TRANSPAC2TRANSPAC2 TransPAC2 US-Asia Connectivity Jim Williams – Indiana University

TRANSPAC2TRANSPAC2 TransPAC2 Overview

TRANSPAC2TRANSPAC2 TransPAC2 Technical Details Physical Network 10G Layer 3 network connection between the US and Asia –Asian connectivity via the APAN (and TEIN2) infrastructures –US connectivity via the Pacific Wave Facility Juniper T320 and other associated hardware in Los Angeles Juniper T640 and other hardware in Tokyo

TRANSPAC2TRANSPAC2 TransPAC2 Hardware/Circuit Plans Project Years 4-5 Insert a switch between the circuit and the router in LA (to balance the switch in Tokyo). Offer Layer 2 VLAN services between APAN- LA/USA

TRANSPAC2TRANSPAC2 TransPAC2 Networking Partners TransPAC2 Co-investigator partner – Internet2 TransPAC2 Asia regional partner – APAN ( TransPAC2 Japanese partners NICT and NII TransPAC2 – EU TEIN2 partnership

TRANSPAC2TRANSPAC2

TRANSPAC2TRANSPAC2

TransPAC2 TOP 10 apps Significant aggregated (In/Out) flows between Institution 1 and Institution 2 One year aggregate data

TRANSPAC2TRANSPAC2 Significant IRNC-2005 Successes 1.Supporting science collaborations, both large and small. You have seen excellent examples of supporting large scale science collaborations. Not all IRNC supported science collaborations are >1Gbps. Pakistan is an excellent case in point. 2. Leverage. All IRNC projects are incredibly leveraged, usually by a factor of 10 or more. That is now SOP. IRNC projects should connect multi- country networks, or at minimum countries to US scientists 3.Quantitatively understanding more about network traffic (a.k.a. measurement) and routing. But, there is more work to do in these areas. 4.Understanding threats within network traffic (a.k.a. security). Unclear this is a success…it is an area that needs more emphasis

TRANSPAC2TRANSPAC2 Interesting IRNC-2005 Side Effects RENOG - (Research and Education Network Operators Group [CCIRN chartered]) South Asia SIG - (Sub-group of the Internet2 Developing NREN Group)

TRANSPAC2TRANSPAC2 Supporting international connections and collaborations in the future 1.Supporting connections. Close IRNC service coordination and collaborations yield valuable results. Measurement is an example and needs continued emphasis. Security needs more direct attention in the next solicitation. New inter-domain services require joint US-international development. This might be addressed by small, out-of-band awards or a within-project formal technical aspect. 2.Supporting collaborations is not Science needs and network infrastructure capabilities will evolve. Linkage of networking efforts with the needs/requirements of science is critical. Coordination of US face to international science is equally critical. Integration of networking efforts with other international R/E networks will be required.

TRANSPAC2TRANSPAC2 Jim Williams Indiana University Questions