• Created by Unknown User (jwerle), last modified by Unknown User (rstout) on Dec 03, 2009

2009 Fall MM - K20 Advisory Committee Business Meeting Agenda

Monday, October 5, 2009
1:00-4:00pm
Hyatt Regency San Antonio
Nueces/Frio Meeting Room
San Antonio, TX

Attending

Denise Atkinson-Shorey, EagleNet, CO
Kim Breuninger, CCIU, PA
Ruth Blankenbaker, CILC, OH
Tim Boundy, JANET, UK
Bob Collie ENA, TN
Jeff Custard, FRGP/UCAR, CO
Louis Fox, Internet2 K20 Initiative
Jeff Harrington, NYSERnet, NY
Larry Gallery, NYSERNet, NY
Eric Jansson, NITLE, TX
Gerri Maglia, TETN, TX
Brian Miller, KanREN, KS
Kim Owen, NDSU, ND
Tim Poe, MCNC, NCREN, NC
Linda Roos, Internet2, MI
Rob Rothfarb, The Exploratorium, CA
Jason Russell, MERIT, MI,
Emilie Stawiarski, Internet2, MI
Heather Well, TIES, MN
Carol Willis, TETN, TX
Ann Zimmerman, OSC-net

Notes

1:00-1:20pm Welcome/Introductions

  • Louis: Thanks to participants for attending. My day job is at Duke University (20 years at the University of Washington). I'm commuting from Montana. The agenda today is full and typically we have twice as many people so this is a very intimate group. Carol is the chair of our Executive Group — that group and the Program Group have done a phenomenal job in planning this meeting.

The agenda:

  • Elwood will talk about Merit's technical model that Merit has. Think about pricing and how we move into a world where bandwidth is no longer a constraint.
  • We have a report on the K20 middleware effort in North Carolina.
  • Rob will talk about with what's up at the Exploratorium
  • Communications plan and Lauren Rotman, Internet2's Director of Communications. How do we reach out to our 70,000 institution strong community.
  • Well talk about Stimulus initiative - Susan Estrada will talk about catalyst@edu
    • Is there some way that the k-20 group would want to engage together and have an impact at the national level? Maybe the landscape is covered and maybe we have no need to do anything. If we could leverage the expertise in just this room, we should do that.
  • Like to talk about Mega Conference effort and who would like to sign on.
  • Linda Roos will speak on the changes in membership categories for Internet2.

Linda: I would be happy to talk to you afterwards or arrange a call with colleagues - whatever you might need. Generally there is no SEGP fee changes under the new membership structure and things will work pretty much the same. If an institution fits the criteria for a Level 3 or Level 4, you may choose to do that. There's information at:

http://www.internet2.edu/membership/membership_structure.cfm

  • There is a requirement that Level 1 and Level 2, high research institutions previously sponsored, must become members as of January 2010. There are about 14 of these and the fee will transition over a 3-year period. This is the only exception for the SEGP program. Internet2 is happy to talk about how to transition these institutions to pay for whole fee.
  • There are 4 new levels and only 1 or 2 can sponsor other institutions.

Question: If they are a member, they must remain a member and can't go to be a SEGP? Seems like a double standard for members vs SEGPs just joining.

Linda: The Carnegie Classification System will set their level of membership.

Ann: If a school was a Level 1 but really is now a Level 3, they can move but they still must stay as a member instead of being a SEGP?

Linda: Yes. I am happy to answer any questions and you can send me an email at lroos@internet2.edu

Louis: So once a member, always a member.

1:30-1:45pm Merit's new technical model (unlimited bandwidth pricing by institution size not bitrate used) [slides]

Speaker(s): Elwood Downing ejd@merit.edu Director of Member Services  www.merit.edu

Session Abstract: Proposed Merit model for implementation next year whereby affiliate members connected at the GIG level and potentially at the 100 megabit level could get unlimited internet and Internet2 access for a standard price.   Merit is working on their financial blueprint to support this unlimited bandwidth model. Elwood will review this model and all considerations while developing the final offering.  The goal is to offer Higher Education the availability of unlimited bandwidth to enhance education and research.

