Slide1: ICFA Standing Committee on Interregional Connectivity (SCIC) Harvey B. Newman California Institute of Technology ICFA Meeting, Beijing August 20, 2004


ICFA Standing Committee on Interregional Connectivity (SCIC): ICFA Standing Committee on Interregional Connectivity (SCIC) Created by ICFA in July 1998 in Vancouver ; Following ICFA-NTF CHARGE: Make recommendations to ICFA concerning the connectivity between the Americas, Asia and Europe (and network requirements of HENP) As part of the process of developing these recommendations, the committee should Monitor traffic on world networks Keep track of technology developments Periodically review forecasts of future bandwidth needs, and Provide early warning of potential problems Create subcommittees as needed to meet the charge Representatives: Major labs, ECFA, ACFA, N. and S. American Users The chair of the committee reports to ICFA once per year, at its joint meeting with laboratory directors (Today)


SCIC in 2003-4A Period of Intensive Activity: SCIC in 2003-4 A Period of Intensive Activity http://cern.ch/ICFA-SCIC/ Monitoring: Les Cottrell (http://www.slac.stanford.edu/xorg/icfa/scic-netmon) With Richard Hughes-Jones (Manchester), Sergio Novaes (Sao Paolo); Sergei Berezhnev (RUHEP), Fukuko Yuasa (KEK), Daniel Davids (CERN), Sylvain Ravot (Caltech), Shawn McKee (Michigan) Advanced Technologies: Richard Hughes-Jones, With Olivier Martin(CERN), Vladimir Korenkov (JINR, Dubna), Harvey Newman The Digital Divide: Alberto Santoro (UERJ, Brazil) With V. Ilyin (MSU), Y. Karita(KEK), D.O. Williams (CERN), D. Son (Korea), H. Hoorani, S. Zaidi (Pakistan), S. Banerjee (India), V. White (FNAL), J. Ibarra, Heidi Alvarez (AMPATH) Key Requirements: Harvey Newman et al.


SCIC in 2003-2004 http://cern.ch/icfa-scic: SCIC in 2003-2004 http://cern.ch/icfa-scic Three 2004 Reports; Presented to ICFA in February Main Report: “Networking for HENP” [H. Newman et al.] Includes Brief Updates on Monitoring, the Digital Divide and Advanced Technologies [*] A World Network Overview (with 27 Appendices): Status and Plans for the Next Few Years of National & Regional Networks, and Optical Network Initiatives Monitoring Working Group Report [L. Cottrell] Digital Divide in Russia [V. Ilyin] August 2004 Update Reports at the SCIC Web Site: See http://icfa-scic.web.cern.ch/ICFA-SCIC/documents.htm Asia Pacific, Latin America, GLORIAD (US-Ru-Ko-China); Brazil, Korea, etc.


SCIC in 2003-2004http://cern.ch/icfa-scic: SCIC in 2003-2004 http://cern.ch/icfa-scic Strong Focus on the Digital Divide Continues Progress in Monitoring Intensive Work in the Field: Presentations & Demos at > 60 Meetings and Workshops: E.g., Internet2, TERENA, AMPATH, APAN, CHEP2003, SC2003, Trieste, Telecom World 2003, SC2003, WSIS/RSIS, GLORIAD Launch, Digital Divide and HEPGrid Workshop (Feb. 16-20 in Rio), GNEW2004, GridNets2004, NASA ONT Workshop, … etc. etc. 3rd Int’l Grid Workshop in Daegu (August 26-28, 2004); Plan for 2nd ICFA Digital Divide and Grid Workshop in Daegu (May 2005) HENP increasingly visible to governments; heads of state: Through Network advances (records), Grid developments, Work on the Digital Divide and issues of Global Collaboration Also through the World Summit on the Information Society Process. Next Step is WSIS II in TUNIS November 2005 A Striking Picture Continues to Emerge: Remarkable Progress in Some Regions, and a Deepening Digital Divide Among Nations


SCIC Main Conclusion for 2003Setting the Tone for 2004: SCIC Main Conclusion for 2003 Setting the Tone for 2004 The disparity among regions in HENP could increase even more sharply, as we learn to use advanced networks effectively, and we develop dynamic Grid systems in the “most favored” regions We must therefore take action, and work to Close the Digital Divide To make Physicists from All World Regions Full Partners in Their Experiments; and in the Process of Discovery This is essential for the health of our global experimental collaborations, our plans for future projects, and our field.


