GENWiki

Premier IT Outsourcing and Support Services within the UK

User Tools

Site Tools

Problem, Formatting or Query -  Send Feedback

Was this page helpful?-10+1


rfc:fyi:fyi16

Network Working Group ACM SIGUCCS Request for Comments: 1359 Networking Taskforce FYI: 16 August 1992

                     Connecting to the Internet
           What Connecting Institutions Should Anticipate

Status of this Memo

 This memo provides information for the Internet community.  It does
 not specify an Internet standard.  Distribution of this memo is
 unlimited.

Abstract

 This FYI RFC outlines the major issues an institution should consider
 in the decision and implementation of a campus connection to the
 Internet.
 In order to provide clarity to the reader, some specific information
 has been detailed.  In doing so, the document has been directed
 toward U.S.  academic institutions that have not yet connected to the
 Internet.
 However, the issues for which specific information has been provided
 can be generalized for any organization that wishes to participate in
 the world-wide Internet community.  It will be necessary for those
 organizations to obtain the correct and detailed information from
 their local or national IP service providers.  In addition, this
 document may be used as an evaluation checklist for organizations
 that are currently connected.  Readers are expected to have general
 familiarity with networking concepts and terminology.

Table of Contents

 1.  Acknowledgements..............................................  2
 2.  Introduction..................................................  2
 3. Initial Planning/Pre-Internet Installation Phase...............  4
 3.1  Ask the Vital  Question......................................  4
 3.2  Reasons Why to Participate...................................  5
 3.3  Connection Options...........................................  6
 3.4  Connection Service Providers.................................  7
 3.5  Sample Questions for Connection Services Providers...........  8
 3.5.1  Sample Questions...........................................  8
 3.6  Cost Assessment..............................................  9
 4. Initial Implementation and Startup Phase....................... 10
 4.1  Policy Issues................................................ 10

NETTF [Page 1] RFC 1359 Connecting to the Internet August 1992

 4.2  Connection to the Mid-level Network.......................... 11
 4.3  IP Addresses and Domain Names................................ 11
 4.4  Technical Issues............................................. 12
 4.5  Support...................................................... 12
 4.6  Training..................................................... 13
 4.7  Promotion.................................................... 13
 5.  Full Production/Maintenance................................... 13
 5.1  Technical Issues............................................. 14
 5.2  Human Factors................................................ 14
 6.  Evaluation Strategies......................................... 15
 7.  Appendix A. Partial List of IP Service Providers.............. 16
 8.  Appendix B. NSFNet Backbone Services Acceptable Use Policy.... 22
 9.  References.................................................... 23
 10. Security Considerations....................................... 24
 11. Authors' Addresses............................................ 24

1. Acknowledgements

 This document was created through the efforts of the ACM SIGUCCS
 Networking Taskforce.  NETTF was created in 1989 under the direction
 of Martyne Hallgren and with the approval and support of the SIGUCCS
 Executive Board.
 The Networking Taskforce was created to increase awareness and
 understanding of the Internet, to disseminate information and
 research on development and use of the Internet, to promote
 innovative and appropriate use of Internet resources, and to initiate
 and encourage cooperation between the SIGUCCS membership and other
 organizations, such as the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF),
 with similar goals towards networking.

2. Introduction

 The Internet is a world-wide network of networks with gateways
 linking organizations in North and South America, Europe, The Pacific
 Basin and other countries not previously included.  The organizations
 are administratively independent from one another.  There is no
 central, worldwide, technical control point.  Yet, working together
 these organizations have created what to a user seems to be a single
 virtual network that spans the globe.
 The networks all use a common suite of networking protocols, TCP/IP.
 It is because of this commonality of protocols, this commonality of
 network functionality and interoperability that the networks provide
 what may appear to be a seamless, integrated virtual network,
 irregardless of the underlying heterogeneity of the underlying
 computer hardware or communications transport.

NETTF [Page 2] RFC 1359 Connecting to the Internet August 1992

 The most basic functions provided are electronic mail, access to
 remote computational and informational facilities and file transfer.
 The networking protocols were first deployed in the late 1960's in
 the United States.  For several years, they were only used for very
 specific research activities and in some computer science
 departments.
 In 1985, at a meeting of National Science Foundation networking
 specialists and higher educations representatives, a new national
 data networking backbone, using these protocols, was outlined and
 acted as a catalyst resulting in dramatic changes in data networking
 technologies and usage.
 Originally conceived to connect the six national supercomputing
 centers that had been established, in the ensuing years, the NSFNet
 backbone network and its associated mid-level networks have grown
 dramatically.  The networks built for mission and discipline specific
 uses have also grown dramatically.  More importantly, because of the
 common technology, they have been able to be connected together,
 increasing their reach and as a result, their usefulness to the user
 community with very little additional expense.  The end result is a
 robust technology supporting the higher education and research
 community.  Its continued development and growth are essential to
 maintaining excellence in education and research.
 The use of the Internet has steadily and dramatically grown over the
 past years.  More and more sites have connected.  Each site may have
 more and more uses of the network, as existing users expand and new
 users are added resulting in exponential growth of network traffic.
 But even more dramatic are the explosions in growth due to the
 innovative applications.  Networks are having a dramatic effect on
 everything from libraries to elementary schools, from sharing
 expensive scientific instruments to using databases to access
 atmospheric data to electronic publishing and interpersonal
 collaborations building "workplaces without walls".
 The number of organizations connected at present is constantly
 growing.  At present, the organizations that connect through the
 Internet include universities and colleges, research laboratories,
 government and private, libraries, specialized scientific centers,
 state agencies, K-12 (Kindergarten-12th Grade) organizations,
 individuals, and individual research labs.  But no matter what kind
 of organization it is, they all have the same need to understand what
 it means to connect to the Internet.
 An institution must anticipate and prepare for four critical phases
 in the deployment of an Internet connection.  The list of issues
 discussed within this document is not exhaustive but rather the

