The Internet2 HNI Interest Group for Technology
Co-Chair: Eric Dean, CTO of the Ventura Group and part of the VA team
Co-Chair: Ron Frazier, Veterans Affairs Internet2 Transition Office and Help Desk
Description:
Issues identified below are combined into a single group that addresses the technical issues, including Quality of Service and Standards. This group will build a number of relationships with Regional Networks, Internet2 Network staff as well as the HHS' Healthcare information Technology Standards Panel (HITSP) and others. This group has the challenging mandate of helping the Participants to be successful in meeting their goals by using the technology necessary and appropriate and not losing sight of these goals because of the technical challenges.
Issues:
- IPv6
- Bandwidth
- Life Cycle
- Peering Arrangement
- Alternative approach to Networks
- QoS
- Resiliency
- Standards and Approaches
Participants:
Ben Colley
Robert Duncan
Wes Crum
Paul Roberts
John Killebrew
Denis Walsh
Rich Greenfield
Larry Gallery
Call Recordings
Internet2 Staff Liaison
Linda Roos
6 Comments
edeanventura@idp.protectnetwork.org
<!-- /* Font Definitions */ @font-face
@font-face
/* Style Definitions */ p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
span.apple-style-span
.MsoChpDefault
@page Section1
div.Section1
-->
The agenda for the HNI/ FCC Technical Subgroup Call Friday 11/7 at 11am call was:
1. Welcome and Introductions - There were approximately 12 people on the call.
2. Website/collaboration - To improve communications amongst the group Eric suggested to have a web based tool or Wiki-based site available (in addition to the calls and emails that are used to share information)
Greg from Internet2 offered to have a section created for the Technical Committee available on the Internet2 web site.
3. SLAs - Rich Greenfield from Alaska suggested we share SLA's amongst us so that we can improve them for future submissions. Tom from Nortel offered to send Eric some of the SLA's he has (Silver, Bronze, Gold). John Kilabrew from North Carolina is waiting for responses to his RFP and is willing to share what he has. Best practices would be helpful to have. Sharing successful SLA's and what you were able to negotiate will help others.
4. Status of technical plans - Inventory - Find out any outstanding items
5. Open floor - discussed much of the above.
6. New Action item review - It was mentioned on the 11:00am call to use info@internet2.edu to make inquiries about the technical committee however on the 1:00pm HNI call it was recommended that we use HNI@Internet2.edu.
7. Determine dates and times for future calls - Once a month
Ron
edeanventura@idp.protectnetwork.org
<!-- /* Font Definitions */ @font-face
@font-face
@font-face
/* Style Definitions */ p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
p.MsoNoSpacing, li.MsoNoSpacing, div.MsoNoSpacing
.MsoChpDefault
@page Section1
div.Section1
/* List Definitions */ @list l0
@list l0:level1
@list l0:level2
@list l0:level3
ol
ul
-->
Call Notes
Technical Subgroup
Internet2 FCC Rural Health Interest Group
5.16.2008
The call was attended by about 25 people and a good lively discussion took place. Not the least of which was the spotting of the first snow covered Robin of the season in Anchorage, Alaska.
The meeting identified a number of things that need to be done.
- IPv6. It was strongly recommended that this specification be included in every proposal submitted to USAC. The rationale is that both the address capabilities and the additional security functionality will be needed (perhaps not day 1) by the Participants. It was noted that many vendors now say they have IPv6 but their offerings are inconsistent and may be questionable.
o Action
§ Michael Lambert of 3Rocks Network is the co-chair of the Internet2 IPv6 working group and he will work with Mike McGill to identify language that can be included in proposals that are submitted to USAC
§ The language will be made available on the Internet2 website and sent to this group
§ It was noted that Internet2 regularly conducts IPv6 workshops. Information about these workshops will be made known to this community as it is available.
- Connecting to Internet2 is often assumed and vendors may be telling Participants that they can do it without an understanding of how it is to be accomplished.
o Action
§ Steve Wallace and Mike McGill will identify language that details how the connection to Internet2 is accomplished and how this is accomplished with Regional Networks.
§ This information and language will be made available to this group and the Participant community via the website and directly mailed to this group.
- Frank Cantarelli of Ciena noted that it is often difficult to consistently determine bandwidth requirements consistently. Asking a few simple and consistent questions would be very beneficial to making these determinations. It was pointed out that the process of making these determinations is underway right now and standard questions would be very beneficial.
o Action
§ Frank Cantarelli will draft questions that can be used to help make these determinations.
§ These questions will be vetted by a small group and sent to this group for further consideration and editing if necessary.
§ The questions will then be posted on the Internet2 website and sent directly to the members of this group.
