Proof of Concept

Proof of Concept Network Project

Final Report

Prepared By

Jennifer Dunbabin, Project Applications Coordinator/Manager

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1 PURPOSE OF REPORT........................................................................................6

2 PROJECT RATIONALE.......................................................................62.1 Background...............................................................................................62.2 Vision........................................................................................................62.3 Supporting Policy......................................................................................72.4 Design.......................................................................................................7

2.4.1Network............................................................................................82.4.2Applications Software.....................................................................102.4.3Applications Projects......................................................................102.4.4Governance and Project Management............................................11

3 PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION............................................................123.1 Network Build.........................................................................................12

3.1.1South Australia...............................................................................143.2 Victoria...................................................................................................15

3.2.1Australian Capital Territory.............................................................163.3 Applications Software.............................................................................16

3.3.1VET Virtual......................................................................................173.3.2Practitioners’ Large Mail Box..........................................................183.3.3mine.edu.au/Mahara.......................................................................20

3.4 Applications Projects...............................................................................213.5 Governance and Project Management....................................................23

4 PROJECT OUTCOMES......................................................................244.1 Network..................................................................................................244.2 Applications Software.............................................................................254.3 Applications Projects...............................................................................26

5 FOR FUTURE REFERENCE...............................................................265.1 Network Build.........................................................................................275.2 Applications Software.............................................................................29

5.2.1Server Considerations....................................................................295.2.2Client Considerations......................................................................305.2.3Bandwidth Considerations..............................................................315.2.4Bandwidth Calculations..................................................................32

5.3 Applications Projects...............................................................................355.4 Governance and Project Management....................................................36

6 ATTACHMENTS..............................................................................376.1 Project Workplan (14 November 2008)...................................................376.2 Participating Partners and Teaching Institutions.....................................486.3 VET Virtual Flyer.....................................................................................50

Proof of Concept Network Project Final ReportJanuary 2010 of 55

6.4 Practitioners’ Large Mailbox Flyer...........................................................51

Figures

Figure 1 - The initial Proof of Concept Network vision.............................................9Figure 2 The Network in December 2009.............................................................13Figure 3 Project Communication Example............................................................14


Acknowledgements

Other contributors to the report are:

Jamie Sunderland from AARNet Pty Ltd on the network design and build, and

Chris Richter from Ricoshae Pty Ltd on applications software and apllications.


1 Purpose of ReportThe purpose of this report is to document the: project rationale and intentions project implementation and outcomes, and lessons learnt.

2 Project Rationale2.1 Background

During 2005 – 2007 the Vocational Education and Training (VET) sector, through the Australian Flexible Learning Framework, funded the Access to Bandwidth Project (A2B) to investigate and make recommendations on the provision of a national high capacity network for the sector. In the course of the Project a network design was recommended and trialled (see Figure 1). The design was that of using AARNet to provide a national backbone for state networks. This model was shown not to deliver the levels of connectivity or performance required. In addition, metered traffic meant that cost was a serious inhibitor to the type of uses envisaged for a VET network. As a result, the Proof of Concept Network Project was set up to test to an alternate model of provision of connectivity – the end-to-end type provided by AARNet for the higher education sector, by building fibre-optic tail circuits between the AARNet backbone and selected TAFEs.

2.2 Vision

The vision underpinning the Access to Bandwidth Projects and this Project was the need to provide VET sector with a very high capacity network with no constraints on usage. To serve VET needs it must operate as a national network.

The Australian Research and Education Network (AREN) was the model for the Project: a not-for-profit network established to provide high capacity, high performing network services to the research and tertiary education sectors and an affordable price.

The Commonwealth has invested significant amounts of money to develop this network along with the universities and research organisation. It is desirable and economically sound to re-use this infrastructure to provide


http://blog.wordle.net/http:/www.flexiblelearning.net.au/

this infrastructure to provide an expanded tertiary network to include the VET sector.

DEEWR identified an opportunity: it noted many TAFEs were proximate to the existing tertiary network and that for, in networking terms, a small amount of funds, the tertiary network could be expanded to include the majority of TAFEs.

It was hypothesised that a national network would: enhance the capacity of TAFEs to meet the skills needs of the future enable the widespread use of interactive e-learning materials and

virtual classrooms provide easy and speedy access to content collections no matter where

they are located in Australia facilitate mutual recognition, credit transfer and cross-jurisdictional and

cross-sectoral portability expand the number of course offerings for learners in regional, remote

and Indigenous communities reduced time-frames for completion of courses of study facilitate microeconomic reform of TAFEs by allowing them access to

markets across Australia in the longer term, influence future funding directions to ensure

effective use of public funds to reduce duplication of teaching effort and resources across the nation.

2.3 Supporting Policy

The vision of a high capacity, end-to-end, optic fibre network for the VET sector was supportive of and complementary to current Federal policies and initiatives such as: the Bradley Report and subsequent Council of Australian Government

decisions to develop more clearly a tertiary sector from both the higher education and VET sectors

build on the Australian Government’s $88 million investment in the high-speed research network for universities, the Australian Research and Education Network (AREN), by extending this network to the training sector

the Digital Education Revolution, and the National Broadband Network.


The network would also provide the essential infrastructure to mitigate the looming shortage of teachers by providing a platform where scare knowledge could be shared Australia-wide.

2.4 Design

The Project’s aim was to:

demonstrate the benefits a high speed dedicated network can provide to vocational education and training, and

assist in developing effective strategies for cross-jurisdictional and cross-sectoral collaboration for any future national tertiary education network.

It was a proof of concept project to test the benefits of, and identify issues associated with, a cross-jurisdictional high speed fibre-optic network, that would deliver end-to-end connectivity to vocational education and training institutions.

The Project’s Workplan is attached (at 7.1).

2.4.1 NetworkDEEWR requested a minimum core network capacity of one gigabit. AARNet’s proposed design was for a separate one gigabit wavelength to each connected institution, where possible. To ensure no cross-institutional contention on the backbone, it was scaled up to 10 gigabits. Links of these capacities are now standard across tertiary and research networks in Australia and overseas.

From a technical architecture perspective, the proof-of-concept network was designed to reflect the thinking of how the VEN may look. It was intended to be a parallel network sitting alongside the AARNet network utilising AARNet’s Dense Wave Division Multiplexing (DWDM) optical transmission equipment with new equipment to provide the routing for the VET sector.

The Proof-of-Concept Network (POCN) would provide a dedicated backbone network for the VET institutions that would peer with the AARNet network enabling direct communications between the VET sector and the Higher Education and Research sectors. The Network was not planned to have Internet access via AARNet due to Whole of Government (WoG) internet purchasing arrangements. Canberra Institute of


Technology (CIT) and the Victorian dual-sector institutions were existing AARNet customers and so had access to the Internet via AARNet.

Figure 1 - The initial Proof of Concept Network vision

The original Workplan anticipated that Stage 1 of the network would be complete on 17 October 2008. The Workplan that was agreed in November 2008 pushed each of the stages back by several months.Stage 1 which was due for completion by end of 2008 comprised: Canberra Institute of Technology SABRENet TAFEs (10) in South Australia, and in Victoria the dual sector TAFEs (Swinburne, RMIT, VU and Ballarat

who were already connected), Gordon Institute and the Victorian College of Agriculture and Horticulture.

Stage 2 focussed on testing hypotheses, evaluating and adjusting and was scheduled to run December 2008 through November 2009.

Stage 3 involved additional sites in Victoria and should this not be successful, other sites might be considered either in Victoria, other states or private RTOs. This was to be completed by June 2009.

