SERENATE Final Session Structure

1
SERENATEFinal Session Structure

• Chair Ian Butterworth

2
Overall

• General Discussion (14.00-14.45)
• Give people a chance to pass to everyone here
  what they regard as key messages for the SERENATE
  project
• Plans for follow-up actions (14.45-14.55)
• Coming workshops
• Are there any issues which specific people (or
  one or more NRENs) would agree to address and
  write up?
• Web site discussion groups??
• Summary of the outcome (14.55-15.30)
• Very personal review
• Chance for comments

3
General Discussion

• General Discussion
• Give people a chance to pass to everyone here
  what they regard as key messages for the SERENATE
  project

4
Plans for follow-up actions

• Coming workshops
• Operators views on infrastructure status and
  evolution (8 Nov 2002, Amsterdam)
• Research user needs and priorities (17-19 Jan
  2003, Montpellier)
• Possible models for the future (4-5 Feb 2003,
  Noordwijkerhout??)
• Final workshop (May-June 2003)
• Work packages
• Not just a talking shop
• Are there any issues which specific people (or
  one or more NRENs) would agree to address and
  write up?
• Case studies on new communities
• Pros ( cons?) of NRENs per se

5
Summary of the outcome

• Clearly very personal impressions
• Personal thanks to the speakers, and to the
  participants
• I feel the need to go away and read the mass of
  information that we have been presented with, and
  try to digest it
• Will put all presentations onto the SERENATE Web
  site as soon as possible

6
STRONG GENERAL IMPRESSIONS

7
From hardware to services

• Networking is (still) evolving FAST
• And going more into the mainline of ICT
• Its not so much just getting hardware
  connectivity to the researchers desk, but its
  increasingly about delivering a set of services
  needed by researchers (and others)
• Information access, collaborative tools,
  disciplinary grids are what the user wants.
  AAA and Web/Grid services will be part of the
  delivery mechanism

8
NRENs as a resource

• Lots of expertise
• Growing understanding by government of the
  importance of ICT as a driver for economic
  prosperity
• Growing understanding by government of the value
  of their NREN expertise
• Increasing requests to capitalise on that
  expertise

9
Europe (subsidiarity etc.)

• What should SERENATE try to generate
• Recommendations?
• Guidelines?
• Basically we all have to try to work by
  persuasion

10
PER BREAK-OUT GROUP

11
Technology

• We certainly need to try to find a coherent
  approach to the steadily increasing amplitude
  of optical networking
• I retained that its going to take some time
• But it seems a powerful wave
• What do we mean by a hybrid solution?
• Interaction with ubiquity is important
• I guess that we need a model where communities
  with special needs (de Laat Type C) can inject
  appropriate funds into a common (hybrid)
  infrastructure

12
Economics

• Study on regulation
• Study on costs
• We do need a clear understanding of any
  regulatory barriers that we could face in
  deploying pan-European fibre
• I personally guess that it does not matter
  whether you actually own fibre, or merely lease
  it on a long-term basis, or maybe even lease
  wavelengths. We should try to quantify this.

13
Geography

• Obviously needs interaction with the politicians
• But we had better have our ideas rather clear
  first
• It seems to me that there may be a conflict
  between two fundamental European concepts-
• the ERA view offer equality of research
  opportunities across the continent
• subsidiarity the EU only helps with funding
  at the pan-European level, not nationally or on
  the campus
• In FP5 we integrated the present accession
  countries into GÉANT. I dont see any similar
  target as part of FP6.

14
New user communities

• I found the discussion very interesting
• Hard to see what the recommendations might be
  situation is very different in each country
• Compendium should develop a set of questions
  around this
• And we should think about whether eEurope style
  benchmarks could be a useful output of SERENATE
• Schools
• Libraries
• Research hospitals
• Healthcare
• Etc

15
Research User Needs

• ???
• As much as they can get (and their govts can
  afford)
• AAA
• Working grids
• Ability to inject funds for Type C (few to few)
  connections as part of the common infrastructure

16
The need for NRENs

• Extreme economic liberals sometimes wonder why we
  need NRENs
• They see them as some sort of competition for
  ISPs
• If I ever needed convincing that this is a false
  argument then this meeting convinced me.
• I would like the argument written up well

17
The need for politics and funding

• We probably are going to have to make sure that
  we keep a dialogue with the politicians
• Both MEPs and national ones
• And with our funding agencies

18
Reactions and Discussions

• I surely forgot something?
• And got something the wrong way around