ICFA Report: Networks for HENPGeneral Conclusions (2): ICFA Report: Networks for HENP General Conclusions (2) Reliable high End-to-end Performance of networked applications such as large file transfers and Data Grids is required. Achieving this requires: End-to-end monitoring extending to all regions serving our community. A coherent approach to monitoring that allows physicists throughout our community to extract clear, unambiguous and inclusive information is a prerequisite for this. Upgrading campus infrastructures. These are still not designed to support Gbps data transfers in most of HEP centers. One reason for the under-utilization of National and International backbones, is the lack of bandwidth to groups of end-users inside the campus. Removing local, last mile, and nat’l and int’l bottlenecks end-to-end, whether technical or political in origin. While National and International backbones have reached 2.5 to 10 Gbps speeds in many countries, the bandwidths across borders, the countryside or the city may be much less. This problem is very widespread in our community, with examples stretching from China to South America to the Northeastern U.S. Root causes for this vary, from lack of local infrastructure to unfavorable pricing policies.


ICFA Report (2/2004) Update: Main Trends Continue, Some Accelerate: ICFA Report (2/2004) Update: Main Trends Continue, Some Accelerate Current generation of 2.5-10 Gbps network backbones and major Int’l links arrived in the last 2-3 Years [US+Europe+Japan; Now Korea and China] Capability: 4 to Hundreds of Times; Much Faster than Moore’s Law Proliferation of 10G links across the Atlantic Now; Will Begin use of Multiple 10G Links (e.g. US-CERN) Along Major Paths by Fall 2005 Direct result of Falling Network Prices: $ 0.5 – 1M Per Year for 10G Ability to fully use long 10G paths with TCP continues to advance: 7.5 Gbps X 16kkm (August 2004) Technological progress driving equipment costs in end-systems lower “Commoditization” of Gbit Ethernet (GbE) ~complete: ($20-50 per port) 10 GbE commoditization (e.g. < $ 2K per NIC with TOE) underway Grid-based Analysis demands end-to-end high performance & management Some regions (US, Europe) moving to owned or leased dark fiber Emergence of the “Hybrid” Network Model: GNEW2004; UltraLight, GLIF The rapid rate of progress is confined mostly to the US, Europe, Japan and Korea, as well as the major Transatlantic routes; this threatens to cause the Digital Divide to become a Chasm


We are Following the HENP Bandwidth Roadmap for Major Links (in Gbps): We are Following the HENP Bandwidth Roadmap for Major Links (in Gbps) Continuing Trend: ~1000 Times Bandwidth Growth Per Decade; Keeping Pace with Network BW Usage (ESNet, SURFNet etc.)


Evolving Quantitative Science Requirements for Networks (DOE High Perf. Network Workshop): Evolving Quantitative Science Requirements for Networks (DOE High Perf. Network Workshop)


Internet 2 Land Speed Record (LSR): Entries judged on product of transfer speed and distance end-to-end, using standard Internet (TCP/IP) protocols. IPv6 record: 4.0 Gbps between Geneva and Phoenix (SC2003) IPv4 Multi-stream record with Windows: 6.62 Gbps between Caltech and CERN (16 kkm; “Grand Tour d’Abilene”) June 2004 We have exceeded 100 Petabit-m/sec with both Linux & Windows Single Stream 7.5 Gbps X 16 kkm with Linux Achieved in July Concentrate now on reliable Terabyte-scale file transfers Note System Issues: CPU, PCI-X Bus, NIC, I/O Controllers, Drivers Monitoring of the Abilene traffic in LA: Internet 2 Land Speed Record (LSR) Petabitmeter (10^15 bit*meter) LSR History – IPv4 single stream http://www.guinnessworldrecords.com/ June 2004 Record Network