  • A new connection model will be rolled out: Unlimited Bandwidth "All-You-Can-Eat"
  • We have 43 members connected to us optically. Out of this we're trying to continue to be a differentiator in how we provide service. We found bandwidth kind of limits what our members can do on the education side.
  • We currently have two models: governing members and affiliate members.
  • Governing members get the "all you can eat" with a 1 gig or 10 gig connection. Mainly in Michigan the three main universities are connected by a 10 gig connection: Wayne State, UofM, Michigan State, and now Grand Valley.
  • We are connected through Cleveland all the way to Chicago. We are going to provide provision point-to-point for emergencies. Right now we do that but it's still considered part of our bandwidth. You would pay a flat fee to get this connection. Do you find that as a challenge within your university? Michigan is having some major problems with the IT, mainly getting them to understand the network they have. The state has two fiber connections with us as well. We are meeting with them to find out their needs .
  • We believe this is a differentiator for Merit but also for our educators. We want to help push people in the right direction. Merit is 10% higher than the commercial providers in Michigan. Used to be 40-50% over. In some areas we're very competitive but in other areas we run higher. Our CEO, Don Welch, is nervous that we're giving it away - like how are we going to pay for operational costs? Libraries pay one connection fee and we aggregate the bandwidth together for the little libraries under the one library system.

For example:

  • (Demonstrating)Two maps on the back - the middle mile and last mile - we now have fiber across the Mackinaw Bridge. Upper Peninsula is well connected but the middle of Michigan and upwards are not connected.
  • We've met with State government several times and our application looks good so we are looking to get BTOP at $43mil. I hope to have the analysis done in November and December. Would be happy to share the pricing model with you — it will go into effect July 2010.
  • Some of the models are based on size, based on # students, on staff and this would not allow us to offer it to all our members. It works good with our 12 main members but not with our affiliate members.
  • Elwood's model is based on operational cost - portion of backbone infrastructure, equipment refresh, etc.
  • The Nanog Conference is Oct 19th in Dearborn, MI - more is being spent on private networks. We have a total of 8 gigs of traffic and 2 gigs of that is Internet traffic. This model will work for all our member and affiliate members.
  • Merit now has a portfolio of revenue that they need: it's less and less bout the network and more about the services that you can use the network for. That 's where we're seeing more of our revenue coming in — services.
  • A portion of the network costs will have a certain amount of services. Our hope is to convince members to let go of their maintenance contracts and let Merit do it.
  • We found an 11% increase in revenue because most of our members were already connected to Merit and just took more bandwidth. We've been lowering our prices each year. We just lowered our rates 10% and saw a 5% increase in revenue. This year we lowered it 3% and saw an increase of 8% in revenue.

Carol Willis: if you can make it work, good for you. We're dealing with it in Texas about size - we have a fee based on the number of students. There are four K-12 student for every higher ed student and the need for bandwidth is not there for the K-12.

Ann Zimmerman: If you get spikes in usage it may affect the university.

Elwood: With the % of increase that is used, only 5% would cause an increase in usage. We have a 10 gig connection for that as well. We have AT&T and you have Quest.

Tim Boundy: Do you bundle your services?

Elwood: We bundle our IP service in to the dedication service but not the video. You subscribe to that separate. But if you're a dedicated member you do get a discount.

Tomorrow afternoon Merit will have a presentation on how they almost didn't survive after 2000 and how they made changes in order to survive.

