CLAC Conference 2006 Hamilton College June 15, 2006

1. CLAC Conference 2006Hamilton CollegeJune 15, 2006 A Change of Voice: Considerations in Implementing IP Telephony at Swarthmore Presented by: Mark Dumic Associate Director Networking & Telecommunications Swarthmore College

2. Swarthmore College • Suburban Philadelphia • Highly selective liberal arts college • 1,450 FT undergraduate students • 600 Faculty-Staff • Students from 50 states and 46 countries

3. About the Project • End of Life of Intecom E • Infrastructure issues • Pure fiber distribution between buildings – no monolithic copper plant • Copper in buildings varied between Cat 3, Cat 5 and Cat 6E (by building) • High awareness of lack of disaster recovery with current system

4. Previous Student Telephone Environment • Digital phone per student, separate DID and VM accounts • Eliminated LD after Spring 2004 • No student technology fee or monthly phone fee • College philosophy toward students • 90%+ cell phone penetration • Declining use of VM by students

5. College Decision Process • PBX Committee Members: • Director of Information Technology Services • Assoc Dir Networking, Systems & Telecom • VP Finance • Controller • Dean of Students • Director of Housing • Provost • Facilities Technology Coordinator

6. College Decision Process (cont.) • Student venues and what we heard • Don’t want to give out cell phone numbers • 10-15% of students don’t want or can’t afford cell phones • International students • Cell phone reception problems • DON’T TAKE OUR WIRED PHONE AWAY • No clear consensus about student services or technology throughout process • Cost a concern (for College and students)

7. Get Help! • Retained Compass Consulting International, Inc. (now Acentech, Inc.) • Assist with defining & investigating options for students • Evaluate issues associated with technology options (IP telephony) • RFP and Implementation

8. Evaluation of Student Technology Options • Digital phones in rooms • Analog phones in rooms • IP PBX – hard or soft IP phones in rooms • Outsourced PBX for residence halls • Traditional Centrex • IP Centrex • College-issued cellular phones • Student-selected cellular phones • Commercial VoIP (e.g. Vonage or Skype) • Voice over Wireless LAN (VoWiFi)

9. Design Goals • PBX Technology: IP, TDM, hybrid • Analog, digital, IP, softphones... • No killer app • Decided to not specify PBX technology in RPF - possible cost savings in TDM or hybrid?

10. Design Goals (cont.) • Preserve future flexibility • Choice of options for maintenance, parts, augmented staffing • Financially stable company with strong US market presence • More control over upgrades • Minimize vendor lock-in • Maximize useful life • Adapt to future applications & standards (SIP)

11. Design Goals (cont.) • Maintenance Considerations • Lots of demands on small staff - continue outsourced support • Telco Agency - no finger-pointing • Swarthmore is “high touch”: • High vendor contact & communication • Like close working partnerships • “Big fish in a small pond” • Plan tailored to take advantage of what we do best • Flexibility to have vendor do what we can’t do well • These considerations favored local support rather than National support model

12. Design Goals (cont.) • Separate Voice and Data Networks (Initial Scenario) • Wanted telecom vendor to have complete responsibility beyond MACs • Small internal staff needed for other areas • Staff had little VoIP expertise • But envisioned combining networks later • Recently purchased switches not powered (not much incremental cost to keep separate)

13. RFP Process • Design • Didn’t dictate IP or hybrid • Did decide on analog student lines • Cisco network for future integration • Required 3 student scenarios • Explored boosting of cell phone coverage • Pre-screen • RFP • Bid process

14. RFP Process: Responses • Responses • Evaluation & results • Proposal review • Financial analysis • Finalist meetings

15. RFP Process: Selection • Selected Cisco Call Manager from TransNet Corporation in Somerville, NJ • Decision based on the capabilities of and chemistry with the reseller • Comfort level with converged network • 24x7 monitoring & problem resolution for data network for cost of just PBX maintenance • Enhanced reliability & technical depth for network • Significant Higher Education experience • Ability & willingness to dovetail support with current staff, telco management

16. RFP Process: Selection (cont.) • Major Benefits of Cisco, too • Long term presence in US telecom market • Familiar technology to Swarthmore • Excellent competitive market for maintenance, components, staffing, 3rd party apps • Good disaster recovery architecture • The most future-proof system proposed • Best E-911 and malicious call trace capabilities

17. New System Details • Decided on a converged network • Totally redundant 6513 cores • 3750s in-line power in buildings with links to each core • Redundant Call Managers & Unity (VM) servers • 1,100 IP phones (faculty/staff) • 300 analog phones (public, FAX, etc.) • 1,300 analog lines (one per student)

18. Cisco 7941g Phone

19. Student Reaction “I think this is the best of possible outcomes. I’m glad that this system was within our budget and I think the administration has dealt with this in a responsible manner.” Student Council Co-President “I think this is basically a pretty sweet deal” Associate Dean of Student Life

20. Blended Support Model • Initial Assumption was separate vertical networks for voice & data • Enhanced support at minimal cost by utilizing horizontal support split • Monitoring of entire network • Quick access to large staff of network engineers for problem resolution • College “boots on the ground” for closet issues • Self-spare 3750’s & VG224 saved $$

21. Flexible Service Agreement (FSA) • New territory • Needed outside expertise/support • Maximize in-house capabilities • Didn’t want to pay money for unused hours • Took time & effort to craft the agreement

22. FSA Structure • Monitoring • annual flat fee • 24x7 • Remote VPN and phone support • pool of hours • expire annually • On-site • pre-paid account • different rates for different times/service levels/expertise • roll-over to subsequent years

23. Convergence Saving at a Small Institution • Compelling Cost Reductions led to successive network integration • completely separate voice network • combine core and switch stacks but keep separate voice & data jacks • Also use single jack for phone & computer (reduce switches required)

24. Convergence Cost Reductions

25. Significant Findings (cont.) • Network architecture varies • Routed segments or flat L2 • Redundancy: core, servers, links • Firewalls • Vendor support for Cat 3 varies • Not many support Cat 3 (even just for phone) • If testing or certification is required, when is this done?

26. Significant Findings (cont.) • Support & maintenance models varies • All local, all remote w/ dispatch, or a blend • Backup, virus protection, security, DHCP, DNS, DC • Telco problem management is possible • Staff effort • Expect MAC calls at help desk about the same • Big Bonus: 24 x 7 network monitoring & problem resolution no additional cost • Ready access to additional technical depth

27. Lifetime % of Total Cables, racks, UPS One-time 7.94% Network Hardware 4 – 7 36.13% Server Hardware 3 - 5 8.11% Phones 8 - 12 17.75% Software No limit 2.28% Licenses No limit 10.21% Install, Train, Proj Mgmt One-time 17.58% Significant Findings (cont.) • TDM vs. IP Telephony Replacement Cycle Component

28. Significant Findings (cont.) • Uplift for student phones • Varied widely from College base (chart) • Per room & per student also varied widely (chart) • Added 14% to project cost • 6% for VM, 8% for analog phone lines • Almost no increment to maintenance since opted to self-maintain gateways

29. Uplift for Analog Student Lines

30. Lessons Learned • Don’t assume students no longer care about wired phones and that costs are prohibitive. • Real cost savings in convergence even for the smaller institution • Bidders have significantly different approaches to architecture, security, redundancy, Cat3 cabling, and analog costs. • VARs with strong telephony and network expertise are more common – there can be flexibility in crafting support agreements.

31. Contact Information Mark J. Dumic Associate Director Networking and Telecommunications Swarthmore College (610) 328–8511 dumic@swarthmore.edu