National Lambda Rail (NLR): National Lambda Rail (NLR) NLR Coming Up Now Initially 4 10G Wavelengths Northern Route Operation by 4Q04 Internet2 HOPI Initiative (w/HEP) To 40 10G Waves in Future Transition beginning now to optical, multi-wavelength Community owned or leased “dark fiber” networks for R&E nl, de, pl, cz,jp 18 US States


JGN2: Japan Gigabit Network (4/04 – 3/08)20 Gbps Backbone, 6 Optical Cross-Connects: JGN2: Japan Gigabit Network (4/04 – 3/08) 20 Gbps Backbone, 6 Optical Cross-Connects


ICFA/SCIC Network Monitoring: ICFA/SCIC Network Monitoring Prepared by Les Cottrell, SLAC, for ICFA www.slac.stanford.edu/grp/scs/net/talk03/icfa-aug04.ppt


Coverage: Coverage Now monitoring 650 sites in 115 countries In last 9 months added: Several sites in Russia (thanks GLORIAD) Many hosts in Africa (5  36 now; in 27 out of 54 countries) Monitoring sites in Pakistan and Brazil (Sao Paolo and Rio) Working to install monitoring host in Bangalore, India


PingER: World View from SLAC: PingER: World View from SLAC S.E. Europe, Russia: Catching up Latin Am., Mid East, China: Keeping up India, Africa: Falling Behind Important for policy makers C. Asia, Russia, SE Europe, L. America, M. East, China: 4-5 yrs behind India, Africa: 7 yrs behind View from CERN Confirms This View


Achieving throughput: Achieving throughput User can’t achieve throughput available (Wizard gap) TCP Stack, End-System and/or Local, Regional, Nat’l Network Issues Big step just to know what is achievable (e.g. 7.5 Gbps over 16 kkm Caltech-CERN)


Collaborations/funding: Collaborations/funding Good news: Active collaboration with NIIT Pakistan to develop network monitoring including PingER Travel funded by US State department for 1 year FNAL & SLAC continue support for PingER management and coordination Bad news: DoE funding for PingER terminated Proposal to EC 6th framework with ICTP, ICT Cambridge UK, CONAE Argentina, Usikov Inst Ukraine, STAC Vietnam VUB Belgium rejected Proposal to IDRC/Canada February, no word Hard to get funding for operational needs For quality data need constant vigilance (host disappears, security blocks pings, need to update remote host lists …)


Slide19: Asia Pacific Academic Network Connectivity Better North/South Linkages within Asia JP-SG link: 155Mbps in 2005 is proposed to NSF by CIREN JP- TH link: 2Mbps  45Mbps in 2004 is being studied. CIREN is studying an extension to India Connectivity to US from JP, KO, AU is Advancing Rapidly. Progress in the Region, and to Europe is Much Slower APAN Status July 2004


Slide20:          


Slide21:     


Trans-Eurasia Information NetworkTEIN (2004-2007): Trans-Eurasia Information Network TEIN (2004-2007) Circuit between KOREN(Korea) and RENATER(France). AP Beneficiaries: China, Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines, Thailand, Vietnam (Non-beneficiaries: Brunei, Japan, Korea, Singapore EU partners: NRENs of France, Netherlands, UK The scope expanded to South-East Asia and China recently. Upgraded to 34 Mbps in 11/2003. Upgrade to 155Mbps planned 12M Euro EU Funds Coordinating Partner DANTE Direct EU-AP Link; Other Links go Across the US