1:50 - 2:20pm K20 Middleware Case Study: NC Pilot project [slides]

Speaker(s): Tim Poe (tpoe@mcnc.org), Sr. Collaborative Technologist, MCNC of North Carolina (www.mcnc.org)

Session Abstract: Tim will discuss the recent NCTrust K-20 Federation Pilot which used the UC Trust model and InCommon to explore opportunities to implement federated identity management in K-20 educational organizations across North Carolina*.*

NOTES:

Tim Poe, senior collaborative technologist: Go to the MUSE sight and see North Carolina with the up-to-date slides of their presentation.
In NC we have:
• 115 school districts
• All 115 LEAs connected but not all schools in NC are connected.
• 7 of the 11 Community Colleges are connected and in the next 3 years we will be bringing in the remaining Community Colleges. Many challenges many of which are identity management -
• Virtual Computing Lab at NC state - www.vcl.ncsu.edu can set up different profiles of different use of software that's being used. You can view all the authentication options on this site and use the NC Trust Federation or the InCommon Federation. You can find all of them in InCommon or just the NC Trust through the vcl

  • It goes back to the identity management at my organization. It recognizes the individual and then brings them back to his organization. I'm not going to need a specific vcl password - I'm using my local user name and password granted by my local organization.

Tim: We kicked off in the Fall 2007 and the thing that took us longer is the federated management project but we've made some progress. We have Chapel Hill, State, And Duke — two Community Colleges, two K-12s, NC Department Of Public Instruction, NC Live which is a co-op of e-journals and PBS and then MCNC. It took a lot of work to get there - -this represents a small portion in North Carolina.

  • What we wanted to do was to put together a proof of concept that would allow us to use this across K-20. One of the next steps will be to provide a formal set of recommendations for government funding, etc. so we can move beyond the planning. Will we get Race to the Top funding? We're not sure, but it would be one way to fund K-12 infrastructure.
  • We worked closely with InCommon and decided to use InCommon for this and looked at the Texas federated model - trust federation. Ultimately we felt we would go with InCommon because of administrative level and legal issues and it was easier to go that route instead of having to develop it all ourselves. We didn't have the time and resources to do it ourselves. We decided Internet2 could provide this.
  • We were able to obtain some funding through our organization so we could sponsor some folks to help them find the funds to join. If they sign an MOU then we will fund it for the first year and it was helpful in the process. We limited the number of service providers to 2 to 3 and it was harder to find than the identity providers. The service providers dragged on a little bit — but we're working with Internte2 on this. There were no K-12 members and we told them we needed to have K-12s in the federation and John Krienke and others allowed it and NC has the first two Community Colleges in the federation. The legal counsel for each of these organizations was a little cumbersome and once one signed on, the other state colleges joined because they had a referral to the original one that joined. Made it a lot easier.
  • Technology challenges - there just wasn't the level of technical expertise in that area. Maybe only 2 tech people available and they don't have the level of expertise. We went out and helped them with some pre-work and got them set-up.
  • Economic situation was a challenge - not so much the money but the time. 2-3 people at an institution are spread thin and we have been able to hook with others in the state to help out.
  • Current status: We have our IVPs, we have our WAYF and we have VCL in place and now have NC Live which means Ken Burns' videos will be available on the Civil War.
  • In terms of lessons learned: a lot of the application process and getting various attorneys to jump through hoops - but it was well worth it ! We didn't have a full knowledge of what it was going to take but we have the best identity management people in the State (from Duke, Chapel Hill, Nc State) and you never have enough time.
    • We hope to have more K-12 participants in InCommon, get additional Community College participate, capture K-12 needs and potential SP.
    • We have a K-12 roadmap and are getting them to think that they can work together.
    • We have 115 school districts thinking separately about all their purchases so we're trying to get them to work together collectively and help with efforts for Race to the Top and other things.
    • We're looking to work with Google, Microsft Live@edu, Learning Object Repository, iTunes U authentication, FIZZ (a private YouTube for K-12 use), The Friday Institution, etc.

