path: root/doc/rfc/rfc1359.txt

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]
^L
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]
^L
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]
^L
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]
^L
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]
^L
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]
^L
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]
^L
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]
^L
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]
^L
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]
^L
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]
^L
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]
^L
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]
^L
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]
^L
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]
^L
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]
^L
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]
^L
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]
^L
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]
^L
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]
^L
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]
^L
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]
^L
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]
^L
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]
^L
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]
^L