morningsong

The ITS Strategic Plan covering years 2008-09 through 2012-13 has been submitted to the University Planning Office and is available on the ITS strategic plan wiki at
https://confluence.et-test.psu.edu/display/stratplan/home


This same site now also has information about two Plan activities that will be done in partnership with the University Libraries.

We have tried to make this a collaborative process.  Many of our staff attended planning forums or offered comments on the wiki.  Members of the senior leadership team met with Campus leaders, members of the faculty, college and campus IT Directors, Outreach and Controllers office representatives and others.  A survey of all students, faculty and staff was conducted to gather information on current uses of IT tools and services.

Certainly there will be changes to this written plan over the next five years, but it provides a good framework for more specific tasks.  The Plan identifies seven change drivers, five critical challenges, and six strategies to address these.  The budget requests, respecting the current economic climate, are reasonable and responsible, reflecting what we believe is needed to help Penn State maintain a position of excellence in higher education.

Thank you to all who contributed to this Plan.  Now the fun of crafting specific tasks and implementation begins.  I hope you will be as engaged in these efforts as you were with developing the Plan.

On May 7 and 8, Educause held its annual Policy conference.  This was also the last Policy conference.  Rather than continue with a dedicated Policy session, policy issues will be added to the agenda of many other Educause seminars and conferences.  This is an attempt to provide information to more members and to allow more timely policy updates rather than hold a single event each Spring.

Several of the sessions revolved around the upcoming Presidential election and changes that may occur with a new administration and congress. 

Jeff Lehman, Chair of Internet2 Board of Trustees, gave a thought provoking talk on the need to shift our networking perspective to international connectivity.  He argues that a number of institutions are creating international campuses or increasing global on-line programs, and as we have had success in creating regional and national networking consortiums, we now need to consider an international one.

During a session on proposed FERPA changes, Francis Moran, a Program Specialist from DoE, was asked about FERPA implications with third party contracts for email.  She admitted her office has not considered this and asked that an inquiry be made.  Educase submitted this question to DoE, so we expect a response in the next few weeks.

The conference ended with a talk by FCC Commissioner Jonathan Adelstein.  He followed a session describing the Educause Blueprint for Big Broadband proposal.  Commissioner Adelstein praised this proposal and described his reasons for supporting a policy of encouraging true broadband throughout the country.

If you're in the DC area try to visit the Newseum, a new museum devoted to reporting and news gathering.  It's a good reminder of the importance of the press, in all forms, for maintaining an open society.  The gallery of Pulitzer prize winning photos is an especially powerful exhibit.

An interview with Research Penn State, April 2008.

Probing Question:

What is Net Neutrality?

 

"Internet Freedom, under attack. What do we do? Stand up, talk back," shouted a group calling themselves the Raging Grannies, outside the Dinkelspiel Auditorium at Stanford University. Inside, the  Federal Communications Commission prepared to hold a public hearing on broadband network management practices—a a topic most people might not expect to draw protesters.

 

At the heart of the Grannies' complaint is the issue of “net neutrality.” Google and Microsoft, among others, favor it; telecommunications firms such as Comcast and Verizon tend to oppose it. Damian Kulash, Jr., lead singer of Internet-phenom rock band OK Go, even penned a New York Times op-ed championing the cause. But what, exactly, is “net neutrality”?

 

“The question you asked, while it sounds really simple, has perplexed people for a couple of years,” says Jeff Kuhns, associate vice provost for information technology at Penn State. Kuhns explains that when customers purchase internet or cellular phone service, they pay for access to that network—think of Verizon Wireless's “It's the network” slogan. For the proponents of net neutrality, once customers have paid for network access, they should be able to use the network however they see fit (within the law).  “Net neutrality is about non-discrimination,” says Kuhns. “It really is about allowing people to connect to any legal site they want using any legal equipment they want, and not being hampered by their network provider.”