APAN Recommendations(at July 2004 Meeting in CAIRNS, Au): APAN Recommendations (at July 2004 Meeting in CAIRNS, Au) New issues demand attention Application measurement, particularly end-to-end network performance measurement is increasingly critical (deterministic networking) Security must now be a consideration for every application and every network. Central Issues for APAN this decade Stronger linkages between applications and infrastructure - neither can exist independently Stronger application and infrastructure linkages among APAN members. Continuing focus on APAN as an organization that represents infrastructure interests in Asia Closer connection between APAN the infrastructure & applications organization and regional political organizations (e.g. APEC, ASEAN)


Internet in China (J.P.Wu APAN July 2004): Internet in China (J.P.Wu APAN July 2004) Internet users in China: from 6.8 Million to 78 Million within 6 months IP Addresses: 32M（1A+233B+146C） Backbone：2.5-10G DWDM+Router International links：20G Exchange Points：> 30G（BJ，SH，GZ） Last Miles Ethernet，WLAN，ADSL，CTV，CDMA，ISDN，GPRS，Dial-up Need IPv6  


APAN China Consortium: APAN China Consortium Has been established in 1999.  The China Education and Research Network (CERNET), the Natural Science Foundation of China Network (NSFCNET) and the China Science and Technology Network (CSTNET) are the main three advanced networks. CERNet 2.5 Gbps NSFCnet Tsinghua --- Tsinghua University PKU --- Peking University NSFC --- Natural Science Foundation of China CAS --- China Academy of Sciences BUPT --- Beijing Univ. of Posts and Telecom. BUAA --- Beijing Univ. of Aero- and Astronautics


China: CERNET Update: China: CERNET Update 1995, 64K Nation wide backbone connecting 8 cities, 100 Universities 1998, 2M Nation wide backbone connecting 20 cities, 300 Universities 2000, Own dark fiber crossing 30+ major cities and 30,000 kilometers 2001, CERNET DWDM/SDH network finished 2001, 2.5G/155M Backbone connecting 36 cities, 800 universities 2003,1300 + universities and institutes, over 15 million users


CERNET2 and Key Technologies: CERNET2 and Key Technologies CERNET 2: Next Generation Education and Research Network in China CERNET 2 Backbone connecting 15-20 GigaPOPs at 2.5G-10Gbps (I2-like Model) Connecting 200 Universities and 100+ Research Institutes at 1Gbps-10Gbps Native IPv6 and Lambda Networking Support/Deployment of the following technologies: E2E performance monitoring Middleware and Advanced Applications Multicast


APAN-KR : KREONET/KREONet2 II: APAN-KR : KREONET/KREONet2 II


GLORIAD: Global Optical Ring (US-Ru-Cn; Korea Now Full Partner ): GLORIAD: Global Optical Ring (US-Ru-Cn; Korea Now Full Partner ) Also Important for Intra-Russia Connectivity; Education and Outreach DOE: ITER Distributed Ops.; Fusion-HEP Cooperation NSF: Collaboration of Three Major R&E Communities Aug. 8 2004: P.K. Young, Korean IST Advisor to President Announces Korea Joining GLORIAD TEIN gradually to 10G, connected to GLORIAD Asia Pacific Info. Infra- Structure (1G) will be backup net to GLORIAD


Slide30: Outgrowth of 6-year US-Russia NaukaNet program OC3 circuits Moscow-Chicago-Beijing since January 2004 OC3 circuit Moscow-Beijing July 2004 (completes the ring); IP traffic August Korea (KISTI) joining US, Russia, China as full partner in GLORIAD Plans developing for Central Asian extension (w/Kyrgyz Government) Rapid traffic growth with heaviest US use from DOE (FermiLab), NASA, NOAA, NIH and Universities (UMD, IU, UCB, UNC, UMN, PSU, Harvard, Stanford, Wash., Oregon, 250+ others) GLORIAD 5-year Proposal Pending (with US NSF) for expansion: 2.5G Moscow-Amsterdam-Chicago-Seattle-Hong Kong-Pusan-Beijing circuits early 2005; 10G ring around northern hemisphere 2007; multiple wavelength service 2009 – providing hybrid circuit-switched (primarily Ethernet) and routed services > 5TBytes now transferred monthly via GLORIAD to US, Russia, China Global Ring Network for Advanced Applications Development


