NETWORK PLANNING TASK FORCE

1
NETWORK PLANNING TASK FORCE
FALL FY 2005 MEETINGS OPERATIONAL DISCUSSIONS

• November 01, 2004

2
MEETING SCHEDULE FY 05

• Summer Focus Groups
• July 19
• August 2
• August 16
• Fall Meetings
• September 20 Operational Briefing
  (Non-financial)
• October 18 Strategic Discussions (Security)
• November 01 Operational Discussions
• November 15 Strategic Discussions
• November 29 Financial Discussions
• December 6 Consensus/Prioritization/Rate
  Setting

3
NPTF FALL 05 MEMBERS

• Kayann McDonnell, Law
• Donna Milici, Nursing
• Dave Millar, ISC
• Michael Palladino, ISC (Chair)
• Dan Shapiro, Dental
• Mary Spada, VPUL
• Marilyn Spicer, College Houses
• Steve Stines / Jeff Linso, Div. of Finance
• Andrew Selden, PCBI
• Ira Winston / Helen Anderson, SEAS, SAS, School
  of Design
• Mark Aseltine/ Mike Lazenka, ISC
• Eric Snyder, Vet School
• Brian Doherty/John Yates, SAS
• Richard Cardona, Annenberg
• Dan Margolis, SEAS(student)
• David Seidell, Wharton
• Ryan Nunes, (student)

• Mary Alice Annecharico / Rod MacNeil, SOM
• Robin Beck, ISC
• Chris Bradie/Dave Carrol, Business Services
• Cathy DiBonaventura, School of Design
• Geoff Filinuk, ISC
• Bonnie Gibson, Office of Provost
• Roy Heinz / John Keane/ Grover McKenzie , Library
• John Irwin, GSE
• Marilyn Jost, ISC
• Deke Kassabian / Melissa Muth, ISC
• Doug Berger/ Manuel Pena, Housing and Conference
  Services
• Mike Weaver, Budget Mgmt. Analysis
• Dominic Pasqualino, OAC

New Members in FY05
4
NPTF FY 05 Progress to Date

• Challenged and reaffirmed NPTF process.
• Refreshed NPTF principles.
• Updated FY 05 09 planning assumptions.
• Prepared 5 year NT budget. (Summer Submission)
• Held 3 summer focus groups and many 1-1 meetings
  with schools/center computing directors to gather
  customer feedback.
• Set the Fall Agenda.
• Operational Briefing
• Security Briefing

5
Remaining NPTF FY05 Activities

• Strategic Discussions (11/15)
• PennKey
• PennCommunity
• On-Line Directory
• Security
• Anything we missed?
• Financial Discussions (11/29)
• Prioritization/Consensus/Rate Setting (12/6)
• Benchmarking (Spring 05)

6
Todays NPTF AgendaOperational Briefing

• Domain Names (MP)
• MAGPI/Internet2 (MP)
• College House Services (MP)
• Wireless (MW)
• Network Management (DK)
• Security (DK)
• Network Operation Center (NOC) Tour (MW)

7
Domain Names

• 2001 Domain Names Policy states that domain names
  existing before 2001 are exempt from meeting
  policy standards. A 300 yearly fee should be
  charged for those out of compliance.
• In FY 2003, we reviewed compliance of all 3rd
  level domain names with 2001 policy to determine
  fee exempt status.
• ISC found that
• Administrative costs exceed revenue generated by
  few non-exempt grandfathered domain names.
• These domain names are an intrinsic part of each
  groups organization. They were not willing to
  bring them into compliance to avoid the fee.
• ISC NT has decided to declare all non-compliant,
  pre-existing domain names exempt from the yearly
  domain name fee.
• The yearly fee will still be charged for new 3rd
  level domain names.
• Domain Name pages www.upenn.edu/computing/pennnet
  /domainnames/

8
MAGPI

• A multi-state regional GigaPoP (Gigabit Point of
  Presence) , involving institutions from New
  Jersey, Pennsylvania and Delaware
• Penns regional connection to Internet2, the
  research network.
• Promotes applications for the region's research
  and education communities through high
  performance network technology.
• Offers wide range of services to support research
  activities, including
• Regional, national, and international high speed
  connectivity
• Applications development
• Advanced services (e.g., Multicast, IPv6)
• Digital video support

9
MAGPI/Internet2 Planning Assumptions

• Penn needs Internet2 to remain competitive.
• MAGPI helps lower Penns total costs.
• The central service fee would increase by 5
  (250k) without MAGPI.
• MAGPI is soon moving to an OC48 to support the
  growing subscriber base.
• Penn will probably need to connect to the
  National Lamda Rail in the next 1-2 years to
  support high-end research.
• The OC48 infrastructure upgrade and other
  activities would increase the potential for NLR
  at much lower costs to Penn
• More info http//www.magpi.net

10
National Lambda Rail

• Thought of as the next version of Internet2, The
  National Lambda Rail is gaining momentum
  throughout the United States.
• Key Features
• Requires fiber optic connections
• Dense Wave Division Multiplexing, (DWDM)
• Lambdas in increments of 10 Gigabits per second
• With the Internet2 project, HOPI, this will
  establish a global Optical/Packet infrastructure
• Benefits
• To maintain Penns competitive edge for the
  research community.