 

How might a network provider such as Comcast or Verizon hinder access? “In its worst form,” Kuhn explains, “it could involve you being denied access to a particular site. It could have you redirected to some other site. Or it could simply involve providing a lesser degree of connection for some sites than you would otherwise expect to have.” Kuhns offers a recent example involving cable giant Comcast. An investigation by the Associated Press revealed that Comcast had intentionally slowed network access for users of BitTorrent, a peer-to-peer protocol often used for distributing large audio and video files.

 

That example caught the public's attention, Kuhns says. “When this really started to become an issue a couple of years ago,” he notes, “most of the regulators didn't want to talk about it because they said there were no examples of companies violating net neutrality principles.” Since then, however, network providers such as AT&T, Comcast, and Verizon have repeatedly used their control of telecommunications channels by preventing public access to specific material online, he adds. Examples include censoring political speech from an online Pearl Jam concert, refusing text-messaging access to pro-choice group NARAL, and blocking network access to competitors.

 

Comcast and other providers claim that they need to manage limited network resources in order to maintain quality of service for all users. Kuhns, though, sees better ways to preserve the quality of online experience. Rather than restrict particular uses of the network for everyone, Kuhns explains, Penn State regulates speeds for heavy users. With this per–user philosophy of network management, Kuhns explains, “It doesn't matter what you're doing on the network: if you exceed certain limits, then your network access is throttled back.” The network remains neutral, valuing equally all the data traveling across it, but certain users receive only limited access.

 

Congress and regulators have once again taken up the issue. A telecommunications bill recently passed by the U.S. House of Representatives included no guarantee of net neutrality, but supporters hope that a similar bill in the Senate will provide one.

 

For Kuhns, who’s testified before the United States Senate Committee on the Judiciary, only regulation can guarantee net neutrality. Because of a lack of broadband competition in America, he says, companies have little monetary incentive to maintain neutrality. (He’s also a member of Educause, a non-profit association focusing on the role of information technology in higher education.)Yet as more and more of our lives move online, Kuhns explains, net neutrality will become a more pressing concern. Without a guarantee that providers will preserve neutral networks, Kuhns says, “I think what many people worry about, though the tide may be turning here, is that we'd see a particular application or a particular legal use of a network denied under the banner of ‘network management’ when really it's a form of network censorship.”

With most of the national attention on the economy and the war, other critical issues get pushed into the background. Today, while at the Freedom 2 Connect conference I listened to a Congressional candidate who was refreshing in her approach to the support of technology, and to the digital divide that exists.

Donna Edwards is the Democratic candidate in MD's 4th congressional district. She described her home in the Ft Washington neighborhood as one which has the highest per capital income for African Americans in the country. The best connection she can get is dial-up which often prevents her from effective communications. Although her neighborhood is one which is listed as having broadband, it exists in a very small area around a Verizon central office, and she lives outside that area.

She also said that while going door to door during her primary campaign, only one person asked her about net neutrality but several residents asked about getting better connections for their children's schools.

We take for granted the importance of infrastructure in water, sewer and roads. We need to realize that the new mode of travel and daily needs are tied to spectrum, bits and light.

Richard Alley, Penn State Evan Pugh Professor in Earth and Mineral Sciences uses an interesting example when talking about the effects of driving on carbon dioxide output. He says that the average fill-up takes about 16 gallons which weighs about 100 pounds, and asks what the effect on driving would be if we had to carry that gas in one gallon cans from the gas station to our cars?

Put another way though he is really talking about the conveniences of infrastructure, in this case the distribution system built around petroleum refining. Like most of our infrastructure systems this one is easily available to everyone, and through this access and ease of use, our nation has benefited.

Why is it then that what is arguably becoming our most critical infrastructure for economic development and sustaining our innovation leadership, broadband communications infrastructure, is left to chance, or rather the chances of the marketplace?

The petroleum industry has been aided by governmental investment in highways. Federal, state and local investments in water systems, sewage systems, and air travel have benefited all. Shouldn't a similar approach be used for deploying and aiding subscription to broadband infrastructure?

Educause, a nonprofit association whose mission is to advance higher education by promoting the intelligent use of information technology, has released a proposal for a national policy on broadband communications infrastructure. Calling for combined federal, state and private investments, it suggest that for $100 Billion, fiber infrastructure could be installed to all homes. The federal investment to do this will require $8 B for each of four years.