This group agreed to meet every other Friday at 1pm EDT and an announcement of the next meeting will be sent prior to that call.
edeanventura@idp.protectnetwork.org
Call Notes
Technical Subgroup
Internet2 FCC Rural Health Interest Group
5.30.2008
Steve Wallace of Internet2 presented and discussed his proposed language for the RFPs to incorporate the connection to Internet2. The proposed language is:
"Provide an Internet2 Network connection that enables full IP connectivity through the Internet2 backbone network to all Internet2-connected members, Internet2-connected international networks, Internet2-connected Federal Network (e.g., ESnet, DREN, etc), and other Internet2-connected national research and education networks."
It is recommended that this language be incorporated into all proposals.
Frank Cantarelli of Ciena has proposed 4 areas for survey questions to determine technical requirements.
The 4 Subject Topics are:
- How to define a network Architecture that supports your requirements.
- How to define your network requirements.
- How to calculate bandwidth needs to meet site and network
Requirements
- How much data does each of the applications/service generate and what
is the bandwidth they require for transmission?
Rebecca Madison of Alaska has recommended some questions and some resources that might be useful:
1. How many employees in your organization?
2. How many healthcare providers?
3. How many total computers on your current network?
4. What applications would you be using outside of your existing network? (i.e. telehealth, radiology images, data only, videoconferencing, VoIP,etc.)
5. How many users on each application?
Here are some resources: http://sunsite.uakom.sk/sunworldonline/swol-09-1997/swol-09-unix.html http://www.microsoft.com/technet/prodtechnol/windows2000serv/reskit/deploy/dgbe_sec_orhf.mspx?mfr=true http://www.windowsitlibrary.com/Content/386/04/4.html
Michael Lambert of 3Rox described his efforts to identify language to incorporate IPv6 into the RFPs. Steve Pirzchalski of the Department of Veterans Affairs said that he believes that the VA has such language and will help us to find it.
Larry Flournoy then described legislation introduced in South Carolina that would prohibit the South Carolina Light Rail from carrying any traffic that may compete with commercial providers and expressly prohibits K-12 traffic.
edeanventura@idp.protectnetwork.org
Call Notes
Technical Subgroup
Internet2 FCC Rural Health Interest Group
6.13.2008
Steve Wallace of Internet2 was asked again to go over the proposed language for the RFPs to incorporate the connection to Internet2. The proposed language is:
"Provide an Internet2 Network connection that enables full IP connectivity through the Internet2 backbone network to all Internet2-connected members, Internet2-connected international networks, Internet2-connected Federal Network (e.g., ESnet, DREN, etc), and other Internet2-connected national research and education networks."
It is recommended that this language be incorporated into all proposals.
Frank Cantarelli of Ciena areas for survey questions to determine technical requirements are still relevant but it is more difficult than anticipated to find exemplary questions.
The 4 Subject Topics are:
- How to define a network Architecture that supports your requirements.
- How to define your network requirements.
- How to calculate bandwidth needs to meet site and network
Requirements
- How much data does each of the applications/service generate and what
is the bandwidth they require for transmission?
Rebecca Madison of Alaska recommended some questions and some resources that might be useful:
1. How many employees in your organization?
2. How many healthcare providers?
3. How many total computers on your current network?
4. What applications would you be using outside of your existing network? (i.e. telehealth, radiology images, data only, videoconferencing, VoIP,etc.)
5. How many users on each application?
Frank indicated that he would have sample questions for discussion at the next meeting.
The IPv6 RFI from the Department of Veterans Affairs was distributed and discussed. The RFI is extensive and Michael Lambert of 3Rox will lead the effort to cull and identify language that we can use.
Larry Flournoy then described legislation introduced in South Carolina that would prohibit the South Carolina Light Rail from carrying any traffic that may compete with commercial providers and expressly prohibits K-12 traffic.
Helmut Orthner of the University of Alabama brought up the need to have high quality of service. The discussion initially focused on MPLS as a protocol and evolved to a discussion of quality of service. He asked for examples of proposals which might serve as models.
The discussion of a mutual review of exemplary proposals resulted in a decision to focus on specific areas of interest that can be used in proposals. It was concluded that two of the areas that are of immediate interest are IPv6 and Quality of Service (QoS). Michal Lambert will lead up the development of IPv6 language and Helmut Orthner will lead up the QoS language. Both will be discussed by the full group at the next meeting.
edeanventura@idp.protectnetwork.org
December 12, 2008
HNI Technical Group Call Notes for 12/12/08
There were approximately 6-7 people on the call.
