruptive Innovation • Rich Presence • Integrated Communication • Automated Location Based Services • Win/Win opportunities for vendors and users • Ford, HP, Microsoft, Wave3Software, Xten