NETTF [Page 3] RFC 1359 Connecting to the Internet August 1992

 information provided should alert decision makers to major concerns
 they should address during the different phases of network
 deployment.
 As each issue is discussed, both soft and hard cost items will be
 identified.  Both must be considered when determining the real cost
 of deploying an Internet connection.  The hard cost items include
 costs for which invoices are created.  They include the costs for new
 circuits or phone lines, the purchase of modems or csu's and routers,
 network membership dues and upgrades to existing hardware to make it
 network compatible.  Soft costs are harder to quantify but no less
 important.  These costs include training and education of staff,
 faculty, and students, modifications to support staffing and
 structure, deployment of new network applications or network services
 such as FTP servers, centralized electronic mail services, or
 campus-wide information systems.  It should also be recognized that
 the soft costs involved also result in benefits that can easily be
 seen as people investment and organizational investment.
 The four phases of an Internet Connection deployment are:
    A.  Initial planning/Pre-Internet installation phase
    B.  Initial Implementation and Startup phase
    C.  Full Production/Maintenance phase
    D.  Evaluation/Upgrade phase

3. Initial Planning/Pre-Internet Installation Phase

3.1 Ask the Vital Question

 An institution must first address the question, "What does my
 community/institution gain from participating in the Internet
 community?".
 Both commercial and non-profit education and research institutions
 rightfully spend a great deal of high level effort to define their
 mission and goals.  Any introduction of new technology --
 particularly one which involves new modes and methodologies of
 communication -- should be assessed in light of the institution's own
 mission and goals as well as the wants and needs of the user
 community it serves.
 Following, and as part of this evaluation, key institution decision
 makers (at the highest levels of the organization) will require
 information not only on the cost of connection, but more importantly
 on the purpose and scope of participation in the Internet.  The
 decision to participate requires not only the strong commitment of
 senior administration but also the support and endorsement of the

NETTF [Page 4] RFC 1359 Connecting to the Internet August 1992

 general institutional community.  In the case of an educational
 institution, it is critical to have the support and active interest
 of the faculty.  This decision will also involve a campus wide needs
 assessment to determine the interest and support of the campus
 community.

3.2 Reasons Why to Participate

 The deployment of an Internet connection provides the impetus for the
 development of a campus wide strategy for the use of information
 technology which may otherwise never be accessible.  It may be
 difficult to quantify such benefits but they must be included in the
 justification process.  Many institutions have already done this and
 are very likely already connected.  An interested institution might
 will consult with a nearby, connected organization to see what
 benefit they have derived from the connection.  An institution
 looking at a connection for the first time must decide if a major
 reason is simply to participate in a technology that has already
 proven itself as being important to education; more importantly, it
 may be a requirement now to compete with peer organizations.
 This is especially important to consider when recruiting both new
 faculty and students.  New faculty will want to continue with their
 research and academic collaborations which may require resources not
 affordable to the institution.  These resources can be made available
 via the network.  As a result, a university or college may be able to
 recruit students and offer a new curriculum that demands access to
 resources that would only be available via the network.  The
 potential gain in prestige, research participation and dollars is
 well work the investment.
 Many universities have also discovered economic efficiencies.  Many
 subscription services have traditionally required a dedicated and
 expensive access method.  More and more of these services are now
 accessible via the Internet.  This trend will undoubtedly continue as
 more and more commercial companies make their services available.
 While the subscription fee may not alter, the cost of the dedicated
 connection may by used to finance an Internet connection; not only
 will the availability of the particular service be greater but the
 underlying access medium can be used for multiple functions.
 Libraries, many already with automated catalogs, are looking at
 various new applications to deal with the glut of information,
 shrinking dollars and limited shelf space.  Electronic journals,
 image-based text, publishing on demand are all issues that are being
 evaluated for the digital library.  Universities are automating and
 integrating a variety of activities and providing access to the
 students and staff via a campus network.  At some universities,

NETTF [Page 5] RFC 1359 Connecting to the Internet August 1992

 students are able to register for classes, look at their grades, and
 check their bill from their dorm room instead of having to suffer
 through long lines.  Some universities are able to keep in contact
 with their alumni, through a variety of on-line information
 resources.
 NSFNet was first created to facilitate access to five national
 supercomputer centers, centers which still provide to researchers
 leading edge computational technologies to support research in a
 variety of areas, from black holes to pollution in the L.A. basin.
 Today, researchers and students alike have access to a broad range of
 computational, informational, and scientific instrumentation that can
 be used remotely, with no loss of productivity.  For some
 organizations, this means that they now can recruit faculty with
 research requirements that they themselves could never afford.  It
 means access to research funding.  At the same time, it opens up the
 opportunity to faculty and students to select their next institution
 for reasons other than the hardware currently owned.

