1. Internet2 Update Gathering of State Networks 2005 Heather Bruning, Program Manager, Network Services Heather Boyles, Director, Member and Partner Relations 9 February 2005

2. 2 Abilene Upgrade – Completed!

3. 3 Abilene Community – 4 levels  Connectors – Regional aggregators of Internet2 traffic.  Primary Participants – Internet2 members, including research universities and collaborating U.S. federal and corporate research labs.  Sponsored Participants – Collaborating partners of Internet2 university members (e.g., small laboratories, museums, clinical research centers) requiring access to advanced networking.  Sponsored Education Group Participants (SEGPs) – Aggregations of state education networks connecting the K-12 community, baccalaureate and community college networks, and libraries.

4. 4 Abilene – February 2005  IP-over-DWDM (OC-192c) backbone  42 direct connections (OC-3c  10-Gbps) 2 10-Gbps (10 Gig Eth) connections –OC-192 SONET also supported 6 OC-48c connections & 3 Gig Eth connectors 25 connected via at least OC-12c (622 Mbps)  233 participants – research universities & labs All 50 states, District of Columbia, & Puerto Rico U.S. Census Bureau and World Bank most recent additions; Library of Congress coming soon!  Expanded access 119 sponsored participants and 34 state education networks

5. 5 Purpose and Goals

6. 6 Sponsored Education Group Participants as of February 2005

7. 7 Approved SEGPs by State (34) Alabama Maryland Oklahoma California Massachusetts Oregon Connecticut Michigan Pennsylvania Georgia Minnesota Rhode Island Hawaii Missouri South Carolina Illinois Nebraska Texas Indiana New Jersey Utah Iowa New Mexico Virginia Kansas New York Washington Kentucky North Carolina Wisconsin Louisiana North Dakota Maine Ohio

8. 8 SEGP Inquiries by State (6) Alaska Colorado Delaware Nevada New Hampshire Tennessee

9. K20 Initiative Update

10. 10 K20 Initiative – Goals 2005  Continue to expand and refine the biannual SEGP Connectivity Survey. Work with SEGP connectors to gather more granular usage data for the 2006 survey.  Review K20 Initiative Advisory and Executive Committee structures for shaping the direction of the K20 Initiative.  Continued development of a multi-faceted communications strategy designed to communicate innovative programmatic activities across the broadest education community and beyond to critical stakeholders (e.g., K20 Initiative website).  Engagement of various communities of interest in workshops to explore how advanced networks and applications will impact education.

11. 11 Internet2 K20 Connectivity Survey – September 2002 vs. May 2004 comparison data

12. 12 SEGP Connectivity Survey Results May 2004  Survey Goals Provide a high level view of the connectivity and enabling technologies within each SEGP as well as an aggregate view of the entire SEGP program. Identify contacts at each SEGP for pursuing additional information. Not intended to be a detailed site survey as this is too resource intensive and difficult to maintain.

13. 13 SEGP Connectivity Survey Results May 2004  84% of the state education networks can access the Internet2 backbone network at >155 Mbps  As of May 2004, there were 32 state k12/k20 networks participating connecting about 27,000 K20 institutions – 23,392 k12 schools (86% of total) 2,360 public libraries (9% of total) 594 community colleges (2% of total) 852 four-year colleges and universities (3% of total) 74 museums, zoos, aquariums, and science centers (1% of total)  For more information: http://k20.internet2.edu/connect_survey_index.php http://k20.internet2.edu/connect_survey_index.php

14. 14 K20 Initiative Contact Information  On the Web http://k20.internet2.edu/  Email Louis Fox: lfox@internet2.edulfox@internet2.edu James Werle: jwerle@u.washington.edujwerle@u.washington.edu  Phone (206) 685-4745 (206) 616-8155

15. 15 Corporate Research Sites – Connection Options  Sponsored Participation – Abilene CoU allows small for-profit entities and government agencies that require routine collaboration on instructional, clinical, and/or research projects, services, and content with Primary Participants or with other Sponsored Participants to become Sponsored Participants. Contact Heather Bruning heather.bruning@internet2.edu for application.  Corporate Membership with Collaboration Site status – Corporate research labs seeking connection to Internet2 are encouraged to pursue Corporate Membership with Collaboration Site status and Abilene Primary Participation.  Collaboration Site Process – An updated list of procedures will soon be available at: http://members.internet2.edu/Collabsite.html http://members.internet2.edu/Collabsite.html

16. FiberCo, NLR, & the Regionals

17. 17 Current Landscape  Initiatives like NLR are motivating others to build facilities-based networks  Combination of a distressed telecom industry and recent technological advancements have enabled the emergence of the RONS Already passed the nadir in fiber prices New optical equipment is easier deploy and manage Optical equipment market is still under pressure, keeping prices low  Because of this, the time for taking advantage of this unique opportunity is quickly coming to an end.