Slide31: Research Networking in Latin America: August 2004 The only Countries with research network connectivity now in Latin America: Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Mexico, Venezuela AmPath Provided connectivity for some South American countries [Three Year Global Crossing Donation] New: CLARA Regional Network Connecting 19 Countries: Argentina Dominican Republic Panama Brasil Ecuador Paraguay Bolivia El Salvador Peru Chile Guatemala Uruguay Colombia Honduras Venezuela Costa Rica Mexico Nicaragua Cuba


Slide32: Latin America: CLARA Network (2004-2006 EU Project) Significant contribution from European Comission and Dante through ALICE project NRENs in 18 LA countries forming a regional network for collaboration traffic Initial backbone ring bandwidth f 155 Mbps Spur links at 10 to 45 Mbps (Cuba at 4 Mbps by satellite) Initial connection to Europe at 622 Mbps from Brazil Tijuana (Mexico) PoP soon to be connected to US through dark fibre link (CUDI-CENIC) access to US, Canada and Asia - Pacific Rim


Slide33: NSF IRNC 2004: Two Proposals to Connect CLARA to the US (and Europe) 1st Proposal: FIU and CENIC 2nd Proposal: Indiana and Internet2 Note: CHEPREO (FIU, UF, FSU Caltech, UERJ, USP, RNP) 622 Mbps Sao Paolo – Miami Link Started in August


Slide34: GIGA Project: Experimental Gbps Network: Sites in Rio and Sao Paolo Fapesp telcos Unesp USP – Incor USP - C.Univ. CPqD LNLS Unicamp LNCC CPTEC UFF CTA INPE CBPF LNCC Fiocruz IME IMPA-RNP PUC-Rio telcos UERJ UFRJ Universities IME PUC-Rio UERJ UFF UFRJ Unesp Unicamp USP R&D Centres CBPF - physics CPqD - telecom CPTEC - meteorology CTA - aerospace Fiocruz - health IMPA - mathematics INPE - space sciences LNCC - HPC LNLS - physics About 600 km extension - not to scale Slide from M. Stanton


Slide35: “This is wonderful NEWS! our colleagues from Salvador -Bahia will can start to work with us on CMS.” Extension of the GIGA Project Using 3000 km of dark fiber. “A good and real Advancement for Science in Brazil” – A. Santoro. GIGA Project in Rio and Sao Paolo


Slide36: HEPGRID (CMS) in Brazil HEPGRID-CMS/BRAZIL is a project to build a Grid that At Regional Level will include CBPF,UFRJ,UFRGS,UFBA, UERJ & UNESP At International Level will be integrated with CMS Grid based at CERN; focal points include iVGDL/Grid3 and bilateral projects with Caltech Group UFRGS UERJ UFRJ T1 Individual Machines On line systems Brazilian HEPGRID CBPF UNESP/USP SPRACE-Working Gigabit CERN 2.5 - 10 Gbps UFBA UERJ Regional Tier2 Ctr T4 T0 +T1 T2 T1 T3 T2 UERJ: T2T1, 100500 Nodes; Plus T2s to 100 Nodes


Slide37: Latin America Science Areas Interested in Improving Connectivity ( by Country) Networks and Grids: The Potential to Spark a New Era of Science in the Region