Challenges: Funding: Race To The Top will help out, parent access, Incommon agreement filled out

Next steps: How do we scale the K-20 pilot to a state-wide federation? The current model does not scale well.
InCommon Future Task Force may propose changes that will better accommodate our needs. How will the migration of Federal SPs into InCommon impact the need or the interest to join InCommon.

Tim Boundy: Who provides the IVP?

Tim Poe: 85% has some sort of identify management at their system level. About 15% have nothing to shibbolize. We're looking at a shared identity management system. We're looking for a stimulus funding source.

Larry Gallery - We're running into the issue of finalizing the legal documents. Indemnification is running rampant - no one wants to take on the responsibility for it. Some of our fees were over $20k just for the document. We're trying to create baselines but not having any luck at all.

Tim Poe: At the core of this it's not about the technology, ultimately it's about trust between these organizations. We have a separate NCID --coming from the state. Every adult in the state would have their own i.d. - that's great but you need an organization to manage it. Sometimes it takes months before a university realizes someone is not there and they still have access to everything.

  • Cost for school to join - MCNC is fitting the bill for it - Steve's time and Tim's time and the InCommon cost. We're trying to figure out how to work with InCommon with it. How does InCommon set up a model to work for everyone? We're just looking at a cost recovery model for our own costs right now.
  • We have vcl right now - utilizing shibboleth. MCLive is participating now. We picked the ones that "got it" and had the staff to support it. Right now I don't talk to anyone putting this together without talking about Shibboleth and federation usage in the future. Content providers are now thinking of this more often now.
  • Love to talk with anyone on this especially someone working on Race To The Top. If there are others in other states, I would love to catch up with you sometime during the conference.

Carol Willis: I've been coming to Internet2 for several years and we have conversations about opportunities to engage in K-20 Internet2 stuff. We all belong to different organizations but this particular group (K-20) "if we're going to do something" it seems to be the one that has national collaborative projects. You do belong to other groups but if sitting down and doing a collaborative project, we usually walk away doing something. MUSE was out of this group, Mega Conference Jr. , and the opportunity - there were 6 states received STEM grants and all 6 states are here in this room.

2:20 - 2:30pm - Break

2:30 - 2:50pm - Exploratorium Discussion

Speaker(s): Rob Rothfarb, All

Session Abstract: As a case study of how the K20 Initiative can work further with science centers and museums, discuss potential engagement opportunities that the Exploratorium/NOAA partnership could develop including the use of technologies such as multicast, video conferencing, and remote instrumentation.

Next couple conversations we're going to have — hopefully you can participate in K-20 activities.

Rob Rothfarb: We're having informal open discussions about some of the challenges and moving forward with some types of initiatives. I am sort of an emissary and I understand your point about collaborations. I want to be able to bring ideas back and also possibilities to this group for sharing content. It's complicated for a Science Center to engage with groups like this - what can be shared, facilitated by web sites and other networks, etc. in a partnership we're embarking on? We want to share information on motion networks and sensory projects and other virtual experiences - one of the things I experience at Internet2 meetings is the demonstration courses and the interactions with different funding agencies and what works and what is sustainable.

We want to have an open conversation. We're a science agency/museum that wants to work with you and learn about the challenges you have in the Internet2 community. How many are in a state that has a museum connected to Internet2. (About 6 hands went up.)

Denise Shorey: We run the gigapop and just got the Colorado SEGP going and I am involved in outreach. We have a group that might be interested in outreach although they haven't used Inernet2 yet.
Maglia right now is the outreach that utilizes Internet2 - they are in an infancy stage so I am not sure what they're doing. Tomorrow the session will be about video conferencing.

Louis: If looking across may sciences centers and museums, very few of them have limited multi-faceted....the preponderance of activity is in video conferencing. They have a repertoire and it's not necessarily about what's in the institution but the outreach. There are a handful of thought leaders out there and if we could find a few more, they might be poster children for what's possible for the K-20 community.

Gerri Maglia is a museum looking for content to bring into their institution.