In Victoria the other TAFEs identified for connection were:

William Angliss Wodonga East Gippsland, and


Further Tail builds were approved in March 2009 including Kangan Batman Gordon HolmesglenAlready on-net in Victoria were the four dual sector institutions: Swinburne University of Technology RMIT Victoria University, and University of Ballarat.

2.4.2 Applications SoftwareA critical aspect of the Network business model is to provide applications on-net so that the traffic between users of the software platforms will travel only over the network. This has the benefit of traffic travelling on an uncontested, over-provisioned network, and that traffic, because is on-net being unmetered. In addition, applications that required high capacity connectivity to work were required.

VET Virtual was refined and redeveloped to meet the needs of the Access to Bandwidth (A2B) Project and as such is an ideal application to offer to the Network users.

Two other applications were developed during the course of the Project: the Practitioners’ Large Mail Box, and mine.edu, an e-portfolio application using Mahara.

2.4.3 Applications ProjectsThere were two strands to the POCN Project: building the network and using it. The applications projects were to be the vehicle for testing network applications, structured to demonstrate the capacity for such a network to improve education and training outcomes. The POCN was to be completed to Stage 2 by late 2008, leaving a whole teaching year for any applications projects to run. Applications projects had to be centred around teaching delivery that could only occur with high capacity connectivity. The following guidelines were provided. Applications ideally should:


be something that is not presently available, or is currently available but not realising its maximum potential due to less-than-adequate bandwidth

not merely replicate an application that is already available be an exemplar of the benefits of high-speed connectivity have an identifiable educational outcome cross jurisdictional borders (at least 2 applications) demonstrate cross jurisdictional collaboration (at least 1 application) involve more than 1 institute (at least 2 applications) involve video conferencing (at least 1 application) demonstrate a bandwidth-hungry application (at least 1 application) be distinctly different in technique and form (not just 3 examples of

videoconferencing) involve a variety of learning disciplines involve at least one traditional trade apply across the tertiary sector or whole-of-education sectors (at least

1 application), and be able to be implemented without undue impost of time or other

resources by institutions (essential).

2.4.4 Governance and Project ManagementThe parties involved and their roles are outlined below: Australian Government Department of Education, Employment and

Workplace Relations (DEEWR) (sponsor, project leader, collaborative partner)

AARNet Pty Ltd (network provider, collaborative partner) Canberra Institute of Technology (CIT) (collaborative partner) SABRENet Limited (collaborative partner) Government of South Australia’s Department of Further Education,

Employment, Science and Technology (DFEEST) (collaborative partner), and

State Government of Victoria’s Victorian Skills Commission (VSC) (manager of financial relationship with AARNet Pty Ltd, collaborative partner).

Governance and division of responsibilitiesThe collaborative model employed for this project was one that required considerable goodwill and accommodation of the needs and interests of


other parties and enormous enthusiasm to implement a worthwhile proof of concept. However, as the sponsor of the project, DEEWR had to approve all activities undertaken as part of the project and had the ultimate decision-making power in relation to how funding will be allocated and when project activities will be ceased.

VSC was responsible for the management of the financial relationship with AARNet Pty Ltd, on behalf of all parties to the project.

CIT, DFEEST and VSC were responsible for engaging with TAFE practitioners in their respective jurisdictions to identify champions who will lead their state’s activities in relation to the running of applications that trial potential uses of the network.

SABRENet Limited, DFEEST and AARNet Pty Ltd were responsible for developing an effective and efficient method of connecting the SABRENet TAFEs to the AARNet backbone.

AARNet were responsible for establishing, managing and operating the infrastructure that will support the network.

All parties were responsible for ensuring effective working relationships that provide the best environment in which to test the concept of a fibre-optic TAFE network.

3 Project ImplementationDuring the implementation period the National Broadband Network was announced on 7 April 2009 followed by the Vocational Education Broadband Network (VEN) on 22 April 2009. These announcements changed the policy environment for the POCN Project and added demands on resources in DEEWR that were already overstretched managing the POCN Project.

3.1 Network Build

When the first Workplan was prepared it was understood to be feasible that Stage 2 of the network build would be completed by the end of December 2008. This was not achieved due, in large part, the extensive negotiation required leading up to the signing of the agreement between


DEEWR, VSC and AARNet. Formal agreement was reached in November 2008. In addition, the method of contracting and administrative structures led to long lead times in the signing of the agreement between DFEEST and AARNet. The Project Manager at the time had to spend substantial amounts of time negotiating with the parties. The remainder of this section deals with the implementation activity and issues that occurred once the initial negotiation and contracting phase was complete.

The remainder of this section deals with the implementation activity and issues that occurred once the initial negotiation and contracting phase was complete.

A fibre-optical backbone has been established between Adelaide, Melbourne and Canberra with associated routers that allow for a private inter-TAFE network with dedicated bandwidth to carry TAFE traffic separately to the rest of the AARNet traffic. This link is a single wavelength and single router connection in each State for the Proof-of-concept network. The separate network allows flexibility and an extended set of services that are not available on the Standard AARNet network, such as differentiating connectivity between TAFEs, Universities and Internet access. When the first Workplan was prepared it was understood to be feasible that Stage 2 of the network build would be completed by the end of December 2008. This was not achieved due, in large part, the extensive negotiation required leading up to the signing of the agreement between DEEWR, VSC and AARNet. Formal agreement was reached in November 2008. In addition, the method of contracting and administrative structures led to long lead times in the signing of the agreement between DFEEST and AARNet. The Project Manager at the time had to spend substantial amounts of time negotiating with the parties. The remainder of this section deals with the implementation activity and issues that occurred once the initial negotiation and contracting phase was complete.

The resulting network architecture is represented in Figure 2.


Figure 2 The Network in December 2009

The main reasons for the changes in network design were as follows:

lack of coordinated technical planning involving representatives from all institutions, state jurisdictions and their outsourced technical consultants

differing and sometimes conflicting requirements from states and institutions with regards to routing and network security

requirement to access to certain applications hosted within the Higher Education and Research Network, and

requirement to access AARNet’s Internet connectivity and content offered as un-metered through AARNet’s extensive peering network.

The project never had a technical meeting between all jurisdictions, including the project representatives together with their government infrastructure departments and their respective outsourced WoG gateway service providers. This caused issues where a technical design that suited all parties was not agreed upon. Instead each jurisdiction’s outsourcer told AARNet the terms under which a connection could be made. This became an iterative process with AARNet acting as the go-between, but having to pass all requests back through the relevant IT department to provide instructions to the Outsourcer (possibly with some approval from TAFE management and the State Infrastructure Department in between). Figure


3 shows a representation of the layered and indirect lines of communication that occurred when the network provider worked with the jurisdictions where IT services were outsourced. This dynamic was particularly in evidence in engaging with the network management model in place in South Australia. It resulted in there being several layers between the PoCN practitioners and project representatives and the outsourced technical staff who actually implement the required changes. Figure 3 represents the communication flows for the Dental Hygiene Project and the setting up of the VPN.

Figure 3 Project Communication Example

3.1.1 South AustraliaSouth Australia has a strong whole of government culture for contract and network management, with centralised network management and a tiered set of firewalls. This had significant impact on the project timelines and consequently the ability to conduct applications projects. In addition the resulting convoluted network design meant South Australian VET practitioners did not benefit from being part of the PoCN to any great degree during the course of the Project.


After some long delays relating to negotiations over Terms and Conditions of Service, the standard AARNet Access Agreement was signed in June in its original form with no amendments made.

The design of the interface between AARNet and SAuGov networks had to be customised to meet the terms set by the Department of Transport Energy and Infrastructure (DTEI) who run the State ICT Services Group and manage StateNet, South Australia’s WOG. These terms did not allow normal inter-network exchange of routing information and did not allow inbound connections into the TAFE network.

