Present:

Apologies were received from:

1. Notes of previous meeting

The notes of the meeting held on 14 May 2001 in Cardiff were accepted as an accurate record of the meeting

2. Matters arising

There were no matters arising not covered elsewhere on the agenda.

3. UKERNA contracts

The model contracts had now been circulated to MANs and the individual contract negotiations had begun. Tim Robinson had been provided with a spreadsheet that explained the calculations behind the allocation of funding in the various categories. There is also a need to know the basis for the allocation of telecomms funding on an individual institution basis so that the impact of varying the schedules could be assessed. Tim Kidd will be asked for an official copy of the general spreadsheets and the detailed telecomms information.

Action: Mick Kahn

There was a lack of clarity regarding the provision of more than 2Mbps to FECs. MANs had not all been told the same thing. UKERNA was making a distinction between physical bandwidth to the FEC and a nominal bandwidth to JANET, but it was not clear how this was defined. The case where an FEC has connections to a MAN from more than one site needed to be covered. UKERNA will be asked for clarification.

Action: Mick Kahn

MANs would need to seek their own legal advice, but do not need to have a detailed review, given the legal input already obtained by the Group. It will be important to instruct lawyers to go into the appropriate level of detail.

The requirements for agreements between MANs and individual institutions was discussed. HEIs had signed an agreement with UKERNA, which had been necessary to underpin the charging. FECs were not being charged and so may not have similar agreements. UKERNA will be asked for clarification.

Action: Mick Kahn

The position of MANs in relation to Sponsored Connections was not clear. It appeared that MANCos were not to be allowed to provide Sponsored Connections, except through a member institution. It was not clear whether RDNs could connect sponsored connections at all. There was concern about a potential explosion of Sponsored Connections via FECs. The Group thought that MANCos should be allowed to offer Sponsored Connections and that this was usually the preferred option. There was also a need for individual institutions to be able to offer Sponsored Connections to organisations they had a close relationship with. Scott Currie will be asked to raise this at the charging workshop on 18 July.

Action: Mick Kahn/Scott Currie

Information on the netsight boxes to be placed on the MANs was rather limited. It was desirable that netsight could be used for monitoring additional connections as well as the main connection to an institution. UKERNA will be asked for further information.

Action: Roger Williams.

MANs were likely to require more detailed performance monitoring to need institution requirements. On issue that would need to be considered would be a disposal policy for information. This might usefully be addressed by a workshop.

4. JANET charging workshop

Phil Brady reported that, as international traffic charges were no longer so disproportionate, one model being considered was to charge for traffic on the JANET backbone. There was concern that this might discourage usage of the network.

There was a lack of clarity as to the purpose of charging, but this will hopefully be addressed at the workshop.

The need to be able to pass on charges to individual groups and users was important. The Group reiterated the view that MANs should not be involved in the collection of charges.

5. SLAs

Pat Crocker was unable to attend, so detailed discussion of the JANET SLA was postponed to the next meeting.

The provision of out of hours cover was discussed. A number of MANs would have difficulty in providing the extend hours cover with the funding available. In some cases goodwill from networking staff was being over stretched already. It was also not clear as to how valuable the cover specified in the JANET SLA was and whether telcos would actually fix faults overnight. A number of MANs were investigating the outsourcing of out of hours cover. Whilst there was pressure for 7x24 operation from some HEIs, the precise requirements was not well articulated and institutions seemed reluctant to consider the funding implications of a higher level of support.

6. DTI Licences

Chris Cheney reported that he had spoken to Jeanne Grey at the DTI recently and been assured that the academic/educational class licence was still a live issue. It was likely to cover academic MANs, the Regional Broadband Consortia (RBCs) that made up the National grid for Learning (NGfL) and individual HEIs/FECs.

DTI intended to arrange a meeting with the Group’s representatives soon and would also contact HEIs with special licences soon.

The DTI will stand firm on not allowing more commercial us under the new licence that is allowed under the TSL, which will disappoint some MANs. Chris Cheney will circulate a summary of the relevant part of the TSL.