AFRICA: Key Trends: AFRICA: Key Trends Growth in traffic and lack of infrastructure Predominance of Satellite; But these satellites are heavily subscribed Slow roll out of downstream bandwidth limiting markets: No regional fiber in East, Central or Interior regions. 52M Mobile phone subscribers by end 2003; > 2X fixed line phone customers Int’l Traffic: Only ~1% of traffic on links is for Internet connections; Most Internet traffic (for ~80% of countries) via satellite Flourishing Grey market for Internet & VOIP traffic using VSAT dishes Many Regional fiber projects in “planning phase” (some languished in the past); Only links from South Africa to Nimibia, Botswana done so far Int’l fiber Project: SAT-3/WASC/SAFE Cable from South Africa to Portugal Along West Coast of Africa Supplied by Alcatel to Worldwide Consortium of 35 Carriers 40 Gbps by Mid-2003; Heavily Subscribed. Ultimate Capacity 120 Gbps Extension to Interior Mostly by Satellite: < 1 Mbps to ~100 Mbps typical M. Jensen and P. Hamilton Infrastructure Report, March 2004 Note: World Conference on Physics and Sustainable Development, 10/31 – 11/2/05 in Durban South Africa; Part of World Year of Physics 2005. Sponsors: UNESCO, ICTP, IUPAP, APS, SAIP


AFRICA: Nectar Net Initiative: AFRICA: Nectar Net Initiative Growing Need to connect academic researchers, medical researchers & practitioners to many sites in Africa Examples: CDC & NIH: Global AIDS Project, Dept. of Parasitic Diseases, Nat’l Library of Medicine (Ghana, Nigeria) Gates $ 50M HIV/AIDS Center in Botswana; Project Coord at Harvard Africa Monsoon AMMA Project, Dakar Site [cf. East US Hurricanes] US Geological Survey: Global Spatial Data Infrastructure Distance Learning: Emory-Ibadan (Nigeria); Research Channel Content But Africa is Hard: 11M Sq. Miles, 600 M People, 54 Countries Little Telecommunications Infrastructure Approach: Use SAT-3/WASC Cable (to Portugal), GEANT Across Europe, Amsterdam-NY Link Across the Atlantic, then Peer with R&E Networks such as Abilene in NYC Cable Landings in 8 West African Countries and South Africa Pragmatic approach to reach end points: VSAT satellite, ADSL, microwave, etc. W. Matthews Georgia Tech


Sample Bandwidth Costs for African Universities: Sample Bandwidth Costs for African Universities Sample size of 26 universities Average Cost for VSAT service: Quality, CIR, Rx, Tx not distinguished Bandwidth prices in Africa vary dramatically; are in general many times what they could be if universities purchase in volume Roy Steiner Internet2 Workshop


Slide41: NEWS: Bulletin: ONE TWO WELCOME BULLETIN General Information Registration Travel Information Hotel Registration Participant List How to Get UERJ/Hotel Computer Accounts Useful Phone Numbers Program Contact us: Secretariat Chairmen  CLAF  CNPQ FAPERJ        UERJ SPONSORS HEPGRID and Digital Divide Workshop UERJ, Rio de Janeiro, Feb. 16-20 2004 Theme: Global Collaborations, Grids and Their Relationship to the Digital Divide ICFA, understanding the vital role of these issues for our field’s future, commissioned the Standing Committee on Inter-regional Connectivity (SCIC) in 1998, to survey and monitor the state of the networks used by our field, and identify problems. For the past three years the SCIC has focused on understanding and seeking the means of reducing or eliminating the Digital Divide, and proposed to ICFA that these issues, as they affect our field of High Energy Physics, be brought to our community for discussion. This led to ICFA’s approval, in July 2003, of the Digital Divide and HEP Grid Workshop.  More Information: http://www.lishep.uerj.br Tutorials C++ Grid Technologies Grid-Enabled Analysis Networks Collaborative Systems Sessions & Tutorials Available (w/Video) on the Web