DTEI and their outsourcer (Dimension Data) refused to allow any form of dynamic routing exchange between the state network and AARNet so all changes were manually made with iterative changes to static routing and Network Address Translation rules based on observation of what was and was not working and individual work orders. It was pointed out early that videoconferencing is generally incompatible with Private IP addressing and Network Address Translation (NAT) unless some form of proxy or firewall traversal device was used. All other PoCN members had a connection to AARNet using Border Gateway Protocol (BGP) Routing which AARNet uses to assign customers to particular communities and decide which communities have routes between each other.

Instead of the participating TAFEs in South Australia being able to work freely with any of the other participants in the Project access to connectivity between Gilles Plains TAFE and CIT for the dental project was set up to run over a private network between the two sites. The connection must be made from the South Australian end of the link. CIT will not be able to make calls from their system during the trial, but will receive the videoconference call and streaming video from Adelaide. An IP address on the standard AARNet network also had to be provided for connectivity to the VETVirtual servers.

3.2 Victoria

In Victoria, TAFEs are autonomous entities with few constraints on the contracting ability, including network provisioning. However, the VSC has proposed a state-based TAFE Broadband Network, and while the contracts for the provision of network services were with individual TAFEs, the


Victorian TAFEs initially insisted on an “on-net only” connection because of the proposed state-based network. However after the initial implementation they found little value in the limited connectivity and each of the connected sites soon asked to have their connection changed to include full Internet access and unmetered access to AARNet’s peers and content providers. This was the cause of the change in design of the network in Victoria from what was originally proposed.

At the end of the Project the following TAFEs were connected: Kangan Batman, William Angliss, Wodonga and Gordon and the four dual-sector institutions. On the signing of the head contract between the VSC and DEEWR, VSC had been given a high degree of discretion as to which TAFEs would be connected. The indecision and changes of TAFEs to be included or not was also detrimental to Project outcomes. For example, East Gippsland TAFE was not connected. Although VERNet provisioned the circuit in the first week of June, the connection was cancelled by Victorian Skills commission days before it was due to be activated. AARNet initially proposed to do a direct build into Gordon TAFE and then later negotiated access to fibre owned by another carrier which was already installed into the TAFE building, however VSC preferred that VicTrack be engaged build a new connection into Gordon TAFE in line with their state-based network plan. Although VicTrack provided initial estimates, final quotes to order against were not provided as they could not provide a circuit to any of AARNet’s sites within Melbourne CBD.

3.2.1 Australian Capital TerritoryCIT has been connected to AARNet since June 2003. ACT information technology infrastructure is managed centrally, by InTACT. Joining the PoCN should have been, and was, a matter of course for CIT. However, because of South Australia’s restrictions on the type of connectivity and VPN had to be established. This meant substantial unanticipated work and it was difficult to schedule given the demands already on InTACT. They had initially agreed to have a new switch installed into the network to provide the private network. However, when it came time to test links from the newly installed videoconference system, InTact setup the local subnet using an address range within the CIT public IP range (which is advertised globally through the standard AARNet network). They did not want to use the private network as this would restrict the videoconference


system from being able to connect to anyone except the South Australian TAFEs.

3.3 Applications Software

A website was created to support the practitioners in using the applications and also for the members of the Practitioners’ Network to promote the use of the applications in their institutions. Its address is: http://www.proofofconceptnetwork.com/site/. Currently it is password protected: the username is ‘applications’ and the password is ‘pocn’.

These applications will continue to be hosted by AARNet in 2010 and available to the VET sector to use.


http://www.proofofconceptnetwork.com/site/

3.3.1 VET VirtualVET Virtual is a web-based interactive meeting and teaching space.

VET Virtual has provided an interactive location for teachers and students to communicate and meet when distance or after hours have made it difficult for face to face classes. On average VET Virtual was actively used by 262+ teachers and students each month. Most participants made use of audio while trainers extensively used video, the white board and PowerPoint presentations.

Statistics

August September October NovemberSessions 266Maximum users at one time

8 6 11 7

Bandwidth to Server 2.07GB 1.14GB 1.59GB 0.96GBBandwidth from Server

9.78GB 5.53GB 11.24GB 1.48GB

Average session length

42min 38 42 36

Individual connections

308 297 239 204

Locations

Australia 91%China 9%European UnionFinlandUnited KingdomGreeceIndonesia


Korea Republic ofPhilippinesSingaporeUnited States

VET Virtual has provided a select group of teachers the opportunity to see what is possible when using a high bandwidth web based conferencing application.

As a result of this project we are compiling a collection of quotes from teaching staff and student in relation to their experiences of VET Virtual during the past 12 months. These will be made available on www.vetvirtual.org.

Although many of the POCN team members did not, or could not, take up the opportunities made available it has provided a wealth of information on the development, technical and provision of web based services across jurisdictions. This information will be invaluable in the future deployment of high speed applications across Australia. These findings will provide a base to make decisions on how a high bandwidth service can be implement and the issues relating to multi user high bandwidth applications. The recommendations are at Section 5.2.

AARNET has been invaluable in providing the servers and server support for all of the Applications used in this project. AARNet will continue to host VETVirtual during 2010 and it will be available to VET practitioners.

3.3.2 Practitioners’ Large Mail BoxIn many disciplines, for example multimedia, there is the need to transfer large files that aren’t readily accommodated with current tools.


http://www.vetvirtual.org/

There are two versions of the large mail box called Large Mail Box and Filesender. Large mail box was the initial file up loader allowing up to 800MB files to be emailed.

Following the success and interest from university educators and other organizations Filesender was added to the mix to allow up to 2GB files to be exchanged. Statistics are supplied for both as both applications made use of the same network infrastructure and were used by educators in Australia and overseas.

Statistics Large Mail Box

Filesender

Number Files Uploaded 160 221Number Files Downloaded

87 97

Bandwidth Uploaded 5.83GB 91GBBandwidth Downloaded 1.25GB 17GBUpload Speeds 9Mbps 2Mbps – 53MbpsDownload Speeds 9Mbps -

23Mbps2Mbps – 70Mbps

File types uploaded: zip, jpg, ppt, rar, png, doc, dbf, fa, pdf.

Large Mail type services are the type of service where people say “Why would I need this” and then one day when they are desperate to get a large file to another colleague – suddenly become acutely aware of the implications of having the service available on a fast network.


As the rollout of fast bandwidth continues and multimedia files become larger and most in use – more and more people will see the benefits of this and will be delighted to get on board and make use of the network.

An end to end connectivity testing tool (using high definition video) so that participants can ensure they have appropriate levels 'last mile' connectivity as well as firewall pass through at their institution, so that the trials are truly assessing the benefits of high capacity connectivity.

3.3.3 mine.edu.au/Maharamine.edu.au is an e-portfolio service, set up using Mahara, an open source e-portfolio system with a flexible display framework. Mahara, meaning 'think' or 'thought' in Te Reo M ā ori , is user centred environment with a permissions framework that enables different views of an e-portfolio to be easily managed. Mahara also features a weblog, resume builder and social networking system, connecting users and creating online learner communities.

mine.edu.au/Mahara has been provided through POCN for educators, particularly at CIT, to trial the application and see how it could fit into their role or organisation to provide ongoing services as student’s complete courses and move out to employment. While CIT’s e-portfolio project could not be funded, Mahara was installed and supported and the team at CIT could trial their project.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M%C4%81ori_language

mine.edu.au can be accessed from http://apps2.vetvirtual.org/mahara. It currently has 41 members.

