Editor's Note: Minutes received 7/27 CURRENT_MEETING_REPORT_ Reported by John Clement/EDUCOM/CoSN Minutes of the Internet School Networking Working Group (ISN) The Agenda had two items: connectivity models, and development of an FAQ archive. A third item was introduced by Scott Williamson: developing a recommendation on domain naming schemes for K-12 schools and organizations. We reviewed connectivity alternatives and growth paths. The mailing list for this subtask is connect@unmvma.unm.edu. We began by a brief review of a number of documents (of varying formality and draft status) on topics related to connectivity for schools. Newman, Denis, Susan Bernstein and Paul A. Reese. Local Infrastructures for School Networking: Current Models and Prospects. BBN Report No. 7726, April 1992. Available in hardcopy from Bank Street School of Education and by ftp from nysernet.org. Susan Bernstein presented major findings of this report. She made it clear that the report was not itself about connectivity alternatives themselves, but about the current situation in school networks and machine- (or LAN-) to-WAN connectivity. Many schools have LANs, and many have WANs; but the latter are almost exclusively used for administrative (not instructional) purposes; and the instructional LANs are not connected to the available WANs, and indeed often instructional LANs are dedicated to Individualized Learning Software (ILS) systems, using proprietary network protocols. The terminal-host model is almost entirely what is currently used for school-to-WAN connection. The paper recommends a possible growth path from the point of individual dialin connections from a machine to a host resource, a path that does ``..not assume the initial availability of LANs but begin(s) developing the expertise and the software to support true network connections in schools with stand-alone computers..'' (p.34). The path would lead schools through connections to a remote network, to a leased line to a local Internet node, and finally to a local Internet server. Reilly, Rob, and Kurt Lidl. A National Computer Infrastructure: The Light at the End of the Tunnel May be an Oncoming Rain! Unpublished manuscript, July 1992. Available by request from rreilly@athena.mit.edu. Rob Reilly sketched the main points of his paper as emphasizing the need to deal with both the physical network and the logical one; a synopsis of connectivity models within one overview structure; and process suggestions for future steps. Burns, Pat. Establishing Connections to the Internet. Unpublished 1 manuscript, n.d. (3/92 app.?) Available by ftp as models_last_revision.ps from ariel.unm.edu (library directory). No one was present from CSU's shop to discuss this paper. Hastings, Eugene. Connectivity Models for Internet Access. Version 1.1. Monday, July 13, 1992. Unpublished manuscript. Available by request from hastings@psc.edu. Gene Hastings' paper begins with the presumption that one is connecting networks together. He calls for schools to build school-specific infrastructures (up to a consortium of school districts) and then connect in bulk to the Internet. His models address needs and constraints of connectivity situations in different situations -- for example, in some areas telephone tariffs are based on metered but untimed calls. In others, the near future will bring ISDN capability -- in the Bell Atlantic market, perhaps for as low as $40/month. Pricing models are not yet set; there is a chance for user communities such as schools to affect these decisions. However, many of the connection options are currently being priced as extra-cost luxury items for small customers, which is exactly the wrong approach. Discussion then began of the various models and designs presented. Susan Bernstein pointed out that the model outlined by Reilly and Lidl was, even in its fullest expression, not yet a ``local Internet server'' model, but relied on a leased-line connection to an external host machine, itself on the Internet. For a long-term solution to the problem of connecting K-12, we have to migrate Internet and other servers to the school settings. Brian Lloyd mentioned work he was doing in the Bay Area to connect two schools, as well as preparing a paper for BARRNET on methods. He reported that he was obtaining old PCs and installing them as routers using PPP. He envisions, he said, a three-phase process: in phase 1 a connection to a school is provided, but (the campus or regional -- some already-connected group) carries the technical and administrative load; in phase 2, the school learns to manage its own access to the network; and in phase 3 the school provides a name and file server for a group of schools. Gerry