NETWORK PLANNING TASK FORCE

1. NETWORK PLANNING TASK FORCE August16, 2004 SUMMER FOCUS GROUP SESSIONS “SETTING THE AGENDA”

2. MEETING SCHEDULE – FY ‘05 • Summer Focus Groups • July 19 • August 2 • August 16 • Fall Meetings • September 20 Review Current Status • October 04 Operational Discussions • October 18 Strategic Discussions • November 01 Strategic Discussions • November 15 Strategic Discussions • November 29 Strategic Discussions • December 6 Consensus/Prioritization/Rate Setting

3. Mary Alice Annecharico / Rod MacNeil, SOM Robin Beck, ISC Chris Bradie/Dave Carrol, Business Services Chris Field, GPSA (student) Cathy DiBonaventura, School of Design Geoff Filinuk, ISC Bonnie Gibson, Office of Provost Roy Heinz / John Keane, Library John Irwin, GSE Marilyn Jost, ISC Deke Kassabian / Melissa Muth, ISC Doug Berger/ Manuel Pena, Housing and Conference Services Robert Helfman, Budget Mgmt. Analysis Dominic Pasqualino, OAC 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 James Kaylor, CCEB 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 NPTF FALL ’05 MEMBERS * New Members

4. NPTF FY ’05 Progress to Date • Challenged and reaffirmed NPTF process • Refreshed NPTF principles • Updated FY ’05 – ’09 planning assumptions • Prepared 5 year N&T budget • Held 3 summer focus groups and many 1-1 meetings with schools/center computing directors to get customer feedback.

5. Today’s NPTF Agenda • Review of FY 2005 – 2009 budget assumptions • Setting the Fall agenda

6. NPTF Revised Principles • Many Penn investments and operations are dependent upon the viability, accessibility and security of the Network. ISC maintains close alignment with University academic, research and business strategies. • Customers and ISC work as partners when making decisions, insuring flexibility to accommodate business needs and changing technologies. Using a continuous process improvement approach, we seek maximum cost-effectiveness and a high degree of customer satisfaction. • Customers and ISC are proactive in identifying strategic directions and emerging technologies and encourage the retirement of obsolete services and systems to insure that we remain competitive with our peers and industry.

7. NPTF Revised Principles (Funding Model) • The costs are visible for data, voice and video services and their associated components, showing a 5-year view of budgets and planning assumptions. Aggregate service rate increases are targeted at 0-2% maximum yearly, determined in conjunction with the NPTF. • The funding model is rational from both a customer and ISC perspective and is measurable in terms that are meaningful to the customer. • All operating expenses (business continuity, planning, support, security) are included in the funding model. • The funding model is demand-based. • The funding model should be simple in order to minimize overhead costs and to allow for ease of budgeting and understanding.

8. Planning Assumptions FY 2005-‘09 • 5 year phase-out of allocated monies ($2.317M) to occur from FY2003-07. • Telecommunications surplus, operating efficiencies and increased costs to offset allocated cost phase out. • Aggregate PennNet, Telecommunications and Video service rate increases projected at 0-2% maximum yearly, determined in conjunction with NPTF. • No rate increases for existing Telecommunications and Video services in ’05, except PVN. www.upenn.edu/computing/isc/networking/rates/ • FY2005-09 budget assumes Next Generation PennNet project averages $630K/year. Funding source is Telecommunications surplus. • N&T total expense budget increases from $22M in FY ’02 to only $23M in FY ’09, an average increase of about ½% per year. • Excellent bandwidth management techniques combined with a good Internet strategy have eased the pressure on developing tiered network connectivity options. However, this will continue to be explored and evaluated as the need/opportunity arises.

9. Planning Assumptions FY 2005-‘09 (Continued) • Security concerns are a high priority as various viruses and worms have reduced Penn’s productivity levels. These concerns constituted a significant portion of the FY ‘04 NPTF discussions. • ISC provided one-time funding to support these critical security issues in FY ‘04. • ISC received supplemental security funding for students from various sources. • Wireless is a strategic technology for Penn. • ISC provided one-time funding to support centralized wireless authentication. • Schools to provide MAC address to PennKey authentication conversion costs. • Public wireless and central pool classroom wireless IP addresses subsidized by the central service fee monies. FY ’05 estimate is 500-1000 subsidized IPs. • Wireless support costs for TSS are part of the service delivery.

10. Planning Assumptions FY 2005-‘09 (Continued) • Separate SLAs for College Houses and GreekNet for maintenance and bandwidth. • For FY2005 College House students will continue to be billed indirectly as part of housing fees for baseline PennNet and Penn Video Network services. • Building entrance and router equipment are on a four-year replacement cycle. • Closet electronics and network servers are on a three-year replacement cycle. • N&T will run a fiscally self-sufficient Internet2 GigaPoP (MAGPI). One component of our MAGPI strategy is to help lower Penn’s I2 costs.

11. Planning Assumptions FY 2005-‘09 (Continued) • The CSF will subsidize approximately 850 wired, public lab connections that have computers attached in FY2005. • The growth rate in IP addresses from the schools/centers is projected to increase by 1000 in FY2005 and 800 per year from FY 2006 – ’09 (ASC). • The growth rate in ISC managed wallplates from schools/centers is projected to increase by 600 per year from FY 2005 – ‘09. • To retain and recruit appropriate N&T IT staff, 3% compensation has been budgeted to include annual performance increases, equity increases, bonuses, promotions and reclassifications from FY2007 – ‘09. (2% in FY 2005 and FY 2006) • In FY2005 a 53% overhead rate was projected to cover costs of benefits, rent, training, computers, telephones, etc. • The NOC will not be physically staffed (7x24x365) through FY2009. It will continue to operate from 6 AM – 11 PM, M-F with the rest of the week covered by technical staff on beepers.

12. Agenda Setting Operational Initiatives • Operational Efficiencies • New LD and Internet contracts • Staff and contractor changes • Wireless Cost Analysis • Electronics Upgrade • Building to core connections • Building backbone connections • Specialized Networking Needs • Fast Ethernet Pricing • Gigabit Ethernet Pricing

13. Agenda Setting Strategic Initiatives • PennKey – ongoing ownership and funding • On-line Directory • PennCommunity • LDAP • Authorization • Voice Strategy • Verizon Contract • Aging Infrastructure • Cellular Programs / Signal reception • VoIP / Facilities preparation (wires/electric/closets) • Integrated Communications • Next Generation PennNet Briefing • NAPs • NAP Links • Building redundancy • 10 Gig Routers • Differential Charging • New Student Services for FY ’06?

14. Agenda Setting Informational Sessions • Video Strategy • Groupware/ Collaboration Tools • RF ID • Business Continuity / DR Planning • Network Management • Overview of Concord Network Heath Reports • Spyware • Grid Computing • Ideas on old wire removal

15. Agenda Setting Security Initiatives • Vulnerability Scanning • Firewalls • Group • Personal • ICF • Port blocking standards, policies and procedures • Netflow Intrusion/Detection • Wired Authentication / 802.1X • Authenticated Jacks

16. Customer Service • Show total networking cost by school/center for multiple years • Show chart of IPs used by school/center • Assist schools/centers in business continuity/ DR planning and reports for Internal Audit • Are lower costs possible for bulk activations? • Improve communications with computing directors when major network connectivity is down • Better two–way communications with customers • Short and long term computing plans and strategies