At this stage Mahara is being trialled but the response has been positive in that other organizations have now implemented their own version of Mahara.

One important aspect of Mahara is the ability to upload videos, images and audio to use in your portfolio. Having a high speed network provision will allow students to load there portfolio media quickly which will reduce the frustration caused by slow networks when trying to create your portfolio. This alone is a key reason to provide these types of services on high speed networks.

There are many career paths that now require large digital files that would otherwise be difficult to put into a portfolio, such as architects, musicians, video producers, clothing designers, advertising and many other IT-based careers.

3.4 Applications Projects

The major aim of the Project was to test the hypothesis that a high speed dedicated network would provide benefits and advantages to vocational education and training. To do this the network, once built, needed to be used and the outcomes of the use evaluated and the Applications Projects were intended to do this. The extensions of time required for the network build made it almost impossible to run the intended projects over the network.

A budget of $250,000 was available for this purpose. The small amount available was problematic for this aspect of the Project.

An Applications Coordinator was appointed in January 2009, three days per week, reporting to DEEWR. The role was increased to 4 days per week in July. The purpose was to coordinate and guide the Applications Projects and support the practitioners.

A Practitioners’ Network was established and met monthly. Membership comprised representatives of each participating institution and the collaborative partners (see 6.2). Engagement structures with practitioners varied from jurisdiction. CIT was straightforward from a jurisdictional


http://apps2.vetvirtual.org/mahara

perspective. In South Australia one person was nominated to be the point of contact and to work with practitioners in SA. In Victoria a two tier approach existed, with Skills Victoria and with the institutions themselves. Again, in Victoria, the engagement was with e-learning practitioners or managers. A wiki was set up for the members to use at http://pocn-practitioners-network.wikispaces.com/.

Project submissions were called for and submitted in April. At this stage the Project from an applications perspective was hampered by the limited funding.

Five applications were received: ACT – E-portfolio ($50,000) SA – Dental Hygiene Project (in conjunction with ACT) ($120,000) Vic – TAFE TV ($30,000) Vic – Cisco Telepresence ($350,000), and Ricoshae Pty Ltd (Chris Richter) – Large File Streaming ($20,000)

Anne Caddy, Wayne Hoare and Jen Dunbabin met in Hobart on 7 April to assess the applications. At this stage it was understood there was up to $750,000 available for application project funding.

It was agreed to fund the following projects: E-portfolio Dental Hygiene TAFE TV, and


http://pocn-practitioners-network.wikispaces.com/

http://pocn-practitioners-network.wikispaces.com/

Large File Streaming.

It was also agreed to provide each jurisdiction with support of $20,000 for the administrative load placed on them.

In June 2009 VSC advised that this was no longer the case, and in fact the Project may be overspent. Consequently, the E-portfolio Project and TAFE TV were discontinued.

Dental Hygiene ProjectThis application project involved establishing a point to point high definition video conferencing link between Canberra Institute of Technology and Gilles Plains Campus, TAFE SA to deliver components of dental hygienist training across these campuses. The project will enable students to view high definition oral examinations using an intraoral camera, demonstrations of instrument use in real-time and to participate in class discussions via video conferencing.

Students were to be able to observe real time examination and practices on a high definition viewing medium with supporting dialogue and conversation.

As noted in 3.1.1, this Project encountered many difficulties in established the video connection and hence none of the planned teaching sessions


occurred. CIT and Gilles Plains will use the network and equipment for teaching in the first semester of 2010.

The implementation of this project highlighted that most TAFE campuses do not have the network infrastructure to deliver the required connectivity to particular buildings or classroom. Both CIT and Gilles Plains had to lay fibre to connect the buildings that were to be used to their central network hub.

3.5 Governance and Project Management

In mounting this project VET was at the vanguard of technology in education. The developmental and ground breaking nature of this Project, which involved multiple jurisdictions and fields of activity (practitioners, networks, policy), along with the heavy reliance on gratuitous contributions from the collaborative partners and the need for confidentiality, had a marked impact on both the governance and management of the Project. The complexity of this type of undertaking cannot be underestimated.

The contributions made through goodwill to the Project by many people were much appreciated, however, because of the demands of their roles often the Project work rightly had to fall in line with other demands. TAFEs now are big businesses with big business models of management which made it difficult for even the most enthusiastic practitioners to devote the time required to the Project. This model is not a sustainable one.

There were many external agendas that had impact on the progress and direction of the project; agendas that were often in conflict with the agenda of the Project, which was to establish a national end-to-end proof of concept network. It would be simplistic to analyse this Project purely as a project management exercise and many useful learnings about implementing a national infrastructure in a federal environment would be lost.

Due to the very small window of opportunity to secure the $2.5 million for the Project, the funds we distributed to the VSC before to Project started. This put the Project at a disadvantage from the start as there was no mechanism available to DEEWR to ensure performance according to agreed timelines.


Other blockers included: the focus on the Project of establishing a national network clashing

with jurisdictions’ focus on what was seen to be required at a state level to build a state network

inadequate staffing at DEEWR and lack a continuity of staff working on this complex project

the amount of negotiation required for agreements to be reached between project partners

jurisdictions’ insistence in controlling access to practitioners, and because of the greenfields nature of the Project, the lack of

jurisdictional understanding of scope and imperatives.

4 Project OutcomesThe Project did not achieve many of the timelines or outcomes set out in the Workplan. Contributing to this was the time it took to establish the network which made it impossible to run the applications projects as envisaged, changed network design and the limited funds for applications projects, and the confidential nature of the Project (it could not be widely discussed until April 2009) which made general communications and promoting engagement across even the participating institutions difficult.

4.1 Network

By the completion of the project a network of as shown in Figure 2 was built. The core between Adelaide, Melbourne and Canberra was completed on 16 June 2009.

By the completion of the project a network as shown in Figure 2 was built. The core between Adelaide, Melbourne and Canberra was completed on 16 June 2009 and continues to operate as a private network, however all participants have a connection to the standard AARNet network and the private network is not being used.

It became apparent during the implementation of the network that organisations that were connected to the AARNet backbone saw little or no value in establishing and maintaining a separate private network when the other institutions were reachable through the AARNet connection.

Tea Tree Gully TAFE has been connected to the South Australian State Government (StateNet) hub via SABRENet.


Connection between the StateNet hub and AARNet has been established, however it is limited to specific applications between specific hosts. It does not provide direct communication between all SABRENet connected TAFEs and all AARNet connected institutions as was envisaged due to StateNet restrictions.

The VPN required by StateNet did not support videoconferencing due to the way it used a single IP address that was connected to the private network using Network Address Translation (NAT). Videoconference streams from South Australia are now routed via the public network using the gateway operated by the Tele-Learning Consortium (TLC) within SA TAFE.

While a VPN circuit was installed into Canberra Institute of TAFE (CIT) for the dental hygiene project, it is not being used as this would limit the connectivity of the videoconference system to connections to South Australia only.

In Victoria, connections were established between AARNet and Wodonga TAFE, William Angliss TAFE and Kangan Batman TAFE. A circuit to East Gippsland was provided through VERNet, but was cancelled prior before a working service to AARNet could be established.

Although AARNet provided options for connectivity to Gordon TAFE, these were not approved by Skills Victoria who instructed AARNet to pursue connectivity through Victrack.

AARNet and VicTrack did come to agreement on Terms of Service and Acceptable use, however VicTrack were unable to provide a quote on which AARNet could place an order for a point-point service between either Gordon or Holmesglen TAFEs and any AARNet point of presence within Melbourne CBD. It is understood however that Gordon TAFE currently has some level of connectivity to AARNet through its link to Deakin University.


