Internet Info 1994 March/Internet Info CD-ROM (Walnut Creek) (March 1994).iso/inet/nren/hearing.12mar92/roberts.testimony

Text File | 1992-03-21 | 11.9 KB | 283 lines

 <NIC.MERIT.EDU>                                             12 March 1992
      /internet/legislative.actions/hearing.12mar92/roberts.testimony


 United States House of
 Representatives
 Committee on Science, Space and
 Technology
 Subcommittee on Science

 Hearing on National Science
 Foundation Network
 March 12, 1992
 Statement of Michael M. Roberts, Vice
 President, EDUCOM

         Chairman Boucher and members of the
 Committee, I am pleased to present testimony
 today on behalf of the EDUCOM Networking and
 Telecommunications Task Force, a group of
 forty-eight universities with joint interests
 in the development of advanced computer
 networks to support research and education.
 NSFNET Success.  Over the past five years,
 NSFNET has compiled one of the most remarkable
 success stories in the history of American
 science.  In this short period of time,
 through a partnership of government, industry
 and higher education, an advanced production
 network with the highest level of bandwidth
 available anywhere in the world has been
 designed and deployed in the research and
 education community in the United States.  At
 the same time, the network has been
 transformed from one serving a narrow group of
 supercomputer centers and federally supported
 research sites into one with connections to
 more than six hundred colleges and
 universities and over a thousand public and
 private research sites.  The global Internet
 family of research and education networks, of
 which NSFNET is a part, is growing equally
 rapidly and now reaches more than three-
 quarters of a million computer systems in more
 than one hundred countries.  On the campuses
 of the members of the EDUCOM networking task
 force alone, more than one million students,
 faculty and researchers have gained access to
 NSFNET and the Internet.  Of special note is
 the fact that NSFNET now connects more than a
 thousand high schools and several hundred
 libraries as a result of an effort by NSF and
 the regional networks to reach all levels of
 education.
         In addition to the benefits within research
 and education, the success of NSFNET has
 materially aided the growth of a commercial
 market for Internet products and services
 which it is estimated will exceed four billion
 dollars in 1992, with growth at the rate of
 seventy-five percent a year.
         This progress - in advanced network
 services, in access provided to the research
 and education community, and in technology
 transferred to the private sector - far
 exceeds the levels planned five years ago and
 is a tribute to the commitment of the NSFNET
 partners and to the able leadership of the
 Foundation and its Networking Division.