Web Site Collaboration
Eric Dean led the meeting and provided the Website/collaboration as was listed in the agenda:
--- https://spaces.at.internet2.edu/display/I2HNI/Technology
SLAs
Dave Kirby from the North Carolina Tele-health Network (NCTN) spoke about how the area in his part of the country is prone to many natural disasters; floods, hurricanes, and tornadoes and that he would like to see a higher availability and support for communications and video for Tele-health to ensure stability. The network is composed of public health agencies & clinics where they need much more availability then they have now, half of the sites can be down from once a day or once a month. The ability to engage in ordinary business is limited. The state (NC Dept of Public Health) is rolling out an electronic health record system to 164 sites. All agencies have a key role in augmenting services during emergencies.
Availability and affordability - A well hardened network is needed in NC.
An 'SLA Template' was mentioned where it could include a superset of language providing specific things that people want or need, e.g. 'availability of services'
Internet-2 does not offer SLA's on response times, up-time, QOS - not a mandate from the FCC. This is a challenge for end-to-end up time needs. How can we bring together or acquire guaranteeing end-to-end up times for regional networks through I2 connections and the back to regional networks? There are expectations when paying ISPs via SLA's when packet losses occur, etc. There are no SLA's between participants of I2, Telco's, etc.
I2 backbone performance is not the concern although a national disaster could have a major impact during winter breaks at the Universities where many of the I2 PoPs exist. Explicit QOS levels and reliability is needed.
At the regional networks is where we can look at differentiating services (DiffServ). Applications need to be looked at - what apps will be used / supported providing end-to-end DiffServ? End-to-end DiffServ will eventually need to come to fruition.
Unified interoperable SLA's - QOS - prioritize traffic, bandwidth issues need to be addressed.
Status of technical Plans
In the North Carolina example, the 1st phase will drive the technical decisions. Most sites will have dual-homed wired line connections and wireless (satellite) - 70% of folks said they expected to be up and running as a result of a natural disaster.
It was mentioned that satellite or backup solution opportunities should be explored.
In San Francisco, fog is always a concern. CA has 750 RHCPP sites - the Public Utility Commission - mapping locations near major highways where fiber is run.
New Action item review
Prioritization of Voice and Data is a topic of future discussions.
Next meeting will be after the holidays.
Ron
HNI Technical Committee Notes from January 9, 2009
1) Welcome and Introductions - Participants on call were: Tom Zawistowski (sp?) (Nortel), Dave Porkoney (Florida Lambda Rail- FLR), Eric Dean, Nate Bradley & Ron Frazier (VA Internet2 Support Team).
2) Website/collaboration - We do not have write access at this time but will continue to post notes in the comments section. Use the following link to access notes from previous meetings:
--- https://spaces.at.internet2.edu/display/I2HNI/Technology
3) Review:
- SLAs with Internet2 - Internet2 is putting together end to end SLA agreements so that people can expect QOS, performance, etc.
- Q. - Do SLA's reach out to Regional Connectors?
- A. - FLR calls them Service Level Understandings. FLR is solely owned. They describe to their customers how they are configured. If someone wants an SLA, FLR can provide the provisioning needed to meet the customers' needs. It was mentioned that someone in North Carolina has some form of SLA with their carrier.
- Q. Will SLA's be extended to Internet2 membership?
- Internet2 is supposedly addressing this issue.
- Satellite Backup - Where it is most needed, e.g., North Carolina, Florida, Tornado Alleyand other locations that are repeatedly hit with hurricanes, floods, etc. When land-line / terrestrial circuits for health care networks are unavailable due to these type emergencies or disasters, VSAT systems or satellite backup systems are critical to continued and successful health care operations.
- Consideration when going with VSAT backup solutions - Each state's readiness centers collectively reserve satellite bandwidth for their needs and when natural disasters occur there would be contention for bandwidth. Bandwidth can be reserved in some cases with vendors for a cost.
- Uses of portable VSAT units could be used in the HNI arena, e.g. the Air Force uses them as well as many other agencies, FEMA, FBI, etc.
- Prioritization - Applications dependent - Inventory the applications that are used over the Rural Health Network and what will be sustained to answer questions like QOS requirements. Tom (Nortel) mentioned that L3 put on a presentation at the last Internet2 Conference that showed an application that would fit.
4) Status of Technical Plans - We need to get verbiage from proposals that are satisfactory or approved. There is IPv6 verbiage available on the Internet2 web site.
5) Open Floor - We should pay attention to the reformation of the FCC.
6) New Action items -
- Inventory of HNI applications needs to take place
- More discussion on satellite backup solutions needs to take place
7) Determine dates and times for any future calls
- Next call is scheduled for February 6th @ 11:00am (EST)