3.3 Connection Options

 There are a variety of connection options.  Factors besides costs may
 be used to select the appropriate option or a series of options.
 These factors include size and projected use (traffic) of the
 connection, nature of the use and purpose of the enterprise driving
 the effort.
 There are three basic categories of IP service connection available
 at this time.  All three categories support essentially the same set
 of functions.  They support a variety of line speeds (which affects
 total capacity of the connection) and will run on a variety of
 hardware platforms.  Performance depends on the line speed, the
 hardware and software used, and the use.
 The three basic connection categories are:
      a)  dedicated connection
      b)  dialup connection
      c)  dialup access to a connection service
 A dedicated connection requires a dedicated, point-to-point
 telecommunications circuit and an IP router (a dedicated networking
 device), linking the organization to the Internet.  Line speeds range
 from 9.6 Kb to 45 Mb, with the most common connection speeds being
 56Kb and 1.54 Mb.  A dedicated connection to the Internet most
 commonly connects to a campus-wide network with several hosts and
 workstations.

NETTF [Page 6] RFC 1359 Connecting to the Internet August 1992

 A dialup connection requires a workstation, which may or may not be
 dedicated to networking, with appropriate networking software and an
 attached modem.  It uses a regular phone line.  When a network
 connection is needed, the workstation is used to establish a
 connection over the modem and phone line. At the end of use, the
 connection is broken.  Line speeds range from 9.6Kb to 56Kb, with
 lower speeds being most common.  It can be used to connect a single
 workstation or a LAN.  However, if it is used to connect a LAN, the
 workstation must provide some routing functionality.
 Several IP service providers offer dialup access to a connection
 service.  Such a service provides only remote login capabilities or
 other limited functions by calling a local phone number and setting
 up a single function environment.  A terminal emulator is used from a
 MAC or a PC.  The service can support speeds from 2.4Kb - 19.2 Kb.
 Providers usually charge a flat-rate connection fee as opposed to a
 connection fee and traffic charge.
 As each type of connection alternative is examined, the organization
 must consider the technical evolution and cost projections.  The
 appropriate campus agency (usually an information or
 telecommunications area) should inventory the existing campus
 networking.  For those organizations that do currently have a campus
 network, the inventory will provide valuable input to the development
 of a short and long term technology evolution strategy.
 If a campus network does not yet exist, the development of a campus
 networking strategy may have the effect of an upgrade of technology
 throughout the campus.  In either case, the question of how to get
 network connectivity to the workstations on the faculty and staff
 desks, large user rooms, residence halls, libraries and campus stores
 must eventually be addressed.
 A connection to the Internet does not always imply the development of
 a campus-wide network.  In some cases, it may be appropriate for only
 a small segment of the organization's community to have access to the
 Internet.  Often, organizations will use such a strategy as a way to
 introduce the technology to a small group of enthusiastic customers
 who become champions in their own right.

3.4 Connection Service Providers

 There are several organizations, not-for-profit and commercial, that
 now offer connectivity services to the Internet.  Refer to Appendix A
 for a partial list.
 There is no hard and fast rule specifying to whom an organization
 should approach for a connection.  Historically, there has been a

NETTF [Page 7] RFC 1359 Connecting to the Internet August 1992

 tendency for an academic institution to become a member of the
 closest mid-level network.  The best approach, given the growing
 number of IP service providers, is to consider all the providers that
 offer services in the region, consider the variety and quality of
 services offered within in the framework of the organization's
 requirements and make an informed decision based on that information.

3.5 Sample Questions for Connection Services Providers

 It is often hard to know what questions should be asked while
 evaluating different service providers.  The following set of
 questions have been included at a starting point for any discussion
 with an IP service provider.

3.5.1 Sample Questions

    a) What connection services do they offer?  Please describe in
       detail (i.e., until you understand what they are talking
       about).
    b) What is the cost?
    c) What is included in the cost?
            -the circuit cost (installation and monthly charge)
            -the router (cost of onsite router, cost of offsite
             router)
            -hardware/software
            -maintenance, of what??
            -membership fee
    d) Is there any other kind of charge not included in the upfront
       cost?
    e) What are their support services?
            -NOC?
            -NIC?
            -What do they mean by either organization?
    f) Do they fix the router when it's broken?
    g) Do they require 24 hour access to the physical location?
    h) Do they require an onsite person be available to them to
       assist in problem diagnosis?
    i) What training is available?  Is it included in above cost??
    j) Do they have an acceptable use policy?

