1 / 12

Report of the SURA CIO RON Ad Hoc Committee

Report of the SURA CIO RON Ad Hoc Committee. Larry Conrad November 9, 2006. Members. Larry Conrad, FLR—CHAIR Doyle Friskney, UKY Pricilla Hancock, UA James Hilton, UVA Marc Hoit, UFL Julio Ibarra, FIU Bill Johnson, OneNet Dick Newman, FIT Don Riley, SURA Brian Savory, SoX/SLR.

tirzah
Download Presentation

Report of the SURA CIO RON Ad Hoc Committee

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. Report of the SURA CIO RON Ad Hoc Committee Larry ConradNovember 9, 2006

  2. Members • Larry Conrad, FLR—CHAIR • Doyle Friskney, UKY • Pricilla Hancock, UA • James Hilton, UVA • Marc Hoit, UFL • Julio Ibarra, FIU • Bill Johnson, OneNet • Dick Newman, FIT • Don Riley, SURA • Brian Savory, SoX/SLR

  3. Background • SURA SE footprint • Has 60 research institutions • 35% of dues-paying I2 member • 7 of the 16 NLR memberships • All but 3 states have R&E network initiatives • Strong history for connectivity leadership • SURANet • SoX, MAX, NCREN, AMPATH • RON startups: FLR, LEARN LONI, MATP, OneNet

  4. Challenges • Connectivity and access gaps in the region • Head-to-head competition between I2 and NLR • Self-serving national networking organizations • e.g.: • I2 will not peer with NLR • I2 initial announcement to bundle ISP with NewNet and lower-than-Quilt ISP pricing • NLR discussions with Battelle • Cannot depend on I2 and NLR to look out for our interests

  5. Motivators • The increasing importance of regional advanced networking to R&E competitiveness • Two national competing networking organizations with duplicative services over the same footprint • ...and the attendant exposure to “pay twice” for the same services • Regional networks need ability to connect with AUP free networks

  6. Motivators • Limitations due to non-net-neutrality, non-QoS networks • National networking entities need to demonstrate a better understanding of the regional network concerns • National networking entities need to be more supportive of regional network business models • Need for more direct input to the national networking entities

  7. Opportunities • Mutual/shared support pacts/collaborations, like DR/BC, virtualized services, data center space • Shared support services, e.g., PR, CFO • Shared best practices, e.g., business plans, pricing models, economic development, NOC services, peering agreements • Aggregated services, e.g., commodity, Abilene/NewNet, National Transit Rail

  8. Opportunities • What regional resources (e.g., SURAgrid) could be further developed to support our institutions? • e.g., storage grids, shared security/authentication services, voice and toll bypass? • If we could speak with one voice, we could wield greater leverage • We could be more demanding with the national network entities about what we need rather than what they are willing to offer

  9. The Proposal • Form a SE regional R&E networking “federation” • For current and aspiring networks • Foster development of additional networks in the region • Leverage SURA organization, corporate structure and presence in the region (to support SURA members and non-members) • Anticipate other than CIO’s will participate

  10. The Proposal • Invite federation board chair to be a member of the SURA CIO Steering Comm. • Would establish a formal charter to provide structure for definition for the group • Envision the group to have a shared funding model with SURA participation • SURA CIO Comm. would establish the founding board members • Could initiate operation as soon as Jan. 1, 2007

  11. Caveat • ...should only do this, however, if people are willing to commit to the principle of group leverage

  12. Discussion

More Related