PRIOR ACHIEVEMENTS
                  Submitted by Sam Trickey


Network '99 began (in late Fall 1993) as a Council project
aimed at moving forward from what had been achieved with
respect to the networking recommendations in the 1991
Information Technology Resources Task Force Report (Sept.
1991).

The Network '99 effort was set up the Council in the paper
"Planning for the Campus Communication Network for 1999".
That paper set forth one basic goal -

     "Develop a 5-year statement for directions for UF
     networking."

Four subsidiary Goals provided the detailed basis foe a
process of responding to twelve specific recommendations.
This report is the culmination of that process.

The Provost's charge to the Task Force should be kept in
mind. It was to review the situation and generate priorities
to
     - allow UF to respond with appropriate speed and
     commitment to present and emerging information
     technology needs,
     - bring new focus, coordination, and cost-effectiveness
     to UF's information technology activities,
     - position UF for innovative and effective use of
     information technologies in mission-critical ways well
     into the next century.

The Task Force Report gave thirty-six (36) specific
Recommendations regarding seventeen (17) Goals.  The Goals
directly related to the Network '99 project were:
"2.1. Coordinated computing and networking activities."
"2.2. An integrated computing and networking support
structure."
"2.3. An integrated voice, video, and data network
management system."
"2.11.  A campus network which extends to the work place of
each member of the University community who needs access to
perform required tasks."
"2.12. Classroom space capable of accommodating projection
and information technology."
"2.14. Development and use of internal and international
standards in hardware, software, and networking."
"2.17. A consistent level of computing and networking
support for all faculty and staff, both on- and off-campus."

In June, 1992, the Council endorsed a set of five
organizational steps to the Provost "in concept." The second
spoke directly to organization of networking:
      "2.  Current Deans Network and related SASS Network
     services, associated personnel, and resources should be
     combined with UFnet services, personnel, and resources
     to form a Data Networking Group.  A Video Services
     Group should be established.  These two should be
     strongly inter-linked with the Telecommunications
     Groups, with all three under the management of a
     Director of Networking Services, who should report to
     the Executive Director of Information Technologies and
     Services.  Responsibility for large-scale "private"
     inter-building networking, such as currently operated
     by CIRCA, IFAS, and JHMHC, should be integrated into
     this organization in a phased way on a 4-year time
     frame.  A similar transfer of inter-unit or shared
     video services should be effected.  During the transfer
     period, consultative arrangements ("dotted-line"
     reporting) should be established between the Office of
     IT&S and the organizations involved."
 In response, Network Services was begun (Feb.  1993).  By
now the first sentence of this organizational change has
been done.  The functions listed in the second sentence are
being handled on a very limited basis.  The third sentence
has not been implemented, but a detailed cooperation
protocol with Telecommunications has been put in place for
trial instead.  As has been the case since President
Criser's term, final determination of telephony policy has
been lodged with the Provost; this role has been by the
Provost to the Exec. Director, IT&S.  The last three
sentences have not been implemented, except as regards
transfer of some College of Engineering CATV assets to
Network Services.  Network '99 revisits these topics.

An entire section (3.3) of the Report was devoted to
networking.  All told, eight of the thirty-six
recommendations were about networking specifically.
(Interestingly, none of the eight " highest priority"
recommendations was specific to networking.)   Those eight
are quoted below.  Each is followed by a brief status
summary.

"3.1.9. Provide network access to all residence halls."
Status: Division of Housing purchased NERDC engineering
services to design a full networking plan (students and
administrative networking).  Subsequent to the formation of
Network Services, a considerable amount of coordination with
Housing has been done regarding extension and completion of
UFnet core and regarding refining Housing's plan.  Progress
on implementation has been hindered by funding constraints
(Housing is an auxiliary).

"3.1.10.  Increase access to University computing resources
for faculty, staff, and students from off-campus locations."
Status: CIRCA modem pool size was increased by presidential
fiat in Fall 1994 but the newly enlarged pool (52 lines)
saturated immediately.  A fee-for-service modem pool has
been operated by NERDC for some time.  With student demand
for that service rising, sign-up and billing for student use
is soon to be handled through CIRCA and Finance & Accounting
respectively (just as the rest of general student computing
and billing is handled).  Network Services has arranged for
LATA-bridging to extend UFnet to Progress Center and has
done a little work (in cooperation with NERDC) on ISDN
connections.  Other off-campus connections have depended on
the entity involved, e.g. substantial effort by ICON and
HEALTHNET to support their respective specialized
constituencies.  Otherwise progress is spotty.  A particular
frustration has been the inability to get any carrier to be
willing to deploy a student-oriented connectivity service in
the residential "donut" around the Gainesville campus.

"3.1.11.  Renovate classroom space to accommodate
projection, networking, and computing technologies." Status:
Progress has been made with end-of-FY funds (92-93), multi-
media project funds, and efforts by Network Services, CIRCA,
and the various academic units.  Though the gains are not
trivial, the net effect is still spotty coverage.

"3.3.1.  Consolidate management of backbone data networking,
video networking, and telephone networking into a Network
Management Center." Status: partial completion with
establishment of Network Services and Provost's directive (3
Sept. 92) to consolidate all data networking. Regarding
telecommunications recall text above about Joint Management
Protocol trial.

"3.3.2.  Establish standards, guidelines, and directions for
voice, video and data networking." Status: Largely through
the work of the Council and its Standing Committees, a set
of Preferred Practices and UF-RFC's has been developed and
others are under development.

"3.3.3.  Establish clear lines of authority for official
certification of new standards, guidelines, and services for
the network." Status: A responsibility of Network Services,
in the context of the Preferred Practices and UF-RFC's just
mentioned.

"3.3.4.  Increase support to colleges and administrative
units in the design, management, and use of voice, video,
and data networks." Status: UFnet staffing up from a minimum
of 2.0 FTE to a current of 7.0; FDDI conversion (major
capacity increase) of core network in 1993-994; rebuild of
broadband cable plant for one-way video in 1993-94; router
technology replacement project in 1995; network seminar;
core network documentation project.

"3.4.7 Establish a University-wide computing and networking
hardware support service." Status: Done de facto by the
extension of CETS activities and by Provost's decision (7
Oct.  1992) on sharing of responsibility by College of
Engineering and OITS for CETS policy.

Finally, a Letter of Agreement for NERDC to provide certain
operational services in support of the mission of Network
Services was put in place in FY 1992-93 and continued.  That
Letter codified, for the first time, the services which had
grown up informally over time. It also provided the first
payments by UF to NERDC for those services. Specifically,
TCP/IP Domain Name Services, Usenet news, Appletalk
Quickmail Server operations, Token Ring management, SURAnet
gateway management, and Softswitch mail interchange
management were covered. In most of these instances Network
Services provides the funding for hardware (e.g. the SURAnet
gateway router) and software separately from the contract.