1. SERON: Southeast Regionally Organized Networking Subcommittee Organizational Meeting Larry Conrad Florida State University Florida LambdaRail April 17, 2007

2. From Nov. 9, 2006: 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

3. From Nov. 9, 2006: 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

4. From Nov. 9, 2006: 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

5. From Feb. 21, 2007: Action Scenarios Collectively address connectivity and access gaps in the region Seek to mitigate impact on our institutions of the head-to-head competition between I2 and NLR Seek more control of our own destiny—cannot depend on I2 and NLR to look out for our best interests

6. From Feb. 21, 2007: Action Scenarios Recognize the increasing importance of regional advanced networking to R&E competitiveness for our institutions Ensure our regional networks’ ability to connect with AUP free networks Ensure our regional networks’ ability to provide redundancy over diverse routes

7. From Feb. 21, 2007: Action Scenarios Work to ensure the national networking entities demonstrate a better understanding of regional network concerns and issues Work to ensure the national networking entities are more supportive of regional network business models Work to ensure a more direct and “undiluted” input to the national networking entities

8. From Feb. 21, 2007: Action Scenarios Establish mutual/shared support pacts/collaborations, like DR/BC, virtualized services, data center space Explore shared support services, e.g., PR, CFO Share best practices, e.g., business plans, pricing models, economic development, NOC services, peering agreements Aggregate services, e.g., commodity, Abilene/NewNet, National Transit Rail

9. From Feb. 21, 2007: Action Scenarios Explore regional resources which could be further developed to support our institutions –SURAgrid –Storage grids –Shared security/authentication services –Voice/toll bypass Speak with one voice to wield greater leverage Be more demanding with the national network entities about what we need rather than what they want to provide

10. From Feb. 21, 2007: Specific Follow-up Actions 1.Align I2 contracts for SE members/connectors 2.72 hour “traffic analysis” study, commencing on April 1, 2007 3.Pursue inter-connecting the RONs and assist in-fill 4.Super-aggregation 5.Cooperative (vs. federation?) organization leveraging SURA 6.Improve communications between RONs and with the universities 7.Get active w/I2 governance structures

11. April 17, 2007: Opportunities Saving money –Potential/interest for further aggregation in the SE –Potential for shared support services, e.g., PR, CFO –Leveraging peering services –Sharing best practices, e.g., business models, pricing models, economic development initiatives, organizing NOC services

12. April 17, 2007: Opportunities Leveraging regional resources –How can we help states develop networks (in-fill) –Interconnecting networks outside the I2/NLR infrastructure (redundancy) –Developing collaborative support arrangements, e.g., DR-BC, virtualized services, Data Center space –Compute and storage grids, security/authentication services –Voice/toll bypass

13. April 17, 2007: Opportunities Internet2 participation –Status of Internet2 network connection commitments –Interest in developing a common connection agreement –Value of continuing SEGP participation? –New Internet2 network membership category –Ensuring adequate governance representation from the SE –Wade-in on proposed NLR-I2 merger

14. April 17, 2007: Organizing Selecting a Chair and Vice Chair –Chair: Charlie McMahon, LONI –Vice Chair: Phil Halstead, FLR Meeting frequency/venue –Biweekly conf. calls for now while the NLR-I2 merger is “hot”

15. Questions?