         In the remainder of this statement, I would
 like to focus on three key issues - a new
 cooperative agreement for NSFNET, a commitment
 to a common infrastructure with participatory
 governance for the NREN, and the linkage of
 the NREN program to establishment of a
 broadband communications network for all
 Americans.  We are submitting additional
 EDUCOM background material on NSFNET and the
 NREN for the record.
 NSFNET Competition for New Cooperative
 Agreement.  Last November, the National
 Science Board approved a proposal by the
 Networking Division of NSF that it conduct a
 competition leading to new cooperative
 agreements for continuation of NSFNET for the
 period 1993-1996.  In developing its proposal,
 NSF drew on studies and recommendations from a
 number of organizations within the networking
 community, including EDUCOM.
         We believe that the plan for new cooperative
 agreements is an excellent one that not only
 provides stability of network service but
 promises to continue the progress in
 technology that has been an important feature
 of the current agreement.  However, we wish to
 comment on the aspect of the intended plan
 that deals with competition for the award
 within the private sector and a related issue,
 raised in recent press articles, that NSF
 should be obligated, in a spirit of fairness,
 to provide a level playing field for
 competitors.
         First, it should be understood that the new
 award will not be for standard commercial
 telecommunications services.  It will be a
 cooperative agreement among partners in an
 effort to maintain and improve a leading edge,
 state of the art computer network which
 continues to meet the demands of the best
 science of which the United States is capable.
 That is the stated goal of the NREN
 legislation sponsored by your committee  last
 year and of the program under development by
 the Administration.  We should set our sights
 no lower.
         Second, with respect to levelness of playing
 field, it is not and has never been the
 responsibility of a federal agency to
 guarantee market entry for a private sector
 firm.  Nor is it the responsibility of federal
 agencies to transfer technology to the private
 sector in a manner which guarantees market
 entry.  What NSF has done very successfully in
 the current award, and proposes to do again,
 is establish the criteria under which firms,
 or joint ventures of firms with public sector
 participation, may join with the Foundation in
 designing, testing, and deploying advanced
 network technology.  The greater the size of
 the funding and resource commitment that is
 made by private sector firms in competing for
 the award, the greater the likelihood of rapid
 progress in advancing network technology.  It
 is important to distinguish between
 competition for the new cooperative agreement,
 and the creation of a competitive market in
 the private sector for network services based
 on NSFNET/NREN technology.  Progress made
 during the course of the next agreement will
 support and strengthen an already impressive
 level of commercial network services that has
 developed in the last several years.
 Common Infrastructure for the NREN.  At
 the present time, federal agencies
 participating in the HPCC program are
 preparing an NREN technical and management
 plan under the aegis of the Federal Networking
 Council (FNC).  It is premature to comment on
 specifics of the plan until it has been
 released and reviewed.  However, the view has
 been expressed by some that it is sufficient
 for the NREN to be just a family of largely
 independent networks, with connectivity and
 services under the control of individual
 agencies.  This is clearly an unsatisfactory
 approach.  It fragments the available federal
 resources.  It confuses industry, which will
 be unsure of which agency approach will win
 out over others.  It will reduce the rate at
 which the common infrastructure can be
 developed and implemented.
         Some federal officials have the opinion that
 full support for the NREN would jeopardize
 mission critical network applications such as
 real time satellite data collection and
 nuclear energy experiments.  These special
 applications have never been part of the NREN
 as envisoned by the universities and
 constitute a small fraction of total agency
 use of computer networks for research and
 education.
         The universities, having made major
 investments in their campus networks and
 NSFNET connections, and having joined together
 to create and sustain the regional networks,
 believe that their federal agency partners in
 the NREN should make a similar commitment to a
 common networking infrastructure.  Such a
 commitment must include agreement on
 mechanisms for participation in the creation
 and application of standards and policies for
 the network.  When your committee continues
 its review of the Administration's NREN
 program later in the year, we believe this
 matter deserves further inquiry.
 NREN Linkage to National Information
 Infrastructure (NII).  As the revolution in
 computer networking has gained momentum in
 recent years, the potential value of NREN
 technology is being recognized in areas beyond
 the original leading edge, Grand Challenge
 research objectives.  Mr. Chairman, you and
 Representative Oxley have taken the
 Congressional initiative in the House with the
 introduction of HR2546, which calls for rapid
 deployment of broadband technology in the
 national communications infrastructure.  In a
 related development, the Computer Systems
 Policy Project (CSPP) has called for a broader
 vision of the NREN and specifically
 recommended that the Administration "establish
 a technology and policy foundation for an
 information and communications infrastructure
 for the future."   The FCC has also taken note
 of these developments in holding future
 network hearings last spring and issuing a
 Notice of Inquiry into Intelligent Networks
 last December.
         The university community believes that both
 the NREN and a broadband communications
 infrastructure for America are important,
 perhaps critical, national objectives.
 However, they are not the same, and neither
 should be treated as hostage or servant to the
 other.  EDUCOM recommends that an explicit
 linkage be created between the two objectives.
 The NREN, guided by a government, industry and
 education partnership in developing and
 deploying advanced network technology, should
 be the means by which the country supports its
 research and education goals, and at the same
 time develops, tests, and transfers to the
 private sector its successes in technology.
         The NII, guided by new federal and state
 communications legislation, should be the
 means through which a revitalized
 communications industry, utilizing digital and
 fiber optic technology, brings the benefits of
 the Information Age to every American.
 Forging a new national communications policy
 which protects the public interest and
 enhances the private sector role in providing
 advanced communications services is a
 difficult challenge.  We in higher education
 have a major stake in the creation of a
 broadband communications infrastructure to
 help us fulfill our educational mission.  We
 are prepared to assist the Congress in
 achieving this vision, which will assure
 continued U.S. leadership in a world which is
 rapidly becoming a global information society.
 Summary.  In conclusion, I would like to
 reiterate five key points:
         First, NSF leadership in the development
 and delivery of NSFNET has been outstanding.
 Research and education are being
 extraordinarily well served by the NSFNET
 program, the sucess of which is obvious from
 every measure of network connectivity and use.
         Second, the NSFNET program has positively
 stimulated the marketplace and there are a
 growing number of commercial providers of
 network services based on this technology
 where there were none only three or four years
 ago.
         Third, we in the research and education
 networking community believe that the planned
 "recompetition" for a new NSFNET cooperative
 agreement is an appropriate and manageable
 compromise between conflicting objectives.  It
 increases participation from the private
 sector while continuing a successful
 management structure proven during the current
 agreement.
         Fourth, we urge the Congress to insure that
 the infrastructure and governance of the NREN
 reflect an effective partnership between the
 broadly based research and education community
 and the federal agency establishments so that
 standards and policies for the network will be
 formulated for the broadest applicability and
 greatest good.
         Fifth, we recommend that the National
 Information Infrastructure and implementation
 of broadband communications envisoned in
 HR2546 be explicitly linked to the NREN
 program, though in no way merged, so that the
 NREN may take early advantage of broadband
 infrastructure to support research and
 education goals while leading in the
 advancement of the technology.