This aspect of the project progressed well, in that the software was available to practitioners to use and well supported. In addition, the wider VET community used these national platforms.


The difficulties some members of the POCN Project had in using the software shows that much work is still to be done on national interoperability. For example, the intention of the Project was to use VETVirtual for meetings, including the Practitioners’ Network meetings. This did not eventuate because the firewall and security requirements of some participating institutions did not support real time communication. This indicates the importance of initiatives such as the Australian Flexible Learning Framework’s e-Standards for Training work (http://e-standards.flexiblelearning.net.au/) particularly resources such as the VET Teacher E-learning Toolkit.

This is a microcosm of experiences for practitioners looking to work with interstate colleagues or participate in national online real time events: of all the platforms available, invariably one jurisdiction or another could not access the platform, hence the work of the Framework, noted above.


As noted previously the Applications Projects’ implementation was hampered by financial and network constraints. However, Wodonga TAFE’s experience serves as evidence that the thesis to be tested by the POCN Project is sound.

Wodonga TAFE in Victoria has been connected to AARNet as a full-service customer since April. They are very happy with the performance and reliability of the AARNet network services and the positive impact on high capacity connectivity and note the following outcomes: the connection has allowed a dramatic increase in productivity of our

remote sites which are VPN connected due to improved speed and adjustments we have been able to make for how they connect,

we have been able to build on our website (which is locally hosted) and incorporate new features and improvements to help our students access information.

there has been an increase in the use of TAFE VC by our staff (previously our 2MB Link could not cope well with accessing this hosted service),

we now have the ability to video conference from the desktop using Attend Anywhere online video conferencing software and Logitech webcams, and


http://e-standards.flexiblelearning.net.au/

http://e-standards.flexiblelearning.net.au/

gained to ability to use the Elluminate service provided by the TAFE Development Centre and eWorks to use for webinars etc.

5 For Future ReferenceThere have been many learnings from the Proof of Concept Network Project and they, along with some recommendations, are set out below.

5.1 Network Build

Recommendation – overarching network designIn the Project it has become clear that there are two models of network design and desired use that are coming in to conflict: the corporate and the educational; closed versus open. It is critical for educational outcomes that educational needs underpin the development of the VEN.

Recommendation – model clausesIt would be beneficial to develop a set of broad principle agreements around practice, policy and procedures so that these could be inserted into legal documentation to support national consistency in contractual arrangements for the VEN.

Recommendation - future network capacityNetwork capacity should be at least three times the expected load. Trends in higher education and research network design, both in Australia and overseas are currently at 10 gigabits and have experienced exponential growth.


Recommendation – infrastructure on siteA holistic approach to upgrading network bandwidth and building the VEN is needed. It is not sufficient to upgrade single link to door step, in most cases it will also require a program of upgrades to the internal network of each institution, both cabling and hardware. A number of Victoria TAFEs had to upgrade their routers. Another hitch was that Telstra assigned IP address ranges could no longer be used and AARNet had to supply a new range which meant renumbering of servers and updating Domain Name Services.

Learning - design principlesThe VEN design should be kept as simple as possible, with minimal filtering and very broad routing rules using a dynamic routing protocol such as BGP. Routing and filtering will quickly become unmanageably complex if rules based on statically configured small address ranges or individual source and destination address combinations are used.

Work needs be done with each jurisdiction during the early design phase to clearly understand what would be required to achieve this outcome within current jurisdictional network policy settings.

Learning – difference between corporate networks and educational networks in relation to security and flexibilityCorporate networks are often built using “walled garden” principles where the bulk of communications is internal and security threats are seen as being primarily from external sources. These networks generally have a single (although technically diverse and resilient) centrally managed gateway/firewall/DMZ system that imposes quite heavy restrictions on network use – particularly related to inbound connections.

Education networks are generally more flexible with security threats just as likely to come from internal networks as from the wider internet. An education network sees itself as part of the global network as both a contributor and consumer of content, rather than as a private network hidden behind a market front. To achieve the desired educational outcomes, there needs to be a closer relationship between the needs of the education practitioners and the ICT management that controls network security.


Where network security is centralized and/or outsourced, it is likely that there will be significant delays in making any adjustments to security policies to enable shared applications and collaboration due to the multi-layered approval processes required.

Learning – multi-carrier environmentThe Higher Education and Research sector uses AARNet as both its inter-organisation carrier as well as the Internet provider. If the VEN is to use one carrier to provide inter-organisation connectivity and another to provide Internet access, then each jurisdiction or institution must be able to maintain dynamic routing between multiple carriers. The list of address ranges (both in IPv4 and IPv6) will change regularly over time as new sites connect and organizations and affiliations change. Static programming of gateways will quickly become obsolete and will need constant updating across multiple jurisdictions unless dynamic routing is used.

Learning – use of private networks and videoconferencingWhere private IP addressing and/or Network Address Translation (NAT) schemes are used, inter-jurisdiction Videoconferencing and Voice over IP will not work without installing a proxy/gateway (also known as a Session Border Controller) which acts like a PABX routing calls from a private network via a public interface.

Learning – acceptable use policiesBuilding the VEN and a wider education network will require the re-use of many existing networks. The underpinning intention to create and national education network may run up against the acceptable use policies of these existing networks.

Learning – IT department work schedulesThere is a need to be mindful of fact that generally that IT departments in education need to apply for project funding well before end of year for work to be done in following year and that future activity is planned in advance so it can become part of the various departments’ planning cycle. IT departments usually prepare budgets in September-November of the year before and by January/February have a list of approved projects for the year and allocate staffing resources appropriately. Any additional work during that year cannot be guaranteed to be allocated appropriate resources.



During the Project the following observations with made: having a large pipeline has a huge benefit provided the applications

can make use of the benefits of this pipeline. end users local network and pc configurations play a major role in

reaping the benefits of a large pipeline. often the increased bandwidth and latency go unnoticed in this type of

environment as the expectations of the performance of technology is very high and while it is working efficiently you do not get a lot of feedback until things are not working.

a bigger issue than the physical network can be the jurisdictional boundaries, expectations, requirements and security considerations.

5.2.1 Server ConsiderationsDuring this Project we tested multiple servers and server configurations including Windows Server 2003 using PHP, .NET and Linux based Ubuntu Servers with Apache and PHP, 32bit and 64bit.

The servers provided for this project were exceptional, high quality and capable of pushing through a lot more data and handling many more users than we provided in the test cases. What we did find is that although the server was consistent, the client networks and physical computers we exactly the opposite, sending data with intermittent gaps in transmission.

Obviously having a capable server or servers is incredibly important, but it still hangs on the assumption that the client is providing quality consistent information and that is an issue for the individual organizations to either recommend that staff use more capable computers for this type of media work and/or make policy changes to the QOS/bandwidth limiting of the computers being used for this type of media interaction.

RecommendationHaving a specific collection of PCs maybe in a library or media room that are tuned and have higher bandwidth allocations for using these types of services will provided a more enjoyable experience and a controlled solution to provide large file or real time communication experiences for clients.


In this scenario we also noted that Linux based servers, as opposed to Windows, handled the large file transferring slightly better and with more tuning the windows based servers could be made to run as efficiently as the Linux server. As there are many factors here it is only an acknowledgement that straight out of the box the Linux based servers were efficient at this type of interaction.

Also, some of the functions involved in VET Virtual, specifically the conversion of PowerPoint to online presentations caused a considerable drain on server resources. On most occasions it did not impact the use of the audio and video communication but under heavier load it could be an issue.

RecommendationUse separate servers for Real Time communication applications, Web HTTP services and Large File Transferring. Large file transferring puts a heavy load on the server as well and although it is not latency affected, if you have real time interaction from the same server the real time latency will be dramatically affected by the large file processes.

