Network Planning Task Force Strategy Discussions

NPTF FY ’07 Members ■ Mary Alice Annecharico/Rod MacNeil, SOM ■ Robin Beck, ISC ■ Dave Carrol, Business Services ■ Cathy DiBonaventura, School of Design ■ Geoff Filinuk, ISC ■ John Keane/ Grover McKenzie, Library ■ Marilyn Jost, ISC ■ Deke Kassabian /Melissa Muth, ISC ■ Manuel Pena, Housing and Conference Services ■ Mike Weaver, Budget Mgmt. Analysis ■ Dominic Pasqualino, OAC ■ James Kaylor, CCEB ■ Helen Anderson, SEAS ■ Kayann McDonnell, Law ■ Donna Milici, Nursing ■ Dave Millar, ISC ■ Michael Palladino, ISC (Chair) ■ Jeff Fahnoe, Dental ■ Mary Spada, VPUL ■ Marilyn Spicer, College Houses ■ Joseph Shannon, Div. of Finance ■ Ira Winston, SEAS, SAS, Design ■ Mark Aseltine/ Mike Lazenka, ISC ■ Ken McCardle, Vet School ■ Brian Doherty, SAS ■ Richard Cardona, Annenberg ■ Deirdre Woods/Bob Zarazowski, Wharton ■ John Irwin, GSE

Meeting Schedule – FY ‘07 ■ Meetings 1:30-3:00pm, 3401 Walnut Street ■ Fall Meetings ■ Intake and Current Status Review – August 21 ■ Agenda Setting & Focus Group Planning – September 18 ■ Focus Group – October 04 ■ Security Strategy Discussions – October 16 ■ Focus Group – October 17 ■ Network Strategy Discussions – October 30 ■ Strategy Discussions – November 6 ■ Final Meeting-Prioritization /Rate Setting – November 20 ■ Focus Group Feedback – December 4

Today’s Agenda ■ VoIP ■ Wireless ■ Authorization

VoIP ■Goal ■To convert 25,000 analog voice customers to Integrated Communications (VoIP, Voic , etc.) over the converged IP network with added functionality and lower costs in 5 years or less.

VoIP – Current Status ■ Developed flexible, cost-effective service based on open source VoIP. ■ We have approximately 800 VoIP users ■ SFS 50 new users in January ■ Nursing Life Building users ■ Vet Hill Pavilion Building – 50+ users ■ Production-grade ■ Redundant servers, gateways and PRIs ■ Automated monitoring (server, network, PRIs) ■ Single-line features, /voice mail integration ■ 911 ■ Architecture: layer 2 Quality of Service, separate VLANs & subnets ■ Installation, Help Desk support & billing fully operational. ■ Customer and local support programs in place ■ Local support provider training ■ Reference materials ■ ■ Deployed telephone directory services. ■ Deployed web “front-end” to Integrated Communications Services.

VoIP Topology

Campus-wide Pilot Rollout

Penn iPhone Web Services Self-service Voice mail Change Password Do Not Disturb Call Forward Reject Anon. Blocked Caller ID More...

Penn iPhone Roadmap Phase 1.X ■IMAP Message Store ■Ring Group Pilots ■PiPS Enhancements ■Security Recommendations ■Handset Recommendations ■600+ phones deployed Phase 2.0 ■Feature Release 2.0 ■Softphone Pilots - I ■Centrex-Asterisk Pilot(s) ■ITSP/LNP Production ■New Handset Testing Phase 3.0 ■First Multi-line Deployments ■Octel voice mail migration ■New Handset in Production ■Softphone Pilots - II ■2000 phones deployed Phase 1.0 ■VoIP Campus Pilot Begins ■Penn iPhone web portal ■Penn Directory lookups from iPhone Phase 3.0 Phase 1.XPhase 2.0 1H 20062H 2006 General Availability Phase 1.0 1H 20072H 2007

Current Development Projects ■ Multi-line and ring-group support ■ Using ITSPs (Internet Telephony Service Providers) for off campus calls ■ Migrating Centrex users to our next generation voice mail ■ Evaluating additional VoIP handsets ■ Power Over Ethernet (PoE) network designs ■ Support for emergency services and location (phone set moves)

Ring Group ■ Ability to support multiple phone numbers on a single desk set ■ Ability to have the same phone number ring on multiple sets, with the first user to pick-up getting the call ■ These features being used internally within ISC today ■ Management and data tracking being added to back end ISC systems to allow for full support at roll out ■ Campus pilots to start in early 2007 ■ Roll out currently expected to happen by spring 2007

ITSP Services ■ Internet Telephony Service Providers (ITSPs) are an alternative to use of local PSTN gateways ■ IP connection (dedicated and independent of Internet access) to a telephone service provider ■ ITSP operates a large network (national, international) with many PSTN gateways ■ Calls leave campus but go over IP until they reach a gateway near to the called party (the recipient) ■ Could have multiple ITSPs and do least-cost routing ■ Could maintain a combination of ITSP services and local gateways

Next Gen VMail for Centrex Users ■ Today’s Octel system works well, but is aging and is not able to interface with outside systems ■ We have manual backup procedures for Octel. Restorations would take up to a day and we may not have everything restored (messages, greetings, and phone trees). ■ Today’s Penn iPhone users are separated from today’s Octel users ■ Move to a single voice mail system ■ Allows for the retirement of the Octel systems ■ Brings some advantages of the Penn iPhone service to users still on Centrex ■ New Voice Mail will have (always available, highly available) design with automated fail over).

