the National Network of Texas Moderator: Willis Marti Texas A&M University

Panelists Jim Williams Executive Director, LEARN CR Chevli University of North Texas Charles Chambers University of Houston Ashley Caron GAATN

Agenda Connecting Texas Creating the Core Network Metro Access Issues Combined Q&A

Connecting Texas Texas higher education has made several starts at organizing a state-wide network since the late ’80s. Distances, funding and technologies have stopped those efforts. Until now…

On the convergence of great ideas, enormous blunders and able people. In that order. Jim Williams LEARN: Lonestar Education and Research Network

The Beginning

This is a big place

“The plains of West Texas are littered with bones of those who tried to network it.”

We already have lots of networks

Recent Texas Network History 1998 Texas GigaPOP established in Houston 2000 N. Texas GigaPOP est in Dallas – Successor to Alliance for Higher Education Abilene connection 2001 Texas universities invited to join SURA – Southeastern Universities Research Association (SURA) 2002 –Texas Tech & UT join Board of Texas GigaPop –Talking Grid to the Governor’s office –Texas universities invited to join National Lambda Rail (NLR) –20 university CIOs hear Tom West in Austin describe NLR and CENIC 2003 TIF scoping study: need backbone

Recent Texas Network History (continued) Jan Gov Perry freezes TIF funds July Lege approves $7.5M for backbone Sep 2003 –Texas GigaPOP opens board –UT Austin is awarded NSF ETF grant Oct Universities agree to commit $20K/yr for Exec. Director and HQ ops Dec 2003 –UT Austin ‘guarantees’ NLR $5M –SURA/AT&T fiber donation

A brief history of LEARN 2003 –December, Texas Gigapop expanded into LEARN 2004 –Jan-May Bid requests for fiber and optronics –July I couldn’t stand it anymore –Sept 28 th We got $7.5M

Why LEARN? Next generation network for Texas R&E Access to NLR Internet2 aggregation Commodity Internet aggregation An unprecedented collaborative effort

The organization –A 501(c)(3) non-profit university membership association, established via bylaws changes from the Texas GigaPOP –Currently 31 members contribute $20,000/yr to support the organization –LEARN is a member of NLR with financial commitment from 23 of the members –And …

$7,500,000 HB 1, Article I, Rider 11 78th Leg. Session Texas Optical Fiber Network and Grid Computing … A total of $7.5 million for the Optical Fiber Network may be transferred to a consortium of three or more institutions of higher education, located not less than 50 miles apart, operating under an interagency agreement for the exclusive purpose of operating a fiber optic network for research and education for use by and for the benefit of higher education and affiliated entities in the State of Texas. The fiber optic network shall not be used, directly or indirectly, with or without charge, to provide telecommunications or information services to the public in competition with the private sector. …

LEARN Members

LEARN Phase 1a

The parts IRUs –WilTel(?), AT&T ( thanks SURA!) Leased lambdas –NLR, Wiltel(?) Optronics –Nortel

The End

Creating the Core Network Identifying Paths and Media Selecting the Optronics Funding Ongoing Operations Build & Implement Plan

Identifying Paths Selection of Endpoints –Population centers? –Major Universities –Where the fiber is? Impact of TACC ETF award –Getting to Chicago Impact of NLR –Initial focus on Dallas –Focus on Houston (currently) –Connecting El Paso SURA – AT&T fiber deal

Texas Backbone Status Dec 2003 –Bids received for dark fiber –Subcommittee of the LEARN Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) began review of bids Jan 2004 –LEARN Board received and adopted recommendation from TAC Initially, dark fiber triangle (Hou-CS-Dallas-Austin-SA-Hou) + lambda to Lubbock. Expand dark fiber network to South, West, and East Texas –LEARN Board authorized UT and A&M to proceed with IRU as necessary

Name the Sites

Identifying Media Dark Fiber or Leased Lambdas permitted –Geography JUST TOO Large –Time to implement Service Allowed shared infrastructure –Carrier Operated Service –Guaranteed lambda quantity Not restricted to a single vendor fiber topology

What we GOT Traditional Dark Fiber –Vendor Topology Restrictions Shared Service (they build/own it; we pay for it) –Two Vendors offered 8 or 16 guaranteed 10Gigabit lambdas to Education Leased Lambdas (20 year)

Fiber offerings to Texas

Selected Fiber Path Two vendors minimizes costs, maximizes coverage Dallas-Austin-San Antonio-Houston Dallas-College Station-Houston Requires metro interconnects in Dallas, Houston

Architecture

Metro RegionalLong Haul 0 km300 km600 km2000 km100 km LH DT - CPL (Future) Carrier > 600km 10.7 Gb/s Line Rate Carrier < 600km reach or shared & upgradeable 2.5 Gb/s & 10 Gb/s Line Rate OM5K / OME - CPL OM5K - OMX OM5K - OMX Enterprise < 32 lambda Optronics Capabilities

Selecting the Optronics There are fundamentally different kinds of optronics, distinguished by the distance between required signal regeneration. Texas’ core needed ~1,300km SONET protection was desired as an option, but not mandatory for every service.