Rob Rothfarb: We're reaching out to those institutions that are leveraging Internet2 - we're looking at the eclipse 2010 and hoping to do it in-house but may charge a fee for it. We're doing experiments working with Cenic to put content out in that channel to show the benefit of it. People who are receptive to that type of programming - people creating events in different locations.

Tim Boundy: We will be writing case studies to find out what museums need and if they are willing to join. Would love to share that about museums using high bandwidth.. (Rob would like to see results.)

Rob Rothfarb: What about zoos and aquariums? Do they have the same types of challenges in outreach because of their locations? One of the exciting things is the real-time display of underwater explorations. Exploratorium uses media on top of that and are offering an inquiry approach where people ask questions. Or data visualizations — anyone experience that?
I have resources for that - remote instrumentation in a pilot utilizing Internet2. For professional development or creating programs for scientists to come and have access to things remotely is a possibility.

Louis: Is most of the remote instrumentation happening as a partnership? It is intriguing thinking about science museums as aggregators in this community - to bring them together and it would be an incredible service to the community.

Carol Willis: Part of the issue is people and having the instrumentation and they want to share but are quiet about it because they don't want to be overwhelmed by "the nation." it's been interesting about HD - lot of schools are out there buying HD. We're finding the MCUs are the weak link right now. Jerry has worked trying to find applications other than video conferencing.

Gerri Maglia: We're using the video electron microscope — it will take a large grant funding source and maybe putting it in museums might be better suited to get it out to higher ed.

Rob Rothfarb: Seeing science in action and showing it to the audiences. If that was geographically separate — what if there was some aspect that they could do at a science center through remote instrumentation and have access to the mediators at the science center - that's the concept we're talking about.

Jeff Harrington: What we would like to have is more than just a video conference but that it's not a once or twice a year field trip but actually doing the science. Like comparing water samples from various areas of the country. To use resources from your organization — to make the communication more than just video — teacher sits on the side for 50 minutes but integrate it much more. And we struggled with this.

Larry Gallery: Maybe we should work with schools to find out what they need to be done. Students have to do galaxy mapping for example - Could the school contact Exploratorium rather than having Exploratorium contact them and saying this is when/what we're doing? If they came to K-20 and said this is what I need to get done and how can you help us?

Heather Wells: Teachers are very intimidated to do that.

We do a pilot - oh that's great, but how do you bring it out to the broader group? So now everyone is so focused on standard testing. We wrote the specs for the science testing, found a weakness, and then wrote how they can do it. We found the technical resources on how to do it and adding some remote instrumentation that they can manipulate a Mars land rover or surface of the moon trying to find water. Find out the gaps in the education and work backwards.

Louis: Certain investigators want a human shield from the rest of the world. Maybe that's NYSERnet or museums - there are Community Colleges out there and baccalaureate institutions that would benefit from the expertise and mediation and we have a tendency to focus only on the K-12 and should think of a broader audience.

Tim Boundy: To inspire these places, the idea is to have a travelling expedition - take it to them and give them a demo, give them something and inspire them on how to use it. Getting the idea out there, but ....

Tim Poe: The whole scalability - maybe rely on streaming and science is kind of conspicuously missing. It's amazing that we are looking at resources that might have 40 some states sign on to some sort of common standard course of study. Are you using iTunes at all?

Rob Rothfarb: We're using it through the education programs and some activity resources for home schoolers.
Time: iTunesU is only for degree granting institutions, but they now have Museum Of National History will be using Internet2 and having a free mechanism for sharing free information.

Rob Rothfarb: Enabling different types of exhibits so they can connect to them directly. Our data exhibitors don't think of exhibits as data sharing.

Gerri Maglia: Thinking about funding for remote instrumentation - if there was a group of us who had funding, there needs to be someone at the other end to utilize it. If we could find 4 or 5 across the country to fund this. Some colleges aren't doing it anymore because they've lost the funding.