NETTF [Page 8] RFC 1359 Connecting to the Internet August 1992

    k) Is there an annual meeting?
    l) Do they have dedicated (i.e., full time), professional staff?
    m) Are there limitations to connecting to other parts of the
       Internet (i.e., can you everywhere you need to get?)?
    n) To whom else do they provide service?
            -references?
 If any of this information is confidential, consider finding another
 service provider.

3.6 Cost Assessment

 An organization contemplating a connection to the Internet should be
 careful to consider not only the physical connection and startup
 costs but also the costs of supporting the resulting service
 infrastructure.  This infrastructure includes the development and
 continued support of a campus-wide network.  At some universities,
 this network may only support data, but at many universities and
 other organizations, the development of a campus-wide network must
 evolve to consider data, voice, and video as the applications and
 requirements of information technologies supported by internetworking
 technologies expand.
 The Internet provides access to a wide variety of resources and a
 broad set of functions and services which may or may not have been
 available locally.  Support staff will require education and training
 to support and in turn train the faculty, other staff, and students
 in the use of the new technology and new resources made available.
 This training may mean strategic re-orientation and deployment of
 campus networking information services.  The costs of such added-
 value services should be planned for in advance.
 Increased use of the campus network will make additional demands on
 existing network technical staff.  Areas of the institution not
 currently participating in data network services will want to
 participate.  While not all of these services can be exactly
 quantified in terms of costs, they must be anticipated and
 incorporated into campus planning for an Internet connection.  These
 areas may include libraries, dormitories, student services, and data
 depositories.
 The implementation of an Internet connection provides the impetus for
 the development of a campus-wide strategy for the use of information
 technologies which may otherwise have never been accessible.  It may
 be difficult to quantify such benefits but they must be included in

NETTF [Page 9] RFC 1359 Connecting to the Internet August 1992

 the justification process.  The benefits can include access to
 expensive, scientific instruments such as computational services
 (i.e., massively parallel supercomputers) or particle accelerators.
 Clearly, this access means that the organization will have the use of
 these facilities without the cost of buying one, thus provide an
 effective recruiting tool for bright, young PHD's who require this
 kind of resource.

4. Initial Implementation and Startup Phase

 Once the institution decides to connect to the Internet, several
 tasks should get underway. In rough terms, the tasks relate to
 policy, process definition, education, promotion, technical and
 fiscal issues.  Several of these tasks should be addressed
 simultaneously.

4.1 Policy Issues

 The campus community should develop guidelines for acceptable use of
 the network.  These guidelines not only include policies governing
 the use of the campus net, but now extend to guidelines for the
 appropriate use of the Internet as well.  Appropriate use policy must
 include policies developed by the Internet community.  NSF has an
 acceptable use policy which applies to use of the backbone networks
 they provide.  See Appendix B.  Each of the mid-level networks as
 well as other organizations with their own backbone networks have
 their own acceptable use policy, which may not be the same as that of
 NSF's.  It is important to be aware of the limitations or lack of
 limitations when connecting and using various networks.
 The development of an acceptable use policy, in addition to providing
 protection to the institution provides an excellent opportunity to
 develop campus guidelines for privacy and security issues for
 computing in general.  Guidelines about data available on the network
 and the proper use of that data and how data may be properly used and
 who may properly use it, issues of copyright and attribution
 requirements of FTP-able documents; all these topics should be
 considered.
 Ethical guidelines concerning the use and possible misuse of software
 and data banks available over the Internet must be carefully
 developed and published across the institution and in the hands of
 faculty, staff, and students.  Considerable work has already been
 expended in developing several good references which can be used to
 guide the development of these policies.  See FYI 8, RFC 1244, "Site
 Security Handbook" [1].

NETTF [Page 10] RFC 1359 Connecting to the Internet August 1992

 In order to maximize usage for the entire Internet community, the
 campus community must learn proper etiquette in the use of the
 network, including such issues as the management of large files, data
 compression, and the efficient use of electronic mail.  See RFC 1087,
 "Ethics and the Internet" [2].

4.2 Connection to the Mid-level Network

 By this time, the organization should have decided what type of
 connection they want and with which service provider they will be
 working.  There are specific technical details which must be
 addressed in the initial deployment of the connection.  There is the
 evaluation of hardware and software.  The mid-level network or
 institution providing the connection is often an excellent resource
 to complement the on-campus group in determining the best
 configuration.  It is vital to understand before this time exactly
 what items the organization will be required to purchase or that will
 be provided at part of a fee-based service.  (Refer back to the
 sample set of questions.)

4.3 IP Addresses and Domain Names

 Every organization connecting to the network must have a unique
 identifier.  This identifier is known as the campus IP network
 address.  In addition to a numerical identifier, most organizations
 also get what is known as a domain name.  It is through the numerical
 address and the domain name that the organization's hosts will become
 know throughout the Internet.
 An organization must register with the authority that assigns a IP
 addresses and for a domain name.  The IP address is assigned by the
 Internet Address Naming Authority (IANA).  The Domain Name is picked
 by the organization.  A domain name is simply a character string that
 maps to the IP address.  It makes it easier for humans to remember
 than a unique set of numbers.  It is beyond the scope of this
 document to include a tutorial on IP addresses and domain names.  For
 more information on IP addresses and domain names, refer to Doug
 Comer's textbook, "Internetworking with TCP/IP: Principles,
 Protocols, and Architectures" [3].  (See also FYI 5, RFC 1178,
 "Choosing a Name for Your Computer" [4].)
 There are different classes of Internet addresses, which correspond
 to the number of hosts an organization anticipates connecting to its
 networks.  Thus the campus should carefully consider the planned
 growth of its own network in applying for the appropriate class of
 membership.  The IP service provider is an excellent source of advice
 in choosing a membership class.