Slide42: HEPGRID and Digital Divide Workshop UERJ, Rio Feb. 16-20 2004 Summary Worldviews of Networks and Grid Projects and the Relationship to the Digital Divide: [Newman, Santoro, Gagliardi, Avery, Cottrell] View from Major Experiments and Labs (D0, ATLAS, CMS, LHCb, ALICE; Fermilab): [Blazey, Jones, Foa, Nakada, Carminati] Progress in Acad. & Research Networks in Europe, Asia Pacific, Latin America [Williams, Tapus, Karita, Son, Ibarra] Major Network Initatives: I2, GLIF, NLR, Aarnet, CLARA [Preston, de Laat, Silvester, McLaughlin, Stanton, Olson] View from/for Developing Countries [Willers, Ali, Davalos, De Paula, Canessa, Sciutto, Alvarez] Grids and Digital Divide in Russia [Ilyin, Soldatov] Other Fields: ITER (Fusion), MammoGrid: [Velikhov, Amendolia] Round Tables: Network Readiness, Digital Divide in Latin America Special Talks on HEP in Brazil [Lederman], and Review of the CERN “Role of Science in the Information Society” Event [Hoffmann] Participation of Latin American NRENs, and Gov’t Officials 152 Participants, 18 Countries: BR 107, US 18, CH 8, AG 3, FR 3,… See http://www.lishep.uerj.br/WorkshopSchedule.html


Findings and Recommendations: D.O. Williams (at LISHEP2004) on the Digital Divide in Europe: Findings and Recommendations: D.O. Williams (at LISHEP2004) on the Digital Divide in Europe The Digital Divide Exists The depth of the digital divide varies very greatly from country to country There are four countries in Eastern Europe with a high overall standard of research networking. Reasons include: Good support for research networking at gov’tal level Access to dark fibre where/when necessary History of participation in joint European projects The majority of countries fall very far behind those in western Europe The consequences of this digital divide are serious Those countries without an adequate research network will suffer from “research exclusion”


Findings and Recommendations on the Digital Divide in Europe (Williams): Findings and Recommendations on the Digital Divide in Europe (Williams) Access to Dark Fibre is Vital Access to dark fibre enables the NRENs in small eastern European countries to upgrade the capacity of the backbone and access links one hundred-fold without spending much more on the infrastructure At the present moment this is the main step which could be taken to close the digital divide. In most eastern European countries the fibre is already laid. In countries with a liberalized telecommunication market it is not difficult to get the fibre. There are encouraging examples that this was also done in the countries with monopoly in telecommunications Could the EC make recommendations in this respect ?


Some Personal Comments on the Digital Divide(D.O. Williams, LISHEP2004): Some Personal Comments on the Digital Divide (D.O. Williams, LISHEP2004) I think that the digital divide issue is actually very important for the future stability of the world I think that it will be very difficult to fix Some of it is finding the right technologies for different areas But a lot is about the structure of society Reliable electrical power Government transparency Support for education and scientific research – and while the developed countries can give advice and try to help, the real directions can only be determined in the developing world You need to understand that “removing the digital divide” is shooting at a moving target. Internet use has only just started and technological progress will move the goalposts (raise the bar) a lot in the next 2-3-5 years.


International ICFA Workshop on HEP Networking, Grids and Digital Divide Issues for Global e-Science: International ICFA Workshop on HEP Networking, Grids and Digital Divide Issues for Global e-Science Proposed Workshop Dates: May 23-27, 2005 Venue: Daegu, Korea Dongchul Son Center for High Energy Physics Kyungpook National University ICFA, Beijing, China Aug. 2004 ICFA Approval Requested Today


International ICFA Workshop on HEP Networking, Grids and Digital Divide Issues for Global e-Science: International ICFA Workshop on HEP Networking, Grids and Digital Divide Issues for Global e-Science Themes Networking, Grids, and Their Relationship to the Digital Divide for HEP as Global e-Science Focus on Key Issues of Inter-regional Connectivity Mission Statement ICFA, understanding the vital role of these issues for our field’s future, commissioned the Standing Committee on Inter-regional Connectivity (SCIC) in 1998, to survey and monitor the state of the networks used by our field, and identify problems. For the past three years the SCIC has focused on understanding and seeking the means of reducing or eliminating the Digital Divide, and proposed to ICFA that these issues, as they affect our field of High Energy Physics, be brought to our community for discussion. This workshop, the second in the series begun with the the 2004 Digital Divide and HEP Grid Workshop in Rio de Janeiro (approved by ICFA in July 2003) will carry forward this work while strengthening the involvement of scientists, technologists and governments in the Asia Pacific region.