Tim Poe: There are opportunities with STEM and the stimulus, etc.

Heather Wells: Have you thought about doing a conference at SC on Internet2? Walter was here last year to help with that. It is an area that we need to pursue.

2:50-3:10pm - K20 Initiative/Internet2 Communication plan

Speaker(s): Lauren Rotman, All

Session Abstract: Explore how the K20 Initiative and Internet2 can leverage existing efforts to get the appropriate messages out to our target audience.  A few quiding questions to start the conversation.  Ideally, we can identify individuals in the K20 community who would like to continue this discussion.

Lauren:

  • How we might develop a communications for the K-20 initiative. Informal brainstorming on how to advance the goals on a national level. I know there is a lot going on regionally but I'm hoping to learn from you in your region to leverage some of the things you do to bring it up to a national strategy.
  • What are the goals of plan? Of the initiative itself and I would love your input.
  • What are the goals over the next six months?
  • Who is the target audience; students, teachers, end users themselves, state officials, etc. ?
  • So I'm asking the question to the group - who are some of our target audiences?

Tim Poe: What are some of the common standards? Also being able to gather metrics and data to formally access it and begin to use the resources effectively. How can we start to deliver that broadly across the country and these are a few of the opportunities to meet with folks across the country. It would be very exciting to see how this group could do that - are there opportunities for increased efficiencies and is there stimulus money we could use?

Lauren: Who would be the target audience - who would you communicate that to?

Tim Poe: Federal government, state government - all as stakeholders. K-12 districts (you're looking at teacher education programs) and looking at higher ed as well.

Lauren: What we struggle with is that this is such a broad reaching program. How do we prioritize what we want to communicate with. There is so much that goes into this program and we want to publicize it but we have to be strategic about how we publicize it. Are there people on staff doing commujnications? Is there a sub-committee that does this? I do a google search every morning and find a ton of K-20 stuff being done but would like to be able to communicate this cohesively.

Carol Willis: We all, in our states, work to promote Internet2 because we spend a lot of time and effort to bring Internet2 to the community. The poeple who have this message are more on the technical side than the content side. Kentucky hired someone specifically on how to promote Internet2 in the state and now they're not funding it. Gerri also does that in Texas. No one has found that magic formula to find that common word to make it work in the state. I was disappointed that when a sub-committee at the senate met, they had a discussion about broad band in education and they never even mentioned Internet2. That's a good place to start, if there is ever the FCC.

Lauren: So I hear one area is that you want to get in front of federal policy makers.

Larry Poe: Not only policy makers but federal agencies - they have no clue there is Internet2.

Lauren: We've been trying to do communications thru ARRA.

Larry Gallery: RACCP program is the only one in which Internet2 is mentioned.

Lauren: One of the staffers mentioned that they had seen a demo at the Library of Congress and it sparked their idea on using Internet2. How to promote distance learning, tele-health as well.

Larry Poe: At the spring meeting they used to do demos "Highway One" — always at the spring meeting and always bring your congressman. The heart demo and mapping with the pen.

Louis: When supercomputing was in Baltimore, we were able to get funding from various agencies and got demos that were more education-focused and SC is demo-driven science and it was the perfect forum to do that in. MLS has been good about including Internet2 in their RFPs but that focuses on the library institutions. Ken and I started going to the Dept of Education - the whole alphabet soup in DC - There is turn over and you have to commit to do this on an ongoing way. We only have so much time and how can we be more strategic and in a meaningful way.

Jeremiah Frink: One thing is keeping that sustainability. Not just the demos where you see the potential but where you have examples that are done on a state-wide basis.

Lauren: Schools, hospitals, libraries - James (Werle) and I worked together to pool some of the events.

Jeremiah Frink: Media clips are always good.

James Werle: Before beginning the "how are we going to do this?" conversation let's think about our goals.   If we could find 3 or 4 high level communication objectives then engage Lauren on how to execute them.