NETTF [Page 11] RFC 1359 Connecting to the Internet August 1992

 At this time, there is no cost associated with registration for IP
 addresses or domain names.
 The actual procedure for applying for the IP address and domain name
 should be explained and is often provided to the connecting
 organization by the IP service provider.

4.4 Technical Issues

 The installation itself should occur with with as little disruption
 to the campus network as possible.  To accomplish a such deployment,
 the organization should develop a complete plan of action, which
 would include the following steps (some may be simultaneous; some may
 be done by the service provider; the list is not exhaustive):
    a)  order, install, test circuit or phone line
    b)  IP address and domain name registration
    c)  hardware purchasing/delivery
    d)  routing configurations/reconfig campus network
    e)  bring up router, test end-to-end connectivity
    f)  make available to campus

4.5 Support

 Perhaps the most challenging task in the initial deployment of the
 Internet connection is the resulting reorientation of network
 technical and network information services.  There are added
 responsibilities for network management as well as added network
 information services to support the connection.  Cognizant
 administrators must recognize, plan and budget for these added tasks.
 Administration must also ensure that there is a clear delineation of
 duties among technical and network information services staff to
 avoid needless duplication of effort or conflict.
 Concurrent with the deployment of the network, the education of the
 user community is critical.  This includes creation of documentation
 on basic information about the Internet and specific campus resources
 as well as details on remote resources (library catalogs, information
 servers, etc) and how to use them.
 Many organizations have already created excellent documentation that
 they are willing to share.  They generally only require attribution
 in return for distribution rights (for educational purposes only).

NETTF [Page 12] RFC 1359 Connecting to the Internet August 1992

4.6 Training

 Networking problems experienced by end-users are often the result of
 mis-information or campus-specific configurations as opposed to
 problems at the mid-level or backbone.  An investment in staff and
 user training and documentation at the beginning of the network
 deployment is an investment that will show a clear return in the long
 term.
 User training is critical but depending on the size of the campus, it
 is impossible to expect the support staff to train users on an
 individual basis.  Rather, it's important to consider developing and
 promoting a hierarchy of support personal, so the central support
 staff is actually training the trainers who then go out and support
 their particular group of users.
 The most critical course taught to users is on local information on
 the basic functions of the network, electronic mail, file transfer,
 and remote login.  Good documentation will help promote the
 successful use of the network.  Documentation should be clear,
 concise and to the point.  During the training, it is important to
 address the most commonly asked questions first.

4.7 Promotion

 A network is only as successful as the users say it is.  From the
 very beginning, the network must be presented to them as a useful
 tool.  Promotion, through newsletters and other appropriate
 communication vehicles must be considered a required activity.  An
 active promotion strategy will allow an organization to set the
 expectations of the users in regards to service and performance,
 especially important for a networking staff that is just learning.
 Faculty involvement from the very beginning is vital.  It is
 important to gain their support and to build on it.  Whether it is
 through faculty advisory committees or direct contact with
 individuals, their feedback and support can be a healthy measure of
 success.

5. Full Production/Maintenance

 As the campus community incorporates the Internet as part as its
 usual routine, those responsible for the campus network and the
 Internet connection must ensure the accessibility, reliability, and
 relative ease of use of the network.  This ongoing maturation of the
 network constitutes a vital service to the user community.

NETTF [Page 13] RFC 1359 Connecting to the Internet August 1992

 As the network becomes a crucial tool in the user community's daily
 routine, so does the interface between the operations, information,
 and user services staffs and the end users gain in importance.
 Responding to end-user problems with courtesy and accepting
 responsibility for resolving the end-user concern (as opposed the
 actual technical problem) creates a working environment of trust and
 partnership.

5.1 Operation Services

 There will be hardware and software support, including updating and
 maintaining compatible software revisions, planned replacement and
 maintenance of communications hardware to make use of new technology,
 and routine network operations center activities.  This includes IP
 number administration, monitoring of the network to determine usage
 patterns, optimal routing, continuous and accurate updates of known
 problems as well as trouble shooting problem areas of the campus net.
 The network staff will have to maintain its campus routing tables.
 If the site serves as a backbone site, it may have to maintain tables
 for its designated area.
 It is important to continue to have a close relationship between the
 operations staff and the engineering staff.  The operations staff
 must have a quick inroad to engineering to ensure quick responses to
 the user community as problems are reported.
 The scope of these technical activities depend upon the size of the
 campus network and the level of campus responsibility for the
 Internet connection.  The responsibilities grow both in scale and
 importance as the institution comes to rely on the services of the
 network and its access to the Internet.

