1. The EARNEST Foresight Study 2006 - 2007 Campus Issues Jean-Paul le Guigner, CRU, France Martin Price, EUNIS Bratislava 27 April 2007

2. The EARNEST Foresight Study 2006 - 2007 Issues For Investigation Campus Bottlenecks Providing Network Services Rollout of IPv6 Training Network Staff Collaboration at Campus and National level

3. The EARNEST Foresight Study 2006 - 2007 CAMPUS Panel Rogelio Montanana, Valencia University, Spain Michael Nowlan, Trinity College Dublin, Ireland Ligia Ribeiro, Porto University, Portugal Martin Sutter, SWITCH, Switzerland Plus Jim Buddin Jean-Paul le Guigner Martin Price

4. The EARNEST Foresight Study 2006 - 2007 Online Survey Targeted at Heads of campus IT services Took place in early March 2007 Circulated via: –EUNIS mail lists –NREN contacts of connected organisations –National organisations –TERENA lists

5. The EARNEST Foresight Study 2006 - 2007 Areas of Survey Campus Infrastructures Network Services Governance/Funding Networking Expertise Collaboration

6. The EARNEST Foresight Study 2006 - 2007 Findings (Campus Infrastructures) Connection to the NREN –50% under 622Mbs to the NREN –35% under 100Kbs/per computer  How can they cope with this situation? –Almost 70% with ‘intermediate’ nets. (*) Bottlenecks? –A few recognise a bottleneck at campus level (*) –Bottlenecks in ‘the suburbs’ or ‘countryside’ ? (*) conflicts/inconsistencies with the TERENA compendium  Much wider diversity than the TERENA compendium seems to present.

7. The EARNEST Foresight Study 2006 - 2007 Findings (Campus security) Security –40% without any public IP addresses! (*) –25% forbid any direct outgoing connection (*) P2P –25% with NO P2P allowed at all –25% do not apply any control (*) Makes life difficult for those wanting to have videoconferences, E2E services etc  There is a place for recommendations but of course with some « nuance » The two numbers are interesting

8. The EARNEST Foresight Study 2006 - 2007 Findings (Networking services) Three interesting items : –Videoconference: (*) Widely provided however no proof that it is really used extensively  See the Researchers survey –IPv6: many do not offer it, not many care about it –Multicast : only 50%! (*) (*) Why is it not provided or not used?  Difficult to set up, not easy to use (bad interfaces), low level of end-user awareness, …  Not only the problem of institutions, may be the concern of NRENs as well

9. The EARNEST Foresight Study 2006 - 2007 Findings (Governance, funding) Very large recognition of NREN’s advantages –High bandwidth, reasonable price, flexibility –Better services, tailored to R&E community Not many formal structures representing end-users –No interest in end-users’ needs? –Better to keep them ignorant? (contradictory with above) Still one third of the institutions not really well organised regarding networking policy definition –Does this mean that one institution out of 3 does not care much about networking?

10. The EARNEST Foresight Study 2006 - 2007 Findings (Network expertise, training) Very wide spectrum for staffing level –Many, low staffed, feel they’re well resourced! Obstacles for recruiting people –However salaries seem appropriate! Requests for better training –But 70% say that expertise is adequate to meet the demand of users! Majority experiencing difficulties retraining staff –Not much funding for this –Not in institutional plan for training. The less obvious part to analyse

11. The EARNEST Foresight Study 2006 - 2007 Findings (Collaboration) NREN Institutions –One third of the institutions live in ‘isolation’ No collaboration, information and feedback –End-users not really aware of the existence of NRENs (see Researchers survey) Not much collaboration between institutions –Different reasons put forward –One being ‘competition between institutions’ May be a shortsighted view? How can NRENs help alleviate these « pains »?

12. The EARNEST Foresight Study 2006 - 2007 Issues, questions (1/4) NREN related : How to help institutions improve? –Awareness of NRENs and services at end-user level Seamless link NREN/Networking Staff/End-users –Level of collaboration between NREN experts and institution ‘techies’ and IT managers? –‘Quality’ of networking policies Provide guidance to institutions (best practices) Try to influence institution’s policies. Three conditions for accelerating the usage of innovative services by researchers and teachers.

13. The EARNEST Foresight Study 2006 - 2007 Issues, questions (2/4) Institutions related : need for recommendations? –Foster awareness of innovation in the networking area for networking personnel? –For removing barriers (security, P2P, lack of services, …) –For strengthening collaboration between institutions at national level. Formalizing structures and their representation at european level. Make end-users aware and active. Again three additional conditions for accelerating the usage of innovative services.

14. The EARNEST Foresight Study 2006 - 2007 Issues, questions (3/4) Earnest-CAMP : need for investigation/stories? –Lower bandwidth : How can institutions cope with it? How common are intermediate nets? Their impact on bandwidth and services? –Higher bandwidth : Which innovative services are being used? What kind of project/collaboration? What may be proposed to others as guidance?

15. The EARNEST Foresight Study 2006 - 2007 Issues, questions (4/4)  Where are the bottlenecks? (if they exist) –SERENATE saw them at campus level Not true anymore? Local infrastructures have improved? Transport infrastructure not the real problem? –Services,middleware layers,… are vital! –Control (monitoring, performance tools, …) also E2E services rely on this –Informing and training users is very important