Update from Washington

1
Update from Washington

• CALEA
• USF
• Net Neutrality
• Wendy Wigen
• Policy Analyst
• EDUCAUSE
• June 12, 2006

2
What is CALEA?

• CALEA is the Communications Assistance for Law
  Enforcement Act. It was originally enacted in
  1994. It requires providers of commercial voice
  services to engineer their networks in such a way
  as to assist law enforcement agencies in
  executing wiretap orders.
• Until August 5, 2005 that is..

3
CALEA First Report and Order

• On August 5, 2005, in response to a request by
  law enforcement, the FCC voted to extend CALEA to
  include facilities-based Internet service
  providers.
• Facilities-based Internet service providers are
  defined as "entities that provide transmission
  or switching over their own facilities between
  the end user and the Internet Service Provider."

4
Where are we today?

• ACE (American Council on Education) vs FCC
  Federal District Court of Appeals decision
  announced June 9, 2006
• In favor of the FCC
• CALEA can be extended to ISPs
• But. it does not apply to private networkssome
  hope
• FCC Second Report and Order announced May 3, 2006

5
FCC Two Part Decision

• Part 1 Decided CALEA does apply to all
  facilities-based Internet service providers. Full
  compliance is required by May 14, 2007. Confirmed
  by Court decision June 9, 2006.
• Part 2 Decided (May 3, 2006)
• Compliance date extensions
• Technical requirements
• Security requirements
• Cost recovery

6
Compliance Deadline

• May 14, 2007 remains the deadline for
  compliance
• Extensions are only available for pre-October
  1998 equipment

7
Option Petition for Relief

• Must demonstrate that compliance is not
  reasonably achievable
• Cost must be prohibitive (disfavored as an
  excuse)
• Lack of commercially available equipment (not an
  excuse)
• All possible solutions must be examined third
  parties must be brought in
• Prohibits group petitions

8
Technical Requirements

• FCC refuses to intervene in the standards process
• Industry standard-setting bodies are free to
  determine what constitutes compliance
• Entities must submit compliance progress reports
• Law Enforcement must file a deficiency petition
  if they disagree

9
Options

• Adhere to a yet-to-be-issued industry standard
• Hire a trusted third party provider
• Develop a standard of our own?

10
Security Requirements

• Must file policies and procedures within 90 days
  of the effective date (30 days after published in
  the Federal Register)
• In short (Section 105 of Second RO)
• Create a security office
• Train personnel
• Provide contact information to the FCC

11
Options

• Copies of requirements are available at
  www.educause.edu/calea

12
Cost Recovery

• Providers may recover the costs associated with
  carrying out a wiretap using a CALEA-based
  intercept solution
• Providers are prohibited from including capital
  costs related to deploying the CALEA solution

13
Whats next?

• Study and interpretation of the Court decision
• Clarification in an FCC Third Report and Order?
• Release of Second Report and Order will give us a
  date for the security requirements

14
Universal Service FundUSF
15
USF Reform

• Issue Need to make the system more efficient and
  directed at improved broadband
• Challenges
• Traditional funding (fees on long distance) is
  disappearing
• Who should pay, and who should receive the funds?

16
Why Should HEC Care?

• Today
• Institutions in rural areas benefit from USF
• Students in rural and low-income areas benefit
  (distance education)
• HE pays into USF
• Tomorrow
• Institutions in rural areas continue to enjoy
  subsidized rates for broadband and phone
• Broadband deployment improves (distance
  education, telehealth, etc.)
• HE continues to pay into USF at a fair and
  equitable rate

17
ACUTA Study

• October 2005 found
• Average monthly USF contribution was 1,559
• Based on current FCC proposal, the average
  monthly contribution would become 14,753

18
What are we doing?

• Educating the FCC
• American Council of Education (ACE) provided
  detail on the impact on 15 specific schools.
• ACUTA submits comments calling for a number
  equivalency approach based on a proposal from
  Quest and BellSouth.

19
Net NeutralityThe fight to control the Internet
20
What is net neutrality?

• The concept of keeping the Internet open to all
  lawful content, information, applications, and
  equipment in a non-discriminatory manner

21
In other words

• Packets can not be prioritized based on what they
  contain, or who sends or receives them
• Packets can not be prioritized in order to favor
  a network owners or an affiliates content

22
A very brief history lesson

• Common Carriage
• Public vs. private networks
• Differentiate vs. discriminate
• Dial-up Internet the Internet WAS regulated

23
And then things got messy.

• As we moved to broadband
• The competitive environment changed
• The technology changed
• The law changed

24
Why worry?

• Network providers, mainly telephone and cable
  companies, have the means, the incentive, and the
  declared intent to discriminate . And there is
  no law against it.

25
Why should the higher education community care?

• We are large consumers and producers of online
  content
• We are increasingly dependent on the Internet to
  fulfill our mission of education, research and
  community outreach
• The lack of NN fundamentally alters the nature of
  the Internet i.e. costs go up, quality of
  service goes down

26
As a citizen

• Overall health and welfare of our country, our
  economy, and our research community
• International competitiveness Every other
  country has some type of non-discrimination rules
  in place.

27
Arguments against

• It is a solution without a problem
• Networks are private property.
• Net neutrality would discourage investment

28
It is a solution without a problem

• There have been several documented cases
• As the video over IP market matures there will be
  more
• Policy makers have experience with other markets
  under similar circumstances

29
Networks are private property

• The telephone and cable companies have spent
  billions on their networks, they should be able
  to run them however they wish, and decide who can
  use them and who cant.
• But.

30
Networks need rules because..

• Current infrastructure was built under government
  protected monopolies (competition)
• More than 2 connections to the home is unlikely
  anytime soon (competition)
• Other countries experience lower prices and
  higher speeds (competition)
• Internet is a vital public service
• The Internet cant be owned

31
NN would discourage investment in new
infrastructure.

• Government does not control the rates for
  broadband access
• The cable operators have already made the
  investment
• For phone companies, upgrading to fiber will
  happen with or without NN

32
Where are we now?

• Congress
• House Barton Bill
• Markey amendment defeated
• Passed HR 5252 (COPE) on June 8, 2006 without
  sufficient protections for NN
• Senate Stevens Bill
• Snowe/Dorgan Amendment
• Judiciary interested holding hearings
• New draft promised

33
What can you do?

• Grassroots
• Grass tops
• Learn more and spread the word.
• www.savetheinternet.com
• www.educause.edu/netneutrality

34
Contact Information

• CALEA and Net Neutrality
• Mark Luker mluker_at_educause.edu
• Wendy Wigen wwigen_at_educause.edu
• USF
• Garret Sern gsern_at_educause.edu