11
I2/MAGPI Involvement at Penn

• Engineering School - remote course delivery as
  part of Nanotechnology Institute's outreach to 7
  community colleges in PA, NJ, DE, and MD  and
  educational outreach to high schools.
• International Student Interviews (SEAS, SAS Grad
  Students)
• Grad Ed's Penn Literacy Network International
  Programs with pre-service teachers in Dublin.
• Collaboration Opportunities for Lauder Faculty
  with France, China, etc.
• School of Medicine Faculty Participation in COPD
  Virtual Conference hosted by Prous Science in
  Barcelona
• National Teleimmerison Initiative   
  http//www.cis.upenn.edu/teleimmersion
• National Digital Mammography Archive
• http//www-306.ibm.com/e-business/doc/content/gro
  wingsuccess/univofpa.html
• Schoenberg Center for Electronic Text and Image
  http//dewey.library.upenn.edu/sceti/
• English Renaissance In Context http//dewey.librar
  y.upenn.edu/sceti/furness/eric
• Wharton West http//www.upenn.edu/pip/?pipwharton
  west
• The French Project (Lauder and Universite of
  Grenoble) and EUMAX Project (multi-state,
  multi-country International Business and Computer
  Science education)
• http//www.scienceblog.com/community/older/2001/E
  /200115536.html
• Penn Museum of Archeology and Anthropology's
  Interactive Virtual Museum Education for K12s

12
MAGPI Connected Sites

• Universities
• Princeton
• Thomas Jefferson University
• Arcadia University
• Lehigh University
• Seton Hall University
• St Francis University
• Temple University
• Villanova University
• Widener University
• Rutgers
• University of Delaware
• Stevens Institute of Technology
• University of Medicine and Dentistry New Jersey
• New Jersey Institute of Technology
• Hospitals
• CHOP
• Fox Chase Cancer Center
• Lehigh Valley Hospital

13
College House Services

• Focus Groups
• Wireless
• New Financial Model

14
College House NT Service Focus Groups

• Conducted two focus groups last week regarding
  data, voice and video services
• Goal is to get direction for preparing student
  survey
• Strong desire for wireless throughout college
  houses
• Rejection of PAC codes on phone lines
• Bandwidth cap not noticed

15
College House Wireless

• Working on various strategies for wireless
  networking in the dorms.
• Cost Effective vs. Performance Coverage
• Supplemental vs. Replacement for Wired
• Insourced vs. Outsourced Service.
• Working on a proposal for College House wireless
  costs (end of January 05).
• Strategy could be expanded to rest of campus.

16
Proposed College House Service Funding Models

• We already have a separate network SLA for the
  College Houses
• Differential hours of support since home use is
  off hours
• Differential Internet Bandwidth
• Special Support for College House Servers
• We are exploring a new funding model for future
  services
• Is it time to have a separate cost model?
• Wallplate fee
• Central service fee

17
Wireless

• Current status
• Subsidized Wireless IP Addresses
• Future Plans

18
Wireless Current Status

• Locations 32 Wireless LANs on Campus
• 14 Public Wireless Locations
• 16 Private Wireless Locations
• 197 Managed Access Points
• Blue Socket Gateways Installed in 4 locations.
• User Based Authentication for all but three
  Wireless LANs

19
Wireless LANs on Campus
20
Wireless - Subsidized Wireless IP Addresses

• NPTF voted to allow up to 400 IP addresses for
  public wireless locations if FY2005
• 14 Public Wireless Locations are being monitored
  for usage statistics
• Private Wireless LANs can get some subsidies (10
  for large LANs, up to 20 for small LANs)
• Defining Public vs. Private Wireless LANs

21
Wireless Ranges
22
Wireless Ranges
23
Wireless Future Plans

• Improvement on user authentication 802.1x
• Improving efficiency of wLAN installation
• Using New Wireless Tools
• Air Magnet Laptop Analyzer - troubleshooting
• Air Magnet Surveyor survey and updating APs
• Evaluating New Tools
• Centralized wireless management tools
• Cisco Works Wireless LAN Solution Engine (WLSE)
• Airwave Management Platform
• Air Magnet Enterprise

24
Network Management Tools
25
(No Transcript)
26
(No Transcript)
27
(No Transcript)
28
(No Transcript)
29
(No Transcript)
30
(No Transcript)
31
Network Management PUMA
32
(No Transcript)
33
(No Transcript)
34
(No Transcript)
35
(No Transcript)
36
Security

• Wired Authentication
• Intrusion Detection
• VPNs

37
Security Wired Authentication

• Pilot underway in ISC since June
• Plan to expand pilot externally in December
• Pilots will require client (web intercept
  unavailable) until Q1CY2005

38
Intrusion Detection

• A new tool, Arbor Peakflow, allows us to collect
  and analyze network "flow" info from Penn
  routers.
• This helps us to see lists of
• top talkers,
• traffic by protocol (web vs email vs p2p vs voice
  vs video, etc),
• traffic by destination service provider (Cogent
  vs Qwest vs Abilene/Internet2),
• and much more.

39
Intrusion Detection

• Peakflow also allows us to identify denial of
  service (DoS, DDoS) attacks in progress,
  including sources and protocols, and possible
  filtering options.
• In this role, the Arbor Peakflow tools act as a
  very sophisticated distributed IDS, helping us to
  do targeting filtering during major network-based
  attacks.
• No dedicated IDS systems needed to be put inline
  into the network. Netflow data from the routers
  is used.

40
Security - VPNs

• Beginning investigation of generic solution
• Goal allow specific ports to be used that are
  otherwise blocked by ISPs (e.g. for Windows file
  sharing and MS Exchange)
• Expect to have proof-of-concept in March
• Targeting deployment for Fall 2005