This is a considerable sum but the benefits are enormous. The investment is for a limited amount of time yet the benefits will accrue for decades.

The proposal entitled, "A Blueprint for Big Broadband", can be found at
http://www.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/EPO0801.pdf .

January 8th and I'm walking across campus without any overcoat, and passed a couple of guys in shorts and T-shirts. Is this a sign of global warming? Maybe, maybe not, but there can't be any doubt about the need to reduce the total amount of carbon emissions we generate. One of the drivers that will affect our plans over the next several years is the need to do this.

And we're joining a growing list of others. This morning I heard that China is forbidding stores from using plastic bags for carrying purchased items and encouraging shoppers to use more permanent cloth bags which they bring with them.

In the IT area, HP just announced a goal of reducing the energy consumed with its new products by 25% over the next 2 years, and that by 2010 it will reduce its global energy consumption by 20%. Dell says its current line of PCs consume about $23 per year in energy vs $100 by its older products.

The EU has produced this report talking about how IT can aid in reducing carbon emissions,
http://www.etno.be/Portals/34/ETNO%20Documents/Sustainability/Climate%20Change%20Road%20Map.pdf

I've even seen a call to start measuring network capacity in bits per carbon rather than bits per second.

So, what can ITS do to aid this total effort? Seems to me there are at least 3 things we could do:
- make sure that all electronic equipment purchased is as efficient as possible, even if that means it isn't the lowest initial cost equipment; what's the total cost of ownership?
- look for ways to centralize services within ITS, eliminating equipment providing a duplicate or competitive service.
- make carbon emissions reduction a personal goal and effort.

What can you do through existing tools like audio and video conferencing (think Adobe Connect) to reduce driving across campus to a meeting. What can we do with these tools to reduce commuting to the office? What can you do to live a healthier lifestyle by walking more and driving less; did you know that OHR sells low cost pedometers?

Why not set goals for yourself? Reduce the amount of auto transportation you use by say 5% over the next year. Reduce the number of meetings you attend in person by 10% over the next year, and assess what effect this has on total productivity.

What ideas do you have on ways we can be better global citizens. I'd love to hear them.

No, I'm not referring to home or office energy use, but your own personal energy management. We all are concerned with time management, but few of us think about how we build, sustain and use the energy we need to perform better in our personal lives and our work lives. Yet, studies show that those who have more energy produce better.

A recent article in the Harvard Business Review provides a thorough review of this in "Manage Your Energy, Not Your Time", by Tony Schwartz (HBR, Oct. 2007). There are four areas of focus:
Physical Energy.
Eat right, exercise reqularly, develop routines that allow for adequate rest. Get away from your desk at reqular intervals and move around the building or campus.
Emotional Energy.
Learn to deal with stress; deep breathing exercises are one way. Eliminate negative reactions and thoughts. A meeting that you know will be difficult can be viewed positively by seeing it as an opportunity to be persuasive or to gain a new perspective. How do portray the events of your day, positively or negatively? If mostly negative, how can you change this, without altering the facts, to make it more positive?
Mental Energy - Focus.
One way to improve concentration is to reduce the amount of mutli-tasking, instead focusing on one task at a time. Set aside specific time for specific actions, even routine ones like reading and responding to email/voice mail.
Spirtual Energy.
What are your core values? How do you adhere to them in your work and personal life? If you're working toward the things most important to you then it's more likely you'll find rewards in what you are doing that reinforce your positive habits and make it easier to drop the negative ones.

We're starting to build a five year plan, and want your assistance. Please visit our wiki site and offer your comments on the questions posed there or your thoughts on the critical projects we should consider.
http://confluence.et-test.psu.edu/display/stratplan/home

Some questions to get you started:

What are reliable sources of technology projections?

How should we plan for the continued growth of social networking? Facebook now has some 30M members and over 70,000 developers working on new applications.