Action: Chris Cheney

The DTI sees the major issues to be with the RBCs and possibly with MANs using radio.

Some funding was available for JISC for specialist advice.

Barry Forde reported that he had been told by ministers that the NGfL should carry commercial traffic if it was in the public interest, which contradicted the information from DTI officials.

7. News from MANs

LMN was planning to be an RDN for an interim period, but intended to move to an RPAN as soon as practical. This would involve some major changes in operational arrangements. It would be connecting public libraries as soon as LMN2 was fully operational. The outcome of the bid to provide the infrastructure for the London Grid for Learning as still awaited.

ClydeNet was now reprocuring. It would be connecting FECs at 8/10Mbps.

MidMAN had discussed its upgrade plan with UKERNA and the resilience proposals had been rejected. The West Midlands VCs were likely to form a company limited by guarantee.

EastNet reported that the network was now up and running, but that there were some problems with Cisco 6500 POS cards in the site gateway routers.

SWERN was moving to a switched ATM service (dual STM-1 or STM-4) in the Northern part (ex BWEMAN). They have requested that the upgrade funding for equipment can be delayed to synchronise replacement across the whole merged network. They were planning to be an RPAN and will set up a company, but had not decided between shares and guarantees. The level of staff resource was a problem.

NetNorthWest had replaced equipment with Cisco OSRs and had installed UPSs in the core. They were appointing two FE directors.

The Kentish MAN planned to be an RPAN, but would be a consortium rather than setting up a company. Additional links were being installed to create a circle for increased resilience.

EMMAN was mostly up and running, but had problems with radio spares. They had appointed a Business Manager. The Board had 2 FE and 8 HE members.

LeNSE was almost complete, though some resilient links had been delayed by flooding. The operations and help desk was outsourced.

C&NL MAN was now live. A MANCo will be established, but the structure is undecided. They will be an RPAN. Barry Forde also reported on Cumbria Lancashire Education Online (CLEO) which currently had 28 PoPs at 155Mbps and 150 sites at 10Mbps. The next phase will have 400 schools, 120 library and museum sites and 70 social security sites.

SWMAN reported that Aberystwyth was now connected at 155Mbps. Welsh Networking Ltd was soon to be established as a company limited by shares. Procurement will begin soon.

The North Wales MAN was being installed. Initially they will use a lead institution and be and RPAN. They may join up with SWMAN. A bid has been made under Objective 1 for connecting business parks on the A55.

[Email report : Like most Scottish MANs, FaTMAN is busy with the process of reprocuring the MAN. We are a small MAN with 4 HEIs connected by dark fibre (currently running 155Mbps ATM), 5 FE colleges connected at 2Mbps and Dundee Schools attached through a 2Mbps primary connection too.

We have not yet decided on whether to become an RDN or RPAN. Neither have we committed to company status. An RDN agreement + lead site arrangement is still under active consideration, which - despite the cautious generic legal advice - I think is still an option for us given our size. It's worked so far...]

8. Any other business

Phil Brady reported that the Follet Report on the JISC was complete. There had been broad support from VCs for top slicing for the JISC. A teaching & learning committee would be established. A research committee had been proposed. The main committee would be reduced in size, include members from outside the sector and would not include IT Directors in the future.

The review of UKERNA will now move ahead, with Fred McCrindle in the chair. Annette Howarth is also a member of the committee. Linda McCormick will be chairing the structure subgroup and Peter Kemp the funding subgroup. The timetable was for an outline report at the end of August and a full report in October.

Concern was expressed about the dual roles of UKERNA as advisor to the JISC and service provider, which were not seen as compatible.

Linda McCormick would welcome comments from Group members.

The Chair of MANs Group had met on 21 May, but there was little specific to report. They will meet again at the end of October.

9. Date of next meeting

The next meeting will be Tuesday 9 October in London. The Group would prefer to meet near Kings Cross/Euston rather than at City.

[The meeting will be at ULCC.]