Selecting the Optronics (cont) Variety of available interfaces generally greater in metro versus long haul. Created evaluation for “best value” considering initial implementation AND later growth. Who wants “serial number 1” for support of production services?

Funding Ongoing Operations Initial (current) decision that O&M must be pay- as-you-go. Service-for-fee separate from membership dues. Leased lambdas treated as capital cost (try not to penalize geography). A&M and UT Systems can purchase enough services for their WANs to ‘cover’ cost of core triangle.

Build & Implement Plan Coalition warfare! Engineering by committee can work. Select one school to do the procurement paperwork. Pick a Project Manager for vendor coordination and status tracking. Weekly phone/videoconference/face-to-face meetings.

Build & Implement Plan (cont) Activities run in parallel, not one after another: –Long haul fiber and Lambda services –Metro fiber –Optronics selection –Services Definition Texas’ target: Spring 2005 for first light. Planning started for next phase.

Lessons Open bidding is almost the only way to determine availability. Really hard to design optical transport when you don’t know which vendor, or what you want to do, “Indecision is the key to flexibility” Plan for expansion.

Metro Access Issues Current Efforts –Houston –Dallas Success Story – Austin –GAATN

Why Metro? Driving need is to interconnect the two long haul fiber providers (Dallas, Houston). Desire to consider local needs in forming solution. ‘Last mile’ may not be part of the backbone, but needs should affect backbone choices.

Houston Interconnect effort in Houston benefits from local upgrade effort. Area schools have some existing interconnectivity. NLR has same (similar) problem.

Current Metro Upgrade Needs Improved capacity between TMC-Rice-UH for research projects that can attract federal funding in CS and the Sciences Improved capacity to Internet2 to participate in national projects developing national and global information infrastructures or tools for the construction thereof Connectivity to the National Lambda Rail and LEARN.

Dark fiber proposal Two rings of 12 strands each offered by Abovenet (formerly Metromedia Fiber Networks (MFN)) address the needs for improved capacity between TMC-Rice-UH and between these institutions and the NLR PoPs in Houston Improved capacity to Internet2 still to be resolved

Ring-1: TMC-Rice-UH

Ring-2: TMC-Rice-UH-AT&T-WilTel

Dark Fiber Status TMC access points to be added in the short term currently under review by the South East Texas GigaPoP technical reps from TMC institutions Build-out at UH under review Contract issuing initiated by TLC 2 for both rings Resolution on Internet2 capacity upgrade to follow asap

1993 to Present

GAATN IS… miles of 100% singlemode fiber Seven individual MAN’s with over 400 connections to the fiber optic network F/O cable that carries voice, data, video and radio circuits Managed by a Board of Directors Common sheath fiber optic cable containing between strands 2 Super Rings and 9 Sub Rings

GAATN MAP Travis County – 989 Square Miles Austin – 265 Square Miles GAATN Coverage of Austin – 85%

GAATN AGENCY HISTORY 70’s & 80’s - AISD’s rising telecom costs ‘84 - iNET ’88 - Beginning of GAATN ’90 - Cooperation with COA, Travis County and ACC

BASIC DESIGN CRITERIA Total redundant ring architecture 40 year expected life Varying number of strands depending on # of entities participating Expandability built into the design Protected building entrances into Super Nodes Entities own the fiber from the splice point into their buildings.

INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT Texas Interlocal Cooperation Act Establishes Board of Directors Establishes Policies & Procedures Establishes means of determining Network Rights

GAATN AGENCY NETWORK RIGHTS City of Austin (COA) Austin Independent School District (AISD) Travis County (TC) University of Texas (UT) Austin Community College (ACC) State of Texas (DIR) Lower Colorado River Authority (LCRA)

GAATN CONTRACTS Maintenance Legal Pole Attachment & Rights of Way Locate Services SLA Insurance

GAATN USAGE AISDACCCOALCRAStateTravisUT ATM OC48 ATM OC3 RPR Sonet OC48 FDDI Sonet OC48 OC12 Sonet OC48 OC12 OC3 Sonet OC48 DWDM Ethernet Sonet

HAZARDS TO GAATN

HAZARDS TO GAATN (cont’d) *In 2003, GAATN sustained $181,500 in squirrel related damage.

GAATN ECONOMICS $13 million initial cost Average annual budget over last 5 years - $2.2 million Annual budget covers: –Utility relocations –Repairs –Maintenance –Expansion

GAATN’S FUTURE Expanded Use for Mission Critical Applications for Police, Fire, EMS, Homeland Security Distance Learning –Libraries, Schools, Higher Education Public Access to Government Records Free Public Internet Access (COA only) Continued Technological Advancements Continued Delivery of Carrier Class Services Expansion with Growth of Metro Area Possible additions of other school districts, cities and/or counties in the area

GAATN CONTACT INFORMATION

Combined Q&A