2012 10 22 bcnet i canada presentation

Digital Infrastructure in Metro Vancouver

Michael HrybykPresident, BCNET

Overview

Vancouver Digital Infrastructure

• We need a hybrid model approach to digital infrastructure to enable the intelligent community

• Digital infrastructure components• BCNET’s network and current role• Digital Infrastructure for Metro Vancouver

October 22, 2012 2

What do we need for digital infrastructure?

October 22, 2012 Vancouver Digital Infrastructure 3

• Networks

• Services

What do we need for digital infrastructure?

Networks• Cabling

– Local– Intercity

• Aggregation points– Wireless

towers/bases

• Exchange points

Services• Inter-Exchange

Carriers• ISPs (short haul)• Data Centres

– Content Delivery Networks (CDNs)

– XaaS Providers (infrastructure, platform, sw)

Vancouver Digital InfrastructureOctober 22, 2012 4

Local cabling


Vancouver Digital Infrastructure

Aggregation Points

October 22, 2012 6

Exchange Points

Vancouver Digital InfrastructureOctober 22, 2012 7

Infrastructure Ownership Examples


• Sewer/Water

• Natural Gas

• Electricity

• Roads

Infrastructure Ownership Summary


Network Ownership Service Layer

Sewer/Water Government Monopoly

Natural Gas Regulated Utility Mixed

Electricity Regulated Utility Monopoly/Mixed

Roads Government Market

Infrastructure Ownership Summary


Most strategic infrastructure ownership is a mix of a local commons at the base and a market layer over top

Models for Digital Infrastructure

• Three possibilities– Monopoly (single provider)– Mixed– Market (facilities-based competition)


Comparisons

Type Advantages Disadvantages HistoryMonopoly No duplication

EfficientUbiquitous

No incentive to innovatePricingBiases by usageForced purchase

Works for utilitiesWas tried and found wanting

Mixed Optimizationbenefits from monopoly and market

ComplexityHand-offs and exchanges

Generally untriedEarly Internet

Market Efficient pricingResponsiveFunded

SegmentationNot universalVertical integrationBiases by usageScaling leads to oligopoly

Current situationFacilities-based competition


Mixed Model

• Choose the mixed model rather than status quo– Optimize advantages from both– Minimize disadvantages

• What parts are needed?• What parts are commons vs market?


Network Parts


Component DeliveryLocal Cable/Conduit CommonsAggregation Point MixedExchange Point Commons (maybe)InterCity/Exchange Cable MarketService Market

Architecture


Local Cable Plant

Aggregation Point

Local Cable Plant

Wireless Tower

Local Cable Plant

Aggregation Point

Local Cable Plant

Wireless Tower

ServiceExchange

Point

ServiceExchange

Point

ServiceExchange

Point

Blue is Commons

Exchange Points

• How many per city or region?• Ownership

– Regional Entity– Market (akin to shopping malls) in conjunction

with zoning


End-to-End Service

• Network service provisioned by ISPs• Ordering of cabling and fulfillment for ISPs

across local cabling and aggregation points– Need for third party– Regional entity


Layered Services

• Data Centres– Apply planning approaches and zoning– Proximity or colocation with exchange points is

optimal but not necessary– Connected to exchange points via local cable

plant

• XaaS and CDNs– Locate in data centres


Why does BCNET care?

• Need for fibre for research and higher education– Advanced Networks– Internet fat pipe– Shared IT Services

• Need for exchange points– Connect to multiple networks– Service from multiple suppliers– Operates Exchange Points in 6 cities in BC


Advanced Network via Exchange Points

• Research universities and institutes

• Provincial health centres• Federal and provincial

research labs• 72 colleges and schools

through the Provincial Learning Network


Innovative Services

• Multiple dedicated virtual networks can be created per service– XaaS and CDNs can be provisioned over dedicated

infrastructure direct to customer

• Customers can create virtual networks– Enterprise– Government– Family

• Interconnection at Exchange Points– Counteracts segmentation

• Expanded market choice– Solves network neutrality problem


Metro Vancouver

• How will this happen in Vancouver?• Task Force

– Inter-city• Translink• Hydro• Port of Vancouver

– Municipalities


Vision


Harbour CentreExchange Point

SurreyExchange

Point

Vancouver

New Westminster

Coquitlam

Richmond

North Vancouver

Burnaby

Delta

Port Moody

Port Coquitlam

Surrey

West Vancouver

Translink, Hydro, Ecomm, Port, Private Providers

Municipal Interconnect

How it can work

• One agency coordinates municipal interconnects– Private Interconnects

• Direct city-to-city connections

– Third party• Public: Translink, Port, Hydro• Commercial interconnect providers

• Service provider connects nodes end-to-end– Agreement for fibre from agency– Interconnect to service provider network at exchange

points or private interconnect

• Service provider “owns” the customer– Subcontract to agency

• Customer can have many service providers


Regional Use Cases

• Public– Translink – bus depots, maintenance yards, traffic systems– Ecomm – emergency responders (police, fire, …)– BCNET – higher education and research– Libraries– Regional District – utility systems– Port – harbour and shipping interconnects– Hydro??

• Private– Internet Service Providers– Cloud Service Providers– Colo Data Centres– Content Deliver Networks

• Intra-Municipality– City departments– SchoolsOctober 22, 2012 Vancouver Digital Infrastructure 25

Issues

• Decentralized municipal and regional infrastructure

• Lack of standards• Hodge-podge rights of way• ROI and business case


Next Steps

• Regional task force formed• Regular meetings• Sharing of fibre infrastructure maps• Develop swap agreements• Develop shared infrastructure to get to

Harbour Centre


2012 10 22 bcnet i canada presentation

Documents

Transcript of 2012 10 22 bcnet i canada presentation