International ICFA Workshop on HEP Networking, Grids and Digital Divide Issues for Global e-Science: International ICFA Workshop on HEP Networking, Grids and Digital Divide Issues for Global e-Science Workshop Goals Review the current status, progress and barriers to the effective use of the major national, continental and transoceanic networks used by HEP Review progress, strengthen opportunities for collaboration, and explore the means to deal with key issues in Grid computing and Grid-enabled data analysis, for high energy physics and other fields of data intensive science, now and in the future Exchange information and ideas, and formulate plans to develop solutions to specific problems related to the Digital Divide in various regions, with a focus on Asia Pacific, Latin America, Russia and Africa Continue to advance a broad program of work on reducing or eliminating the Digital Divide, and ensuring global collaboration, as related to all of the above aspects.


Sketch of an Agenda: Sketch of an Agenda Status of HEP Grids (One day) LHC(CMS, ATLAS, ALICE, LHCb), CDF/D0, Belle/BaBar, PHENIX, etc. International Projects: iVDGL, GriPhyN, PPDG, EDG, EGEE, etc. Digital Divide Perspectives from Major experiments (One day) LHC/Tevatron Exps/B-Factories/RHIC Other areas such as ITER, Weather, Earthquake, Bioinformatics, etc. Network perspectives from each region (One-half to One Day) National (or regional) representatives from Asia Pacific and also key countries (e.g. Brazil) from other regions: Korea, Japan, China, Australia, other parts in AP / Russia / Brazil, Mexico, other parts in Latin America / South Africa and other parts in Africa / Europe / N.America etc. Grid Enabled Analysis for LHC (One-half to One Day) Status of GEA and some perspectives of Grids Applications of Data Grids and Implications for Future society (Half Day, on the last day) Ubiquitous Computing (special topic) Discussion Panels (~1 hour 2nd and 3rd Days; ~2 hours on last day) All Sessions & Tutorials Carried Live Via VRVS; Also Playback


Schedule Outline & Logistics: Schedule Outline & Logistics Some Dates Workshop: May 23-27, 2005 LOC/International Advisory Committee: September, 2004 Fixing the agenda: ~September 25, 2004 (8 months ahead) Sending out letters of invitation: November 20, 2004 (6 months ahead) Logistics Number of people expected: ~250 (130 from Korea; 120 from abroad) not counting many graduate students from Korea Number of invited speakers, panelists: ~ 60 (Includes 10 from Korea) Venue: Kyungpook National University or Hotel Inter-burgo or EXCO Kyungpook National University is most preferred. Hotels : Inter-burgo/Daegu Park & others within 30’ Inter-Burgo (5 Star, 207 rooms, ~$120) and Daegu Park (4 Star, 135 rooms, ~$100) at same site Special events, Highlights or Items of special note Tour and Sightseeing (Historic Gyeongju Area) Special Performance (Korean Traditional Folksongs and Dances) Banquet/Reception ICFA-SCIC Meeting Several people from Korean Governments will be invited Advanced Network communities from several regions will be invited to participate


Outcomes, Support/Sponsors, Side Meeting Option: Outcomes, Support/Sponsors, Side Meeting Option Expected Outcomes Infrastructure buildup in needy areas Advance Grid or Network initiatives. New or strengthened collaborations in Grid Enabled Analysis Support and Sponsors Some support to help needy students attend will be provided Sponsors: Center for High Energy Physics/KOSEF Kyungpook National University Ministry of Science and Technology Korea Information and Strategy Development Institute (KISDI) Korea Institute of Science and Technology Information (KISTI) National Computerization Agency (NCA), Advanced Network Forum (ANF), etc. Options Meetings of Advanced Network Forum or Grid Forum-Korea would run side by side as parallel sessions (to be discussed with the ANF, Grid Forum-Korea) In this case, we would need the EXCO for the venue and there will be tutorials; but otherwise there is no plan for tutorials