5.2.2 Client ConsiderationsApplications were tested on varying client machines, browsers, operating systems and locations.

The key areas of discussion revolve around the browser version, ports and network locations in relation to local network management. The biggest issues were port availability for streaming media and last mile bandwidth, quality of service and bandwidth limiting.

RecommendationPutting together a specific policy in regard to additional non http ports for real time communication will dramatically improve the experience for everyone using real time applications. In fact the difference between http port 80 and using, for example, port 1935 is a minimum of double usually more latency increase. If the policy was specific to only allowing 443 SSL port then you have an additional layer of security. Most Real Time Communications servers support 443.

From the discussion with staff it has become apparent that although they do like the idea of cloud services – they are still more interested in having


there own version of an application as opposed to relying on an external service. Even though the cost of maintenance, hardware and support can be relatively high, the fact that they can locally control the environment, server, security and other services makes the idea of using local service more appealing. Self branding may also have a major role in this trend.

What this means is that although the new network provides a massively increased pipeline, the clients seem to want to have their own services, self hosted and managed, that they can provide for their students.

The smaller the organization, the more they want SAAS applications available On-net, the larger the organization, the more they want their own, controllable environment.

RecommendationProviding a service that can run as a local Real Time Communication service so that any local data is kept inside the local network will provide lower latency and a controlled environment. Communication from the local server to a central server for cross institute, cross jurisdictional real time communication can be achieved using an Origin server. This is sometimes referred to as an Edge/Origin strategy. This will also allow the organizations to brand their local version of the Real Time Communication applications.

Edge/Origin Strategy


5.2.3 Bandwidth ConsiderationsFrom a bandwidth point of view, most locations did not experience a major difference unless connected directly to the pipeline as local machines and networks were often throttled down to help provide quality of service or at least a more equal shared network environment to stop heavy users dominating the bandwidth, which resulted in users being able to do basic functions like checking email etc. without being affected by another user downloading huge files.

A major unseen benefit is the massively reduced latency when using these applications between on-net users. As many of the application users where both on-net and commodity internet users, the fact that on-net traffic reduced latency by an incredible amount and allowed large video formats as more users at once was not as apparent due to the students accessing the applications form either home or work where they are limited by the commodity internet providers that they are connected through.

There is no immediate solution to this except to recognize that to make the most of this latency benefit means making the most of applications between on-net sites while recognizing that commodity internet users will lag behind.

RecommendationMaking sure that clients are aware of the bandwidth limitations imposed on their local pc’s will allow them to understand why a real time service is not responding as well as they had hoped and providing an approved solution to increased bandwidth, decrease latency, if it is required by the client.

5.2.4 Bandwidth CalculationsFrom the results of this project and ongoing testing we are able to estimate the bandwidth usage for a typical scenario using video and audio conferencing on a personal computer across the network. This also allows us to calculate the server load and bandwidth requirements to and from the server. The following scenarios are provided as a guide only.

Presenter – Many UsersOne way A/V Server Bandwidth Client Bandwidth

BWS = N * S BWC = S


N = Number of Users S = Content encoded at constant bit rate

S = Stream encoded at constant bit rate

EG. 100 users at 100kbps

10 Mbps = 100kbps * 100 100 kbps

You may want to vary the bandwidth for selected users that may be on a slower connection (dial-up modem users). Calculation could then be 6.9Mbps = (100 kbps * 50) + (38 kbps * 50) assuming half were on dial-up modem.

Many to ManyExample: 4 user conferencing room with all 4 using video and audio at the same time.

Scenario Server Bandwidth Client BandwidthBWS = (P * N ) * S BWC = P * SP = Number of publishers P = Number of publishersN = Number of Subscribers

S = Content encoded at constant bit rate



1.6 Mbps = (4 * 4 ) * 100kbps

400 kbps = 4 * 100 kbps

Example: 10 user conferencing room with all 104 using video and audio at the same time.

Server Bandwidth Client BandwidthBWS = (P * N ) * S BWC = P * SP = Number of publishers P = Number of publishersN = Number of Subscribers




10 Mbps = (10 * 10 ) * 100kbps

1000 kbps = 10 * 100 kbps

Our Experience with conferencing roomsPresenter with 4 guest (Video and Audio) 306kbps Audio/VideoScenario Server Bandwidth (Out) Client BandwidthCameras running at 306kbps

BWS = N * S BWC = S

N = Number of Users S = Content encoded at constant bit rate

S = Stream encoded at constant bit rate10 Mbps = 306kbps * 4 306 = 306kbps

Result Bandwidth 1224 kbps 306 kbpsObservation


Quality of video is great. Frame rate is too slow. Latency about 350 to 500 milliseconds Could not use this for a conference if video is important. Audio delay is too high to hold a conversation Server is happy at 65%

Meeting Room with 4 participants (Video and Audio)Scenario Server Bandwidth (Out) Client BandwidthCameras running at 306kbps

BWS = (P * N ) * S BWC = P * S

P = Number of publishers P = Number of publishersN = Number of Subscribers


S = Stream encoded at constant bit rate14.896 Mbps = (4 * 4 ) * 306kbps

1224 kbps = 4 * 306 kbps

Observation Quality of video is great. Frame rate is OK. Latency about 350 to 500 milliseconds (But this doesn’t matter as

much as only one way video and audio) Works well for a presenter

Server is happy at 65%

Presenter with 4 guest (Video and Audio) 70kbps Audio/VideoScenario Server Bandwidth (Out) Client Bandwidth

Cameras running at 70kbps

BWS = (P * N ) * S BWC = P * S

P = Number of publishers P = Number of publishersN = Number of Subscribers


S = Stream encoded at


constant bit rate1.12 Mbps = (4 * 4 ) * 70kbps

280 kbps = 4 * 70 kbps

Observation Quality of video is adequate. Frame rate is acceptable as latency is heaps lower. Latency drops to under 84 milliseconds Audio is excellent Easy to run a meeting at this bit rate Server is happy at 60%

RecommendationPlanning and calculating you initial expected use and working out the maximum users that your network is capable of is imperative to planning you real time communication services. You will find that there are many server options to limit bandwidth per user, per room, number of cameras and many more server side settings to manage your real time communication server. Make sure if you are running your own server you have someone on staff that has experience and understands the system, requirements and administration to keep control and troubleshoot your real time servers.


Applications Projects showed that there were many points of possible failure in delivering end-to-end high capacity connectivity – often based around the current setting of throttling traffic at an institutional or state network level, in addition to firewalls and on-campus infrastructure. RecommendationTo run projects that require high capacity connectivity, usually using some type of real time communication, to test the network capacity and reveal possible inhibitors to connectivity.

Learning – incorporating high capacity connectivity into VET practice

Enabling practitioners to effectively and comfortably use technology for training, particularly real-time online activities requires significant work, energy and commitment. Relying on the goodwill and enthusiasm of practitioners, administrators and network manager, as was the case to a large degree in the POCN Project, is not feasible. These activities need to


be integrated across an organisation’s business planning, have the support of the executive, and receive adequate funding to allow teachers the opportunity to go offline for planning, training and trialling purposes.

RecommendationAllow time to trial technologies well in advance so that it can be included in the teaching plan for the following semester/year. Incorporating new technology into an existing teaching plan will only be limited in scope until that technology is proven to be reliable and effective in enhancing the material.