5.2 Information and User Services

 The education, training and promotion activities associated with the
 network continue but mature both in scope and the level of network
 expertise.  Documentation efforts continue.  Documents are refined
 and reviewed periodically for accuracy and completeness, but
 individual consultation will change as network users become more
 sophisticated and experienced in using the network.  As more and more
 consulting and information services are made available through the
 network itself, network information staff will likely find themselves
 increasingly involved in "training the trainers" or in individual
 consultation and help sessions with faculty and researchers actively
 involved in collaborative research over the network.
 Promotion activities must also continue to involve new faculty and
 staff, to promote and advertise major campus network activities and

NETTF [Page 14] RFC 1359 Connecting to the Internet August 1992

 projects, and to highlight new services and projects available on the
 Internet.  The continuing effort, which can include a campus
 newsletter or periodic seminars on network services, is a necessary
 and crucial part of recruiting new and innovative uses of the
 Internet, which will act to justify continued development and
 investment.

6. Evaluation Strategies

 A system as complex and ubiquitous as the campus data network
 requires periodic review and evaluation.  As the campus network
 provides the primary access to the larger Internet community,
 evaluation strategies must include analyses of how and where the
 Internet is most heavily used and how campus data flows might
 optimize that traffic.
 Evaluation of network statistics provide key information on how the
 network is used and who is using it.  In turn, this must lead to
 assessment mechanisms to gauge user satisfaction with the network and
 the tools used to make use of the network.  At the base level, there
 are the tools provided within the network protocol itself -- Telnet,
 FTP, SMTP mail -- that provide fundamental access to the Internet.
 But as campus use of the network and the Internet matures, the campus
 network community itself will build on those tools to provide special
 "campus customized" tools used on the network.  Network services
 should evaluate user needs and, where appropriate, design user
 friendly interface mechanisms especially suited to special campus
 area needs.
 While the use of quantitative methods of evaluation are important,
 they can not replace qualitative methods.  If end-users are unhappy,
 if problems continue to be reported even though the statistics and
 technical monitors show few errors, organizations must recognize that
 serious problems do exist and take immediate action to resolve them.
 The use of the Internet itself and its impact on campus research and
 instruction goals must be reviewed and evaluated.  The introduction
 of new technology inevitably involves reorientation and new means of
 communication.  While this should be a benefit to the campus
 community as a whole, the new technologies may leave some segments of
 the community disoriented.  A careful evaluation of the impact of
 this new technology should determine not only which areas of campus
 benefit from Internet participation, but also which areas are not
 benefitting from the new technology.  Planning strategies should
 include special attention to areas not making use of network
 resources to make those areas aware of the potential benefits and to
 provide training in the use of the network.  In summary,
 universities, schools, colleges and institutions in the Internet

NETTF [Page 15] RFC 1359 Connecting to the Internet August 1992

 community must incorporate a mechanism to evaluate both hidden
 benefits as well as hidden costs of that participation.

7. Appendix A. Partial List of U.S. IP Service Providers

 ANS
         Joel Maloff
         Vice President - Client Services
         Advanced Network and Services
         2901 Hubbard Rd.
         Ann Arbor, MI 48105
         (313) 663-7610
         maloff@nis.ans.net
 BARRNET
         William Yundt
         Pine Hall Rm. 115
         Stanford, CA 94305-4122
         (415) 723-3104
         gd.why@forsythe.stanford.edu
         Fax: (415) 723-0010
 CERFnet
         Susan Estrada
         San Diego Supercomputer Center
         P.O. Box 85608
         San Diego, CA 92186-9784
         (619) 534-5067
         estradas@sdsc.edu
         Fax: (619) 534-5167
 CICnet
         Michael Staman
         President
         ITI  Building
         2901 Hubbard Drive  Pod G
         Ann Arbor, MI 48105
         staman@cic.net
         (313) 998-6101
         Fax: (313) 998-6105

NETTF [Page 16] RFC 1359 Connecting to the Internet August 1992

 Colorado Supernet
         Ken Harmon
         CSM Computing Center
         Colorado School Mines
         1500 Illinois
         Golden, Colorado 80401
         (303) 273-3471
         kharmon@csn.org
         Fax: (303) 273-3475
 CONCERT
         Joe Ragland
         CONCERT (Communications for NC
         Education, Research, and Technology)
         P.O. Box 12889
         3021 Cornwallis Road
         Research Triangle Park, NC 27709
         (919) 248-1404
         jrr@concert.net
         Fax: (919) 248-1405
 CREN
         Jim Conklin
         EDUCOM
         1112 16th Street NW
         Washington D.C.  20036
         (202) 872-4200
         conklin@bitnic.bitnet
         Fax: (202) 872-4318
 CSUNET
         Chris Taylor
         Manager, Network Technology
         Office of the Chancellor
         Information Resources and Technology
         P.O. Box 3842
         Seal Beach, CA  90740-7842
         (213) 985-9669
         chris@calstate.edu
         Fax:  (213) 985-9400

