Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
CUDI: international connectivity issues������Carlos Casasús���CENIC Conference���March 8, 2011
How CUDI is born (1998)
✤ Universities start using Internet and develop campus infrastructures ✤ Mexican universities provide ISP services and develop a significant
business ✤ Intrigued by Internet 2, UNAM requests a connection. Internet 2 denies
the connection of individual universities. Requests the formation of a Mexican university consortium
✤ When several Mexican institutions sign up, economies of scale become evident. Cost of infrastructure shared by several universities
Abril1999. A non profit corporation of Mexican Universities is formed. Name is a translation of University Corporation for Advanced Internte Development. ���
3!
UCAID Memorandum of Understanding signed May 1999. ��� ✤ Mutual recognition as the research and academic network of each
country
✤ Agreement to interconnect ✤ Agreement to cooperate
The initial backbone
✤ Telmex unwilling to sell high capacity links in Mexico because of non- discriminatory condition in its title
✤ However, Telmex agrees to provide backbone for free in 7 cities.
✤ Telmex sells last mile to get to the backbone. ✤ Telmex does not own crossborder facilities
Initial international issues
✤ Connection to Startap (CHICAGO). Unpayable
✤ CENIC connection. Agreed upon a Presidential visit with Governor Davis
✤ University of Texas, El Paso. Radio connection
CLARA (2003)
✤ Born out of the Madrid Summit of EU-LA of heads of state. European funding for Information Society projects
✤ Charter recognizes only one network per country
The concept of National Research and Education Networks
✤ Focus on satisfying the needs of research, education and increasingly health communities
✤ In order to achieve economies of scale in international connections, only one network per country
✤ Given their monopoly status, they have to serve a very broad community (public and private, universities as well as K-12, hospitals)
✤ They are non profit
✤ They do not sell telecommunication services. From a regulatory point of view they are private networks. Therefore not regulated as telecommunications carriers
✤ Most governments provide funding
8
Reasons for NREN’s
✤ Economies of scale. The unit cost of transmitted information is lower when larger bandwidth circuits are used.
✤ Funding agencies considere that NREN´s spread benefits of funding better than individual links. Funding individual links does not generate economies of scale.
✤ Aggregation improves traffic engineering, simplifies protocol adoption, optimizes engineering, increases quality of services, simplify fault resolution.
NLR (2005)
✤ A change in the “one network per country” paradigm
✤ Recent developments in Mexican networks
The CUDI backbone has evolved through donations from interested parties…
✤ Telmex (May,1999): 4,000 kilometers of 155 mbps links ✤ Avantel (Axtel) (April, 2002 ): 4,000 kilómeters of 155 mbps links
✤ WL Comunicaciones (September, 2010): 4,000 kilómeters of 155 mbps links
✤ Bestel (Grupo Televisa), October 2010): 4,000 kilometers of 1Gb/s links ✤ Ministry of Communications and Transport: Access to the fiber of the
electricity monopoly
12
Major impulse to the connectivity of the education and health sectors, through two policies:
‒ Assigning a WiMax frequency band for the development of “state education and health networks”
‒ Develop a National Backbone for the Impulse of Broadband
14
Redes Estatales de Educación, Salud y Gobierno. Proyecto Jalisco���
15
A new backbone is required. Use the fiber on electricity grid
16
Dorsal Nacional
10 Gbps
MPLS
DWDM
REDES ESTATALES
CUDI (200 Universidades)
EDUCACION (150,000 Escuelas)
Voz Datos Video
SALUD ( 30,000 Centros de
Salud )
GOBIERNOS LOCALES
Servicios
In June, CUDI is granted access to the new backbone
17
Telmex reaction
✤ 5 days after the Red Niba announcement, Telmex withdraws its contribution to CUDI
✤ International interconnection issues
✤ In 2010, UNAM purchased a direct link into NLR
On November 30, UNAM and Telmex create a new Resarch network using UNAM´s NLR circuit as its connection into the US
CUDI!RIR!
Internet2!I NLR!
CLARA/CUDI
México
RI3
UNAM
Guadalajara
Tijuana
CUDI
México
Monterrey
San Antonio Tx.
México
Interconexión a miembros de!
CUDI!
México
Monterrey
Cancún
Monterrey Guadalajara
Cd Juárez
Cd Juárez
RI3 Telmex/UNAM
Equipo CUDI Red NIBA/CUDI Axtel/CUDI
Bestel/CUDI
Tuxtla GuJerrez
Tapachula
Nogales Son
1Gb 1Gb
1Gb
1Gb!
1Gb
1Gb 1Gb
1Gb
100Mb
155Mb
155Mb
33 Ciudades
AS28550 Telmex
AS278
AS19401
AS18592
Need for policy for international connections
✤ Outside the US, one NREN per country is the way the system is built ✤ Multiple country networks and individual connections erode
economies of scale. Benefits to powerful institutions in detriment of the collectivity of weaker universities that can not afford individual connections
✤ The Mexican case can multiply through out Latin America if policy is not enforced
✤ Policy should be consistent at both regional and national level
End game?
✤ Universities through out Mexico will start to connect to Red NIBA because of the economics. They have to build their own last mile. It will take time.
✤ Working with NLR, Internet2, CENIC and Learn in the enforcement of “one network per country” policy.
✤ UNAM will need to use the CUDI infrastructure in order to solve the communications needs of its scientific community.
✤ Telmex will keep on being a provider last mile connections of last resource to Mexican universities.