5.4 Governance and Project Management

Recommendation The Project demonstrated the complex nature of this type of undertaking, highlighting many of the barriers such as the various approaches to security and network design across jurisdictions, incompatibilities between large and smaller networks, the lack of confidence existing between jurisdictional technical teams and differing state/territory governance arrangements that in all likelihood will still exist when the VEN is implemented. It is recommended that future applications projects consider appointing state-based ICT committees with membership comprising at a minimum: an ICT Manager senior business manager, and a practitioner.

Learning – collaborationThere is a strong collaborative spirit within the VET sector and enthusiasm for innovation in teaching. However, practitioners and administrators have many demands on their time and skills, performance criteria to meet within their organisations, and little discretionary time. It would be unwise to rely heavily of gratuitous contributions from VET practitioners and administrators for a project’s success or to underestimate the amount of people hours it will take in future projects of this nature.


6 Attachments6.1 Project Workplan (14 November 2008)

Proof of Concept Fibre-optic TAFE Network Project

Workplan

1. Description of projecta. Aim/purpose

This project will: demonstrate the benefits a high speed dedicated network can provide to vocational

education and training assist in developing effective strategies for cross-jurisdictional and cross-sectoral

collaboration for any future national tertiary education network.b. Significance

i. VET needsAll Australian universities, and many nationally significant research institutions, are connected to high speed network services through the Australian Research and Education Network (AREN), which is operated and managed by AARNet Pty Ltd. With access to very high bandwidth, the higher education sector is using resources such as video to enhance other modes of teaching delivery. Researchers, teachers and students are collaborating online and using online tools and resources to reduce duplication, enhance the learning experience, share resources, work collaboratively and access online tools.TAFEs, however, are connected to separate state and territory networks, with variable connection speeds and significant challenges in conducting collaborative activities.

ii. Advantages of high speed networkA high speed network will:

o enhance the capacity of TAFEs to meet the skills needs of the futureo enable the widespread use of interactive e-learning materials and virtual

classrooms o provide easy and speedy access to content collections no matter where they are

located in Australiao facilitate mutual recognition, credit transfer and cross-jurisdictional and cross-

sectoral portabilityo expand the number of course offerings for learners in regional, remote and

Indigenous communitieso reduced time-frames for completion of courses of studyo facilitate microeconomic reform of TAFEs by allowing them access to markets

across Australiao in the longer term, influence future funding directions to ensure effective use of

public funds to reduce duplication of teaching effort and resources across the nation.

iii. Policy contextTertiary sector/networkThe policy context for this project includes a move towards a tertiary education sector where the boundaries between university-based and VET-based education and training are becoming more and more blurred, with increased collaboration across, and increased mobility between, the sectors. There is at present an inequity between TAFEs and universities in relation to access to high speed on-net collaborative space. This project aims to test the value to the VET sector of such a resource, with a view to consideration of what this might mean in terms of a potential roll-out of this type of connectivity across Australia.


Attachment 7.1 Project Workplan

A high bandwidth tertiary network would aim to provide a single post-secondary high speed network and put TAFEs on par with universities in terms of access to bandwidth. In addition to the benefits listed in 1.b.2 above, the focus on a move towards a tertiary sector/network will enhance collaboration across the VET sector and between the VET and higher education sectors; and improve articulation between universities and VET institutions.This project is intended to test the extent to which a high bandwidth dedicated fibre-optic network is of value to, and may provide improved outcomes for, education and training. Relationship with other government initiativesThis proof of concept project will:

o build on the Australian Government’s $88 million investment in the high-speed research network for universities, the Australian Research and Education Network (AREN), by extending this network to the training sector

o complement work being done in the schools sector in relation to the Digital Education Revolution

o complement work being done in the states and territories in relation to high bandwidth connectivity and e-learning.

c. Outline of projectDEEWR, the governments of South Australia, Victoria and the ACT, SABRENet Limited and AARNet Pty Ltd will collaborate to develop a proof of concept fibre-optic TAFE on-net network by: initiating a fibre-optic TAFE network connecting selected South Australian, Victorian and ACT

TAFE sites, through the AARNet backbone (the fibre-optic backbone being used by the university sector)

establishing a seamless connection between the TAFE and university networks that will enable cross-sectoral collaboration

building fibre-optic tail circuits between the AARNet backbone and selected TAFEs most importantly, trialling network applications that demonstrate the capacity for such a

network to improve education and training outcomes. NOTE - This project does not preclude participating TAFEs from also accessing AARNet commodity net services via fibre-optic circuits constructed for this project. However, the relevant TAFE contracting bodies would need to negotiate and pay for these arrangements separately (outside the scope and funding of this project).

d. Desired outcomes and how they will be measured i. Outcomes

o effective testing of the concept of an on-net education network for the TAFE sector that will inform future decisions in relation to the potential roll out of a national tertiary education network

o an understanding of the potential costs and benefits of a potential national tertiary education network

o identification of issues associated with the development of such a networko identification of effective strategies for cross-jurisdictional and cross-sectoral

collaboration for any future national tertiary education network. The project aims to test hypotheses about a TAFE network. Those hypotheses are:

1. High speed network connectivity improves the capacity of learners in vocational education and training to live and work in a digital world.

2. High speed network connectivity improves the capacity of VET learners and practitioners to collaborate across jurisdictions.

3. High speed network connectivity improves the capacity of VET learners and practitioners to collaborate across sectors.

4. Connection to a high speed dedicated network improves the quality of delivery of VET services.



5. VET learning outcomes are improved by the use of a high speed dedicated network.

6. AARNet Pty Ltd is able to provide an on-net network that adequately services the specific needs of the VET sector and provides the sector with value for money.

ii. How outcomes will be measured1. Quantitative and qualitative reporting (to DEEWR) by the project’s collaborative

partners against each of the outcomes statements and hypotheses listed above, to the extent appropriate to their individual areas of expertise

2. Qualitative and quantitative surveys of users (teachers and learners), using survey instruments approved by DEEWR, at the following stages:

a. When teachers and learners first begin using an applicationb. As action research during the course of applications - to inform ways in

which the trial may be modifiedc. At the completion of each of the application trials in which they are

participating3. Analysis by DEEWR of costs, benefits, lessons learnt and implications for any

future policy.e. Essential outputs of project and how they will be identified as completed/implemented

i. Essential deliverables of projectThere are essential aspects of the Proof of Concept Fibre-optic TAFE Network Project that must be achieved in order for the project to be regarded as successfully implemented. Unless otherwise agreed by DEEWR, the following are the criteria by which the project is to be regarded as successfully implemented:

i. By 24 December 2008, the TAFE fibre-optic network is established as either a part of the university network currently managed and operated by AARNet Pty Ltd or as a separate layer within the AARNet backbone.

ii. By 24 December 2008, the following sites are connected to the TAFE fibre-optic network:

o Canberra Institute of Technologyo TAFE divisions of Swinburne University of Technology, RMIT, Victoria

University and the University of Ballaratiii. By 24 December 2008, the SABRENet sites of Panorama, Urrbrae, Regency, Gilles

Plains, Salisbury, Elizabeth, Gawler, Roseworthy and Tea Tree Gully will be connected to the network

iv. Participants in the TAFE network are able to collaborate with university practitioners through the AARNet university network during the course of the project.

v. At least one network application/activity, designed to test the capabilities of the network, has been run over the network for at least ten months (or, if more than one application, for a period totalling at least ten months) and at least two states have been able to adequately test how well that application/s is/are able to be used for collaborative work.

vi. By 28 August 2009, all sites intended to be connected are connected (except those that became unfeasible).

vii. The results of the network application trial(s) has/have been compiled into a report that includes assessment by all stakeholders of the value of that/those network application(s) and an assessment of how the results of this project may inform any move towards the roll out of a national tertiary education network across Australia.

ii. How outputs will be measured



i. Reporting to DEEWR by the project’s collaborative partners against each of the essential deliverables listed above, to the extent appropriate to their individual areas of expertise

ii. Analysis by DEEWR of the extent to which essential aspects of the project were delivered, the costs, benefits, lessons learnt and implications for any future policy.