NETTF [Page 17] RFC 1359 Connecting to the Internet August 1992

 JVNCnet
         Sergio Heker
         6 von Neumann Hall
         Princeton University
         Princeton, NJ  08544
         (609) 258-2411
         heker@jvnc.net
         Fax: (609) 258-2424
 LOS NETTOS
         Ann Cooper
         USC/Information Sciences Institute
         4676 Admiralty Way
         Marina del Rey, Ca  90292
         (310) 822-1511
         Fax: (310) 823-6714
 Merit
         Eric Aupperle
         Merit Network
         2200 Bonisteel Blvd.
         Ann Arbor, MI  48109-2112
         (313) 764-9423
         ema@merit.edu
         Fax: (313) 747-3745
 MIDnet
         Dale Finkelson
         29 WSEC
         University of Nebraska
         Lincoln, NE  68588
         (402) 472-5032
         dmf@westie.unl.edu
         Fax: (402) 472-5280
 MRNET
         Dennis Fazio
         Executive Director
         The Minnesota Regional Network
         511 11th Avenue South, Box 212
         Minneapolis, Minnesota  55415
         (612) 342-2570
         dfazio@MR.NET
         Fax: (612) 344-1716

NETTF [Page 18] RFC 1359 Connecting to the Internet August 1992

 NCAR
         Joseph H. Choy
         P.O. Box 3000
         Boulder, CO  80307-3000
         (303) 497-1222
         choy@ncar.ucar.edu
         Fax: (303) 497-1137
 NEARnet
         John Rugo
         Accounts Manager
         BBN Systems and Technologies
         10 Moulton Street
         Cambridge, MA  02138
         (617) 873-2935
         jrugo@nic.near.net
 NETILLINOIS
         Ed Krol
         University of Illinois
         Computing Services Office
         1304 W. Springfield
         Urbana, IL  61801
         (217) 333-7886
         e-krol@uiuc.edu
 NevadaNet
         University of Nevada System
         Computing Services
         4505 Maryland Pkwy
         Las Vegas, NV  89154
         (702) 739-3557
 NorthWestNet
         Eric S. Hood
         Executive Director
         NorthWestNet
         2435 233rd Place NE
         Redmond, WA  98053
         (206) 562-3000
         ehood@nwnet.net

NETTF [Page 19] RFC 1359 Connecting to the Internet August 1992

 NYSERnet
         Jim Luckett
         NYSERNET INC
         111 College Place
         Room 3-211
         Syracuse, New York 13244
         (315) 443-4120
         luckett@nysernet.org
         Fax: (315) 425-7518
 OARnet
         Alison A. Brown
         Ohio Supercomputer Center
         1224 Kinnear Road
         Columbus, Ohio  43085
         (614) 292-9248
         alison@osc.edu
         Fax: (614) 292-7168
 Onet
         Eugene Siciunas
         4 Bancroft Ave., Rm. 116
         University of Toronto
         Toronto
         Ontario  M5S 1A1
         Canada
         (416) 978-5058
         eugene@vm.utcs.utoronto.ca
         Fax: (416) 978-6620
 PREPnet
         Thomas W. Bajzek
         530 North Neville Street
         Pittsburgh, PA  15213
         (412) 268-7870
         twb+@andrew.cmu.edu
         Fax: (412) 268-7875
 PSCnet
         Eugene F. Hastings, II
         Pittsburgh Supercomputing Center
         4400 5th Avenue
         Pittsburgh, PA 15213
         (412) 268-4960
         hastings@psc.edu
         Fax: (412) 268-5832

NETTF [Page 20] RFC 1359 Connecting to the Internet August 1992

 PSINet
         William L. Schrader
         President & CEO
         11800 Sunrise Valley Drive
         Suite 1100
         Reston, VA  22091
         (703) 620-6651
         wls@psi.com
         Fax: (703) 620-4586
 SDSCnet
         E. Paul Love, Jr.
         San Diego Supercomputer Center
         P.O. Box 85608
         San Diego, CA  92186-9784
         (619) 534-5043
         loveep@sdsc.edu
         Fax: (619) 514-5152
 Sesquinet
         Farrell Gerbode
         Office of Networking and
         Computing Systems
         Rice University
         Houston, TX  77251-1892
         (713) 527-4988
         farrell@rice.edu
         FAX: (713) 527-6099
 SURAnet
         Jack Hahn
         1353 Computer Science Center
         University of Maryland
         College Park, Maryland  20742-2411
         (301) 454-5434
         hahn@umd5.umd.edu
 THEnet
         Tracy LaQuey Parker
         Computation Center
         University of Texas
         Austin, TX 78712
         (512) 471-5046
         tracy@utexas.edu

NETTF [Page 21] RFC 1359 Connecting to the Internet August 1992

 VERnet
         James A. Jokl
         VERnet
         Academic Computing Center
         Gilmer Hall
         University of Virginia
         Charlottesville, VA  22903
         jaj@boole.acc.virginia.edu
 Westnet
         Pat Burns
         UCC
         601 S. Howes, 6th Floor South
         Colorado State University
         Fort Collins, CO  80523
         (303) 491-7260
         pburns@yuma.ACNS.ColoState.EDU
         Fax: (303) 491-2293

8. Appendix B. NSFNet Backbone Services Acceptable Use Policy

THE NSFNET BACKBONE SERVICES ACCEPTABLE USE POLICY - released February 1992

GENERAL PRINCIPLE:

 (1)  NSFNET Backbone services are provided to support open research
      and education in and among US research and instructional
      institutions, plus research arms of for-profit firms when
      engaged in open scholarly communication and research.  Use for
      other purposes is not acceptable.