Lauren: Pick a few goals to start with, we could then go on from there. What are our goals in the next 6 months? Three top goals but it does not mean the rest of the goals should go away. What are the key time lines around those goals - budget times and when to influence them. We need to identify the goals first and then build the communication plans around that.

James Were: Does that sound reasonable to the group? (yes, head nodding) Do we have any people who want to help define the goals and working on executing the communication strategy?
Larry, Wells, Myron, Ann Zimmerman, Kim O and B, Denise, Jeremiah, Jeff Harrington volunteered.

Tim Poe: On the federal site - each state assignment. Is there an opportunity to communicate with them around the state. It's not always the case that the contact is correct on the web site. Should check it out.
www.ed.gov/programs/edtech/contacts.html

Louis: Call it Phase I "low hanging fruit."

3:00-4:00pm - SEGP Stimulus Activities  [slides]

Speaker(s): Louis Fox, Susan Estrada, All

Session Abstract: Each SEGP will have an opportunity to outline their Broadband Stimulus activities to date and discuss strategies moving forward.  Susan Estrada will provide an overview of the Catalyst@EDU project.

NOTES:

Susan Estrada, Aldea Communications: We don't have any money yet Catalyst @edu is a concept developed as a result of some meetings at the Wash DC Internet2 spring meeting in April. We should have some sort of national thrust for the NTIA and RUS funds that are available. Our goal is to focus on a nation-wide cooperation and the various opportunities to collaborate on an adoption proposal that is sustainable.

The targets for anchor institution adoption:
• 10 to 100 gigabits for research in higher ed and hospitals
• 1 to 10 gigabits for non-research higher education institution
• 20 megabits to 10 gigabits for two year education institution and central libraries
• At least 100 megabits for elementary and secondary schools, branch libraries, health clinics

The Steering Committee is: ACUTA, Internet2, NLR, and The Quilt. They committed to being part of the catalyst@edu ACUTA is part of this - has higher ed individuals - an individual membership group.
Quilt is advanced regional networks.

This group has tentacles in many different communities.
The Steering Committee is in charge of coming up with what we're going to do. They will mange the big picture, the focus of the organization. There is one particular thing about the adoption proposal - to collect a variety of experts in this proposal and pay them to be of service to this group.

Public Awarenss Campaign - grassroots style agency to work with us for 18 months to analyze the adoption at various institutions. Aldea Communications will be the conductor on how to get this done. Any number of organizations can join this and move this information forward to the bigger picture. 100/50 challenge is to get vendors to give us 100 gb for $50 a month.
Leadership core will be hosted by www.firstcorps.org

Our real focus here is to raise awareness and adoption to the funded community.
Our Public Awareness Audience - We want the people who are writing the checks for the connections to make them understand that we need 100 megabits at a cheaper price than it is now and we need something bigger and better and faster than the rest of the country.

Round 2 proposals --- We offered in this round (one taker from Maine) to get staff to partake in this. Maine will get two people to do this for three years. In round two we're looking for someone to get money to support

www.educatalyst.org
catalyst@internet2.edu

Susan: If we win what should we do for you?

Carol: Get the message out.

Larry Poe: If that first domino goes down, there may be more vendors who go down.

Susan: I've been doing broadband for 10 years and it's frustrating to hear smart people not think we need more.

Louis: It's frustrating to hear people say "why do I need more than T-1.?" We have lots and lots of information about people and what they do when they have access to broadband. I agree with Carol on getting the message out. One can imagine $50 for paying for capacity - what about the northwest who has no capacity?

Susan: In Colorado (who was a partner in this proposal) if they win and Maine wins, we will track what they're doing and we can see what they're doing in some of these rural areas. How can you get the dollars? And it's shocking how much they're paying per megabit. We're going to look at the factors that matter, and identify those factors and look at the problems for adoption. In rural areas it's just expensive to get stuff out there in the first place but once we have some successes in that area - there will be a number of good things to communicate and get the message out there.