18. 18 Leading & Emerging Regional Optical Networks  Arkansas  California (CALREN)  Colorado (FRGP/BRAN)  Connecticut (Conn. Education Network)  Florida (Florida LambdaRail)  Georgia (Southern Light Rail)  Great Plains Network*  Indiana (I-LIGHT)  Illinois (I-WIRE), Univ. of Illinois*  Louisiana (LONI)*  Maryland, D.C. & northern Virginia (MAX)  Michigan (MiLR)  Minnesota  New York + New England region (NEREN, NYSERNet, Cornell) *RONs with RFx’s issued or in process of acquiring fiber  North Carolina (NCLambdaRail)  New Mexico*  Ohio (Third Frontier Network)  Oklahoma (OneNet)  Oregon  Pacific Northwest (Lariat –supported by NIH, PNNL)  Rhode Island (OSHEAN)  Southeast (SURA Crossroads, ORNL)  Tennessee (OneTN)  Texas (LEARN)*  Utah  Virginia (MATP)  Wisconsin (WEROC)  Wyoming (RONs in red have made dark fiber acquisitions through FiberCo) Courtesy of Steve Corbato

19. 19 FiberCo supporting project  Dark fiber holding company Operates on behalf of U.S. higher education and affiliates – the Internet2 membership Patterned on success of Quilt commodity Internet project Assignment vehicle for the regionals and NLR Fundamentally, a dark fiber market maker for R&E  Project designed to support optical initiatives Regional (RONs) National (NLR)  Not an operational entity Will not light any of its fiber  Concept was a spin-off from NLR governance discussions Internet2 took responsibility for organizational formation National R&E Fiber Co. incorporated in Delaware First acquisition of dark fiber through Level 3 – 2,600 route miles (fiber bank) – 3/2003

20. 20 FiberCo assignment progress (route mileage) Level 3GenuityTotal Indiana U241- U Wyoming178- No. Carolina208- NLR, Inc.1,705- Florida9005921,492 Michigan963- PNNL554- Internet2321- TOTAL5,0705925,662

21. 21 Available fiber topology

22. What’s next? and how does it relate to state and regional networks?

23. 23 Abilene Timeline  October 2007 – End of recent 1-year extension to Abilene transport MoU with Qwest The time frame for both next generation architecture finalization & decision on transport partner(s) is ~12-13 months from now  early spring 2006

24. 24 Internet2 Network Infrastructure Futures  Time is now for architecture evaluation and planning Need to have a good idea of the next generation architecture by the end of 2005 We are at an inflection point in network architecture HOPI design team and testbed will evaluate potential architectures Coordinating with the RON build-outs and NLR time table will be a critical task  Good news: lots to evaluate, ponder & discuss We need your input: abilene@internet2.eduabilene@internet2.edu

25. 25 Regional Networks  The fundamental nature of regional networking is changing The GigaPoP model based on provisioned, high-capacity services steadily is being replaced – on the metro and regional scales  A model of facility-based networking built with owned assets – Regional Optical Networks (RONs) – has emerged Notably, this change increases the importance of regional networks in the traditional three-level hierarchy of U.S. R&E advanced networking

26. 26 Regional and state networks: and future national network infrastructure  The development of Regional Optical Networks (RONs) is the most critical and persistent infrastructure activity in which the higher education advanced networking community is currently engaged  Both affected by and affects how we architect next generation national backbone Sparse topology: NLR facility and even 2 nd gen. Abilene Services: hybrid services out to the campus

27. 27 Regional and State Networks  Internet2 needs your input  Looking at interaction with state and regional networks across Internet2 organization Abilene gigapop coordinators group QUILT Joint Techs program With partners: Educause GOSN

28. 28 Contact Us  www.internet2.edu  abilene.internet2.edu/  www.fiberco.org/  abilene@internet2.edu Steve Cotter, Director, Network Services –scotter@internet2.edu Heather Bruning, Program Manager, Network Services –heather.bruning@internet2.edu Heather Boyles, Director, Member and Partner Relations –heather@internet2.edu

29. 29