SPECIFICALLY ACCEPTABLE USES:

 (2)  Communication with foreign researchers and educators in
      connection with research or instruction, as long as any network
      that the foreign user employs for such communication provides
      reciprocal access to US researchers and educators.
 (3)  Communication and exchange for professional development, to
      maintain currency, or to debate issues in a field or subfield of
      knowledge.
 (4)  Use for disciplinary-society, university-association,
      government-advisory, or standards activities related to the
      user's research and instructional activities.

NETTF [Page 22] RFC 1359 Connecting to the Internet August 1992

 (5)  Use in applying for or administering grants or contracts for
      research or instruction, but not for other fundraising or public
      relations activities.
 (6)  Any other administrative communications or activities in direct
      support of research and instruction.
 (7)  Announcements of new products or services for use in research or
      instruction, but not advertising of any kind.
 (8)  Any traffic originating from a network of another member agency
      of the Federal Networking Council if the traffic meets the
      acceptable use policy of that agency.
 (9)  Communication incidental to otherwise acceptable use, except for
      illegal or specifically unacceptable use.

UNACCEPTABLE USES:

(10)  Use for for-profit activities (consulting for pay, sales or
      administration of campus stores, sale of tickets to sports
      events, and so on) or use by for-profit institutions unless
      covered by the General Principle or as a specifically acceptable
      use.
 (11)  Extensive use for private or personal business.
 This statement applies to use of the NSFNET Backbone only.  NSF
 expects that connecting networks will formulate their own use
 policies.  The NSF Division of Networking and Communications Research
 and Infrastructure will resolve any questions about this Policy or
 its interpretation.

9. References

 [1]  Holbrook, P., and J. Reynolds, Editors, "Site Security
      Handbook", FYI 8, RFC 1244, CICNet, USC/Information Sciences
      Institute, July 1991.
 [2]  Internet Activities Board, "Ethics and the Internet", RFC 1087,
      IAB, January 1989.
 [3]  Comer, Douglas, "Internetworking with TCP/IP: Principles,
      Protocols, and Architectures", Second Edition, Prentice Hall,
      Englewood Cliffs, N.J, 1991.
 [4]  Libes, D., "Choosing a Name for Your Computer", FYI 5, RFC 1178,
      Integrated Systems Group/NIST, August 1990.

NETTF [Page 23] RFC 1359 Connecting to the Internet August 1992

10. Security Considerations

 Institutions who wish to connect to the Internet should be aware that
 the Internet network is, by nature, and open network.  As such,
 connecting institutions must make sure that security mechanisms are
 in force on their own campus network to ensure that unauthorized or
 inappropriate use of campus resources is not exploited by either the
 internal campus or by the external Internet community.  Moreover, it
 is incumbent on the institution to ensure that the campus community
 is aware of the proper use of the Internet.  The institution bears
 the responsibility to educate its users on the appropriate use of
 campus systems within the context of proper and ethical use of the
 Internet.
 An assessment of security on the campus network prior to connecting
 to the Internet should ensure that all required security patches are
 installed on all campus connected systems as well as on the campus
 network.  Systems with sensitive data or information should be
 physically secure as well as up to date with software security
 patches.  In so far as possible, network addressable devices should
 be secure.  Changes to these devices should only be effected by
 authorized network management personnel to avoid potential security
 risks.
 For more information on security issues, refer to FYI 8, RFC 1244,
 "Site Security Handbook" [1].
 In summary, it is only the cooperation and attention of each
 connecting institution on the Internet to security issues that will
 ensure the security of the Internet as a whole.

11. Authors' Addresses

 ACM SIGUCCS Networking Taskforce
 E-Mail discussion list:  nettf@comet.cit.cornell.edu
 Martyne M. Hallgren, Chairman
 Cornell University
 143 Caldwell Hall
 Ithaca, NY
 Phone: (607) 255-5510
 EMail: martyne@nr-tech.cit.cornell.edu
 Jack Pope
 University of San Diego
 San Diego, CA

NETTF [Page 24] RFC 1359 Connecting to the Internet August 1992

 Pat Smith
 MERIT, Inc.
 Ann Arbor, MI
 John Cordani
 Eastern Michigan University
 Ypsilanti, MI
 Steven Sather
 University of California, Los Angeles
 Los Angeles, CA
 Joyce McGowan
 University of Arkansas
 Fayetteville, Arkansas

NETTF [Page 25]

/data/webs/external/dokuwiki/data/pages/rfc/fyi/fyi16.txt · Last modified: 1992/08/13 23:28 (external edit)