Louis: The stimulus has a lot of language about partnership with other parts of the Recovery Act. Working with the highway depts. (both state and county and so on) that there is so much money in building that - especially in the west but no one is putting in conduit while they're tearing up the road.

Susan: One of the things we had in our original was one of the projects permitting a database clearing house so you could take a few municipalities and coordinating road building. Providers would know that the street is being torn up. Cal Tran does have a permitting website so you could track what they're up to. Those are the kinds of things that aren't hard to do - but if we're working on a national basis it can make a huge difference in broadcasting that.

Carol: I like the idea of getting a focus on using broadband. How do you get people to change at how they think about the internet? I think that's a great approach. With the RONs you get a lot of leverage going through them. I was at a meeting with a lot of vendors and it was business as usual - the best price I've heard for a school for 100 mg is $700 a month and that's in a metropolitan area.

Susan: If we get all our heads wrapped around this together.... if you look at the groups participating in it-- you have the market power to make the changes.

Larry Poe: Any role for the quilt in this?

Susan: The Quilt has a number of groups that sort of do some of this stuff. So we may give them some specific things to do or maybe they'll honcho some of these. ACUTA wants to do some of this. NLR will have a more obvious role to this. We want to leverage this as much as we can.

Larry: ISPs are moving toward new billing. There is a divergence going forth rather than convergence. With that disconnect we're not going to get the attention of the ISPs.

Susan: We hope to have the PR smarts to get it out to the people. If we get funding, then we have 3 years to make a difference. We may not get where we want to be, but we might change the minds of a lot of people.

Louis: We hope you get funded.

Carol: Does anyone want to share what's happening in their state with stimulus? Has anyone had to participate in an application? (- about 10 raised hands) Anyone have a story to share with the group?

Dennis: Colorado NSF ARI $178 mil infrastructure for middle mile community anchor.

Elwood: Middle mile application - NTIA sent some to the state and we had to get it into the state last Wed. We partnered with for-profits to help get service out to the homes and businesses. We plan to help them in rural areas. 73% of Michigan is rural.

Tim Poe: We have $28mil — We're rated at the top of the list in North Carolina. Middle mile and private partnership. We're waiting for the final approval for the Race To The Top — lots of opportunity to support them with technology. We're looking at that to support that.

Larry Gallery: ARI grant on our own and partnered with 2-3 others - it's all middle mile.

Sherilyn Evans (from CENIC): Broadband infrastructure - some of it was middle mile and some last mile.

Louis: We did middle mile (Washington) with anchor tenants - the oddest coalition you could imagine - about $100mil. 5 are going back for Round Two.

Carol: Good thing is it's on the national agenda.

Heather Wells: $2mil middle mile by one of the co-ops for 20,000 residents to get.

Louis: We've done a handful of workshops to connecting minority served communities. I find the commerce folks really interested in it. It's about 10% higher ed in the United States. We did one with ACU and had 100 reps from institutions. Did one in the southwest Hispanic colleges and one with black colleges. James & I got requests for information - especially from Community Colleges. Collectively we may be able to contribute with this community - demos, white papers, or groups like Aldea (Susan's) - It's worth pursuing another conversation on this. Carol & I talked about this - it may be worth a face-to-face meeting if folks want to work on this. We will surface this on one of our phone calls.

Ruthie Blankenbaker: The eye opener was six districts who didn't want this coming into their communities - wanted no part of it. Couldn't get community members to support it because they didn't want it coming into their communities.

Louis: Don't forget to do the survey on-line to tell us what you liked in this meeting -

(A thought from Emilie: if you want to reach the state leaders, why not get on the agenda for the "Annual Governor's meetings" or each state has an annual "mayor's meeting." Make a proposal deep enough that it would get you on the meeting agenda and bring attention to Internet2.) Ruthie told me to put this in the meeting notes.

  • No labels