Presentation on theme: "SERENATE findings on geographic issues SERENATE findings on geographic issues Marko Bonač ARNES"— Presentation transcript:
SERENATE findings on geographic issues SERENATE findings on geographic issues Marko Bonač ARNES
Report identifying issues related to the geographic coverage of European research and education networking The Report will review the digital divide in research networking provision in Europe and provide some recommendations on how this divide could be closed. Sources of information are: answers to the special questionnaire sent to all eastern European NRENs several meetings with eastern European NRENs TERENA Compendium 2003 Marko Bonac (Arnes) and John Martin (ENPG) are working on the Report. Any additional input is welcome.
NRENs from eastern Europe Albania (ANA) Bosnia and Herzegovina (BIHARNET) Bulgaria (ICT) Croatia (CARNet) Cyprus (CYNET) Czech Republic (CESNET) Estonia (EENet) Hungary (HUNGARNET) Latvia (LATNET, LANET) Lithuania (LITNET) Macedonia, FYR (MARNet) Malta (CSC) Poland (PSNC) Romania (RoEduNet, RNC) Serbia and Montenegro (AMREJ) Slovak Republic (SANET) Slovenia (Arnes) Turkey (ULAKBIM)
Groupings for statistics For some comparisons, countries were divided in three groups: European Economic Area (EEA) which is comprised of –the 15 European Union (EU) states and –three European Free Trade Area (EFTA) states 10 acceding states (Cyprus, Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, Poland, Slovakia and Slovenia) Other European states (Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Macedonia, Serbia and Montenegro, Romania and Turkey)
Data illustrating the digital divide Group of countries NREN total international bandwidth (Mbps) Typical National Core Bandwidth (Mbps) NREN budget per 1 M inhabitants (MEURO) GDP per capita (EURO) GERD per capita (EURO) Average EEA 6,8923,8331,5725, Average AC 1, ,7711,79144 Average OEC ,49
Average percentage of NREN client institutions experiencing high congestion Country Grouping International Connections National Backbone Metropolitan Network Access Network LAN EEA countries10298 Acceding countries Other European countries
GÉANT (January 2003) Country grouping Speed of access port to GÉANT in Mbps LoadExpenditure for GÉANT as percentage of NREN`s budget Average EEA % Average AC %23 % Average OEC %22%
Backbone Country grouping Typical backbone capacity (in Mbps) Traffic to/from customers in January 2003 in Terabytes Average EEA 3, Average AC Average OEC Ratio between - average of top four developed countries and - average of bottom four developed countries is 110:1
High speed University connections Country grouping Percentage of Universities connected to NREN at 1 Gbps or more Percentage of Universities connected to NREN at 100 Mbps or more Average EEA 29 %47 % Average AC 10 %24 % Average OEC 2 %24 %
At what level are significant problems found CountryEnd-user equipment LANAccess network Metropolitan network National backbone International connectivity CyprusYes Czech RepublicMinor EstoniaYes (4)Yes (1)Yes (3)Yes (2) HungaryMinor (1) Latvia LithuaniaYes (1) Yes MaltaYes PolandYes (1) SlovakiaYes SloveniaYesYes(2)Yes (1) AlbaniaYes Bosnia and HYes BulgariaYes CroatiaYes Macedonia, FYR Yes (4)Yes (3)Yes (2)Yes (1) RomaniaYes (1)Minor Serbia and MYesYes (1) TurkeyYes (3)Yes (1)
Problem areas in the policy, funding and economic environment CountryLack of Government support Lack of University Support Lack of Researcher awareness Lack of NREN Funding CyprusYes Czech RepublicYes EstoniaYes HungarySome Latvia---- LithuaniaYes MaltaYes PolandYes SlovakiaSomeYes SloveniaYes AlbaniaYes Bosnia and HYes BulgariaYes CroatiaYes Macedonia, FYRYes (3)Yes (4)Yes (5)Yes (1) RomaniaYesMinorYes Serbia and MYes TurkeySome
Problem areas in the policy, funding and economic environment CountryLack of National infrastructure High cost Telecomms Shortage of managerial skills Shortage of Technical Skills CyprusYes Czech Republic EstoniaYes HungaryYes Latvia---- LithuaniaYes Malta PolandYes SlovakiaYes SloveniaYes AlbaniaYes Bosnia and H BulgariaYes CroatiaYes Macedonia, FYRYes (2)Yes (1) RomaniaYes Serbia and MYes SomeYes TurkeyYes
Findings and recommendations Digital Divide exists The depth of the digital divide varies very greatly from country to country There are four countries in eastern Europe with a high overall standard of research networking. Reasons include: –Good support for research networking at government level –Access to dark fibre where/when necessary –History of participation in joint European projects The majority of countries fall very far behind those in western Europe The consequences of this digital divide are serious Those countries without an adequate research network will suffer from “research exclusion”
Findings and recommendations Access to dark fibre is vital Access to dark fibre enables the NRENs in small eastern European countries to upgrade the capacity of the backbone and access links one hundred-fold without spending much more on the infrastructure At the present moment this is the main step which could be taken to close the digital divide. –It seems that in most eastern European countries the fibre is already laid. –In countries with a liberalized telecommunication market it is not difficult to get the fibre. –There are encouraging examples that this was also done in the countries with monopoly in telecommunications –Could the EC make recommendations in this respect? _
Findings and recommendations The case for research networks still needs to be made Lack of awareness of the importance of research networking / at government level as well as at academic level / is a matter of concern Sometimes it is supposed that the ordinary Internet will solve the problem. Not every one recognizes that without high capacity research network research exclusion is inevitable. Problems are also known to exist where –the NREN is not formally established as an independent body or –where there are several NRENs with indistinct responsibilities and without necessarily economy of scale
Findings and recommendations Participation in Joint Projects NRENs in “eastern Europe” have approximately the same number of technical experts as NRENs in “western Europe” Those NRENs which succeeded in getting appropriate infrastructure to build high capacity networks are also very active in joint European projects Joint projects are important for eastern European NRENs as well as for the whole research networking community in Europe
Findings and recommendations Role of the European Commission Financial contribution in joint projects (GÉANT, SEEREN) NREN participation in EU projects has an exceptional influence on: –achieving minimal standards –raising awareness of research networking –getting funds from other sources Proposals –Introduction of special programs for least developed countries –Political support in NRENs efforts for getting access to the fibre in cases where fibre is not available on the market
Findings and recommendations Role of TERENA Promote knowledge transfer Many NRENs from eastern Europe are not well enough developed to gain from its technical projects Compendium, papers, staff visits are highly appreciated Membership fees for TERENA members is prohibitively high for the least developed countries Should cooperation with CEENet be pursued as it is seen as a good organizer of technical, managerial and policy workshops on a very small budget and with good understanding for the situation in least developed countries.
Summary 1.Digital divide in research networking provision exists 2.The depth of the digital divide varies very greatly from country to country. 3.The digital divide between most developed and least developed countries is getting bigger. 4.If uncorrected, will prevent the goal of equal opportunity for researchers. A.Access to dark fibre is vital B.Awareness of the importance of research networking at government level is important. C.Participation in joint projects is very valuable. D.Could the European Commission and TERENA do more to close the digital divide ?
Is it necessary to hear such complaints from European researchers ? “We do not have the capacity required to participate or collaborate in advanced services projects or application projects requiring high speed bandwidth, and this hinders research and academic activity in our country”