Video delivered over IP networks will become more common. The end of analog broadcast video will occur in Feb. 2009. HDTV sales are booming. The Digital Commons project will develop more talented students creating rich multi-media presentations. Where does all this fit into our plan? What are the implications and opportunities for course delivery and for our backbone network?

Autonet Mobile, Inc. makes a router for automobile use that converts CDMA celluar signals to 802.11. How we modify applications or plan new services if we assume a near real-time capability to update portable devices or ones which will require voice for both input and output?

Below is an excerpt from Ben Worthen's Wall St. Journal blog. He is writing about recent articles that have appeared on people working around their central IT departmental rules and procedures. The IT folks have argued that average users should be more controlled partly for security reasons, but also for cost control issues and overall management issues.

I wonder - are we guilty of what Ben discusses here? Do we frontload the process so that it is difficult to use or simply not practical to use? Is it reasonable that we not allow specific devices, or insist on only one OS? Do we create nuisance charges rather than look for ways to encourage better behavior?

From Ben's blog:
Information-technology departments are forcing their companies’ employees to use unsupported tech tools by insisting on policies that are outdated in the modern workplace.

Yesterday, the Journal described the other side of the coin in an article called “Helping the IT Department Help You.” Here’s an example, a tip on how to get your company to buy you new technology:

“Build a business case first. That involves writing a short letter explaining what you will be able to accomplish with the technology that you currently can’t do, and how that will benefit the company. Be as specific and quantitative as you can, to show how the purchase can help make money and keep costs low. Typically, these requests should be routed through your own manager rather than directly through the IT department. Find out what the protocol is at your organization.”

Processes like these are the reason that people end up buying their own technology. Here’s a newsflash: People aren’t real good at predicting what they’ll need to do months or even weeks or days from now. When employees ask for technology that will help them do something – say, share a file with a colleague or check email from a remote location – it isn’t because they need to do it six weeks from now. It’s because they have an immediate need. Writing a business case, and routing it through your manager and then IT just takes too long – especially when the employee himself can solve the problem by spending five minutes on the Internet.

The process is what’s pushing people to find their own technology. The Business Technology Blog is sick of people who point fingers – either at rogue users or insensitive IT departments – without ever taking a look at the root cause, which in this case is a policy that no longer reflects reality.

Recently there have been several articles about the need to "reinvent the Internet". For an alternative view, below is an letter written by Mike Roberts. Mike is currently a consultant to I2 and to Educause but one of the leaders in developing the Internet that we know today. He was Pres. and CEO of ICANN, VP of Educom, a director with I2 and prior to that Deputy Director of Information Technology Services at Stanford. Mike submitted the letter below to the Chronicle of Higher Education.

Design Choices,
Not Defects

To the Editor:
When I was in grad school some
years back, one of my professors often
said to me, "Rigor, Roberts, more
rigor." Your article on scrapping the
Internet quotes a number of academic
network researchers whose comments
could use a healthy dose of rigor
("Can the Internet Be Saved?," The
Chronicle, June 29). Many of the sup-
posed deficiencies noted in the text are
actually carefully designed features,
not defects.
To mention but one, the Internet
protocols were specifically designed to
avoid single points of failure, yet your
description of the Ethane network
says "Only if that policy is allowed by
'central
command' will it choose a
path for the packets" The last thing
the Internet, or academe, needs is
"central command." The country is
still recovering from the stifling of innovation
inflicted on us for genera-
tions by telephone engineers with
command-and-control mentalities.
Those of us who participated in the
generalization and commercialization
of the Internet back in the 80s and 90s
look askance at the indifference to
network architectural choices carefully
weighed and made in those days that is
reflected in articles like yours especial-
ly since the researchers involved have
their eyes on spending $300-million of
taxpayers' money.
Perfection in a computer network is
not an attainable goal; the deficiencies
of the Intemet reflect design choices
and value judgments In a technology
that has now, fortuitously, become an
essential means of human communica-
tion, it is essential to revisit those
choices But it would increase the rigor
involved if there were a little less
breaking of china and a little more at-
tention to achieving the best balance
of network features for the billions
who will use the Net in this new century.

Mike Robertr
Portola Valley, Calif.