White of Applitek mentioned that his company is exploring providing broadband Ethernet connectivity to schools via installed cable. An unspecified number of the nation's school cable plants have ``backchannel'' capability, which will allow interactive uses. A number of concerns were expressed with issues such as tuning and management of broadband over cable, with ghosting and interference and their impact on packet transmission; but there was consensus that such models were well worth exploring and noting in an RFC draft. Eric Hood of NorthWestNet and FARNET K-12 asked that any analysis of 2 models consider costs of network management. Michael Powell of Pacific Bell mentioned that his company has entered an agreement with California State University and the California Technology Project to provide gateways for an Internet connection to every educator in the state, under the name Knowledge Network. They are eager to participate in the process of developing connectivity models. John Clement offered that there seemed to be enough written, and enough areas of general agreement between the different documents, that one could now attempt a draft RFC. He asked for volunteers, and said there would be a document posted for discussion before IETF 25 in Washington DC (dates??). The following individuals volunteered: Rob Reilly, Lanesboro, MA Schools (first draft synthesizer) Susan Bernstein (reviewer) Eugene Hastings, Pittsburgh Supercomputer Center Ellen Hoffman, Merit Network Inc. Brian Lloyd and Constance Lloyd, Cameron Park, CA Michael Powell, Pacific Bell Gerry White, Applitek Development of a FAQ (``frequently-asked-questions'') archive on school connectivity issues. The mailing list for this subtask is faq@unmvma.unm.edu. It was mentioned that Ed Vielmetti of CICnet has installed the Kidsnet archives on a WAIS server. The resource seems likely to provide useful ``first answers'' for an FAQ file. John Clement offered to use the cosndisc (Consortium for School Networking) discussion forum to develop a set of questions. April Marine of SRI and Jennifer Sellers of NASA then offered to draft answers to the questions using the Kidsnet WAIS resource. It was agreed that a draft FAQ file could be made available by the time of IETF 25 in Washington, DC. Developing a recommendation on domain naming schemes for K-12 schools and organizations. A discussion was introduced by Scott Williamson of ISI. An increasing number of requests are being received for K-12 domain names, and there is no agreed- upon naming structure. The prospect of a very large number of K-12 domains and nodes raises serious concerns. Discussion points raised: already existing are names such as xxhs.edu. Expansion of this model will provide a very flat structure with very little information, and offer a lot of chances for conflict over names (there are a large number of George Washington or Martin Luther King, Jr. high schools). Additionally, although elementary schools and high schools are identified with relative clarity, there is considerable ambiguity in the middle range (middle schools, intermediate schools, junior high schools). Finally, the point was raised that this information is of 3 uncertain value for a naming domain. Considerable discussion was held on the notion of a geography- based naming convention within the .us domain. Ellen Hoffman of Merit Network, Inc. offered to prepare a draft document for discussion on this issue. The general mailing list for this discussion is isn-wg@unmvma.unm.edu. Copies of the papers cited, can be had by asking John Clement . Reactions and comments are much appreciated. John C. Attendees John Clement clement@educom.edu Daniel Dern ddern@world.std.com Sallie Fellows sallie%ed@psc.plymouth.edu Constance Fleenor Lloyd cfleenor@lloyd.com Maria Gallagher maria@nsipo.nasa.gov Neil Haller nmh@thumper.bellcore.com Martyne Hallgren martyne@mitchell.cit.cornell.edu Eugene Hastings hastings@a.psc.edu Alisa Hata hata@cac.washington.edu Ellen Hoffman ellen_hoffman@um.cc.umich.edu J. Paul Holbrook holbrook@cic.net James Keller j.keller@sprint.com Hock-Koon Lim lim@po.cwru.edu Brian Lloyd brian@lloyd.com Daniel Long long@nic.near.net Kim Long klong@sura.net April Marine april@nisc.sri.com Cindy Mazza Cyndi Mills cmills@nnsc.nsf.net Marsha Perrott mlp+@andrew.cmu.edu Michael Powell mdpowel@pacbell.com Robert Reilly rreilly@athena.mit.edu Joyce K. Reynolds jkrey@isi.edu Michael Roberts roberts@educom.edu Anthony Rutkowski amr@sprint.com Jennifer Sellers sellers@nsinic.gsfc.nasa.gov Gregory Vaudreuil gvaudre@nri.reston.va.us Carol Ward cward@westnet.net Moira West mjw@cert.org Evan Wetstone evan@rice.edu Gerard White Scott Williamson scottw@nic.ddn.mil 4