Evaluating VoIP Handsets ■ Possible criteria (abbreviated list) ■ Support 802.1x, LLDP-MED, plus signaling and media security (TLS/SRTP) ■ Working and supportable NAT traversal mechanisms ■ Codecs for high quality sound (G722/E722) ■ Mature presence management ■ Integration with softphone, such as ability to import call logs, contact information shared between devices ■ Backlit display with contrast adjustment ■ Speaker phone, and Bluetooth & wired headset support ■ Ability to adjust display font and font size ■ Some battery backup (15 minutes? enough to call 911)

Power over Ethernet (PoE) ■ Today’s service requires that the desk set be powered locally (plugged in) ■ PoE allows the network to provide power to the phone ■ Some wiring closets have the space and power to support this. Some may not. ■ Many other parts of the network would need power protection for this to be useful ■ Could you live with a failover to your cell phone when the building power is down? ■ Is the extra availability (99.99 vs 99.9) worth 15-20% added to your bill?

Emergency Services & Location ■ Penn iPhone includes the ability to route 511/911 calls, including support for location information ■ We are building support for mobility and providing improved location information ■ Three phases towards improvement ■ Phase 1 - Fixed location phones ■ Phase 2 - VoIP phones movable by LSP, using a web form for location reporting ■ Phase 3 - Dynamic location updates

Collaboration within Higher-Ed ■ Several major universities are using a very similar approach ■ Sharing plans, code and best practices through monthly collaboration calls ■ Open to participation by other groups seriously engaged in similar efforts ■ Could result in a de facto standard for large university voice communications

Penn iPhone – Estimated Cost Summary Assumptions 1.Meridian Business Set one-time cost of $368 is depreciated over a 60-month period for this comparison 2.30% allocation is included 3.Waived for first 7,000 pilot participants or end of FY ’08

Voice (Misc.) ■ CALEA (Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act) ■ We continue to track developments ■ We should know definitively about the level of compliance in January ’07 ■ The potential cost impact for FY’07 is likely to be about about $250k ■ Current compliance date is in May ■ Universal Service Reform Act of 2006 (HR 5072) ■ We continue to track developments of the bill. On Apr 19, 2006, the bill was referred to the Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet. It is in the first step in the legislative process. Introduced House bills go first to House committees that consider whether the bill should be presented to the House as a whole. Many of bills never make it out of committee. ■ The fees are levied on anyone that ■ Currently contributes to or receives universal service support ■ Uses telephone numbers or Internet protocol addresses, or their functional equivalents or successors, to offer a service or a capability ■ That provides or enables real-time 2-way voice communications; ■ In which the voice component is the primary function; ■ Offers for a fee, a service, that allows an end user to obtain access to a network that permits the end user to engage in electronic communications (including telecommunications) with the public. ■ It is unlikely that there will be a cost impact in FY’08.

Cellular Coverage ■ Customers want improved cell coverage inside campus buildings ■ The cellular companies-while willing to install outdoor towers/repeaters-will not fund inside coverage ■ Should we increase phone charges for everyone to cover this cost? ■ Should we imbed the cost in the CSF? ■ Should we charge only the schools and centers that want it?

Wireless ■ Vision ■ Secure, seamless, cost-effective wireless connectivity for Penn community by June ■ Drivers ■ Smaller devices ■ Mobility ■ Customer expectation

Wireless (continued) ■ Current Status ■ We estimate that approximately 50% of campus has wireless connectivity ■ 1000 ISC and school owned access points (APs) ■ 500 APs added in College Houses and Sansom Place and 2 Greek houses ■ Complete deployment of Wireless in College Houses and Sansom Place using 802.1X for authentication ■ Current Strategy ■ Should we change from our strategy of expanding the network AP by AP? ■ Identifying the total cost for ResNet was effective at moving it forward ■ Costs ■ We estimate needing approximately 1000 more APs to get us to 100% ■ The one-time cost will be about $2M ■ The ongoing annual costs will be $450k

Wireless (continued) ■ What new strategies can we deploy to get to 100% wireless connectivity? ■ Move to 4 year depreciation on wired port electronics ■ Reduce wired ports (6000 gets us $450K a year) ■ Should we embed wireless infrastructure costs in the CSF? ■ How much outdoor space is necessary? ■ How about City Wireless with EarthLink? ■ Penn program likely to be announced later in the fall

Central Authorization System Proposal for NPTF funding November 2006

Central AuthZ ■ Build a central authorization system that could be utilized by applications across the University ■ Utilize Penn Community data and school/center created lists to facilitate authorization decisions ■ Allow Schools and Centers to build and reuse authorization information across applications ■ Provide sophisticated group management capabilities, such as subgroups and composite groups, to support access management needs.

Benefits ■ Facilitate consistent application of University business rules ■ Managed through a common UI and standard API ■ Streamline maintenance of authorization data ■ Bring scattered redundant groups together for re-use ■ Allow useful actions on these groups -- group math, group nesting, exclusion criteria ■ Leverage Penn Community data for accurate, up to date authorization decisions ■ Can leverage existing attribute information ■ Support the creation of new groups ■ By schools, departments, and individuals! ■ Distributed/delegated model of control

Use Cases

Current Implementation Base ■ More than 80 institutions are currently evaluating or implementing central authorization technology. ■ Partial listing of where systems are in production or nearing a production cutover. ■ Stanford ■ Brown ■ Cornell University ■ Duke University ■ National Cancer Institute (caBIG - Cancer BioInformatics Grid) ■ South China University of Technology ■ University of Bristol ■ University of Chicago ■ University of Kansas ■ University of Southern California ■ University of Wisconsin

Costs ■ ISC would fund initial development and deployment (~$150,000) ■ Proposal for $110,000 annual ongoing funding from NPTF (1 FTE + HW & facilities)