2. Structural arrangementsa. Parties involved and their roles

Australian Government Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations (DEEWR) (sponsor, project leader, collaborative partner)

AARNet Pty Ltd (network provider, collaborative partner) Canberra Institute of Technology (CIT) (collaborative partner) SABRENet Limited (collaborative partner) Government of South Australia’s Department of Further Education, Employment, Science

and Technology (DFEEST) (collaborative partner) State Government of Victoria’s Victorian Skills Commission (VSC) (manager of financial

relationship with AARNet Pty Ltd, collaborative partner)b. Governance and division of responsibilities

The collaborative model employed for this project is one that requires considerable goodwill and accommodation of the needs and interests of other parties and enormous enthusiasm to implement a worthwhile proof of concept. However, as the sponsor of the project, DEEWR must approve all activities undertaken as part of the project and has the ultimate decision-making power in relation to how funding will be allocated and when project activities will be ceased.

VSC is responsible for the management of the financial relationship with AARNet Pty Ltd, on behalf of all parties to the project.

CIT, DFEEST and VSC are responsible for engaging with TAFE practitioners in their respective jurisdictions to identify champions who will lead their state’s activities in relation to the running of applications that trial potential uses of the network.

SABRENet Limited, DFEEST and AARNet Pty Ltd are responsible for developing an effective and efficient method of connecting the SABRENet TAFEs to the AARNet backbone.

AARNet is responsible for establishing, managing and operating the infrastructure that will support the network.

All parties are responsible for ensuring effective working relationships that provide the best environment in which to test the concept of a fibre-optic TAFE network.

c. Funding and contractual arrangements DEEWR has provided funding of $2,534,000 (including GST) to VSC to manage the financial

arrangements of this project. This funding must cover all expenditure on the project. On behalf of the collaborative partners, VSC will contract with AARNet to establish, manage,

build and operate the network. Most of the $2,534,000 (including GST) funding will be used for the establishment and

operation of the physical network and the building of fibre-optic tail circuits from the AARNet backbone to selected TAFE sites. This funding has been notionally allocated as follows:

o Set up network (Stage 1) and operate for 1 year $ 975,920 o Build tail circuits $ 786,777

Within the total funding amount of $2,534,400 (including GST), $250,000 is to be quarantined for the trialling of applications/activities/content on the network. This will include the cost of purchase, development and maintenance of those applications.



AARNet will negotiate with DFEEST and VSC in relation to an access agreement for access to the AARNet network.

The distribution of funding within this project may be varied at DEEWR’s absolute discretion.d. Infrastructure created as part of the project

The construction of fibre-optic tail circuits for this project will leverage existing AARNet infrastructure constructed for other education and training purposes.

It is the intention of all collaborative partners that infrastructure created by this project will extend the existing infrastructure and in turn be available for other education and training entities to leverage for future purposes.

All collaborative partners have agreed that access to fibre-optic tail circuits created through the $2.534 million funding provided by DEEWR for this project will be readily available to all sectors of education and training.

3. Phases of project:a. Stage 1.1 - set up network (November to December 2008)

i. Establish networkii. Connect to the network the Victorian TAFEs that are already connected to AARNet

and to CIT iii. Set up a link/protocol between the proof of concept TAFE network and AARNet and

the universities connected through AARNet.b. Stage 1.2 - connect SABRENet sites to the network (November to December 2008)

i. Connect SABRENet sites to the networkc. Stage 2 - test hypotheses, evaluate and adjust (December 2008 to November 2009)

i. Trial applications/activities/content on the network that test the hypotheses in 1.d.i. above

ii. January 2009 - Mid stage evaluation against designated outcomes, hypotheses and essential activities of the project

iii. Adjustment of activities in line with issues arising, changing priorities and lessons learnt, as approved by DEEWR

d. Stage 3 - add new sites to the network (November 2008 to August 2009)i. Stage 3.1 - Round 1 tail builds (November 2008 to April 2009)

o The preferred option is to build fibre-optic tail circuits from the AARNet backbone to the following Victorian TAFE sites (Plan A):

Wodonga East Gippsland William Angliss

o If agreements are not in place to proceed with these builds by 30 November 2008, or DEEWR decides these sites are not feasible, alternative sites will be selected (Plan B), subject to approval by DEEWR.

o Alternative sites that may be considered include: Other Victorian TAFEs TAFEs in other states Private RTOs

ii. Stage 3.2 - Round 2 tail builds (March to August 2009)o By 1 February 2009 DEEWR will decide which sites will be included in

the tail circuit builds for Stage 3.2, if any.o The preferred option is to build fibre-optic tail circuits from the AARNet

backbone to the following Victorian TAFE sites (Plan A): Holmesglen



Central Gippsland Gordon (currently has weak connection through Deakin

University) Kangan Batman

o If agreements are not in place to proceed with these builds within this timeframe, or DEEWR decides these sites are not feasible, alternative sites, if any, will be selected (Plan B), subject to approval by DEEWR.

o Alternative sites that may be considered include: Other Victorian TAFEs TAFEs in other states Private RTOs.

e. Stage 4 - Evaluation (August to December 2009)As indicated in 1.d and 1.e. of this document, a range of quantitative and qualitative evaluation methodologies will be employed to assess the outputs, outcomes and lessons learnt in relation to the technical, administrative and, to some extent, pedagogical aspects of the project.

AARNet will make all reasonable endeavours to meet milestones and timeframes set out in this Workplan. However, AARNet will not be held responsible for its failure to perform or delay in performing its obligations if that failure or delay is the direct result of events beyond AARNet’s reasonable control. If at any stage the above milestones cannot be met, DEEWR will at its absolute discretion vary the nature and or timing of activities to ensure the core elements of the project remain feasible. This may include the extension of milestone dates and/or the adjustment of project scope.

4. AARNet lead times

i. Tail builds AARNet has indicated the following lead time requirements in relation to the planning/permit/civil works involved in building tail circuits from selected TAFEs to the AARNet backbone/network:

i. build design/duct study: 8 weeksii. civil works/construction: 8 weeks

iii. commissioning/fibre installation: 4 weeksiv. handover/documentation/testing: 2 weeks

These builds will be executed using teams of contractors. It is therefore important to note that civil works contractors are effectively unable to conduct work in the period between December 1st and January 15th.These lead times pertain to items 3.1 and 3.2. AARNet will make an effort to have lead times in items 3.1, 3.2 and 4 run in parallel where build planning permits.

ii. AARNet lead times for tail fibre equipment and provisioning of bandwidthAARNet has indicated the following lead time requirements in relation to the equipping and provisioning of bandwith on fibre optic tail circuits from selected TAFEs to the AARNet ‐backbone/network as built under 3.1 and 3.2 above:

i. Place orders with supplier – 1 week ii. Equipment delivery lead time – 4 6 weeks ‐

iii. Staging of equipment before roll out – 1 2 weeks ‐iv. Roll out of core/backbone infrastructure – 1–2 weeks v. Roll out of sites (1 2 days per site) – 4 6 weeks ‐ ‐

vi. Testing of APL infrastructure – 1 week



vii. Integration with local TAFE infrastructure – 4 6 weeks. ‐AARNet will make every effort to have lead times in items 3.1, 3.2 and 4 run in parallel where build planning permits.

5. Applications a. Criteria for selection of applications to run on the network

An “Applications Reference Group” has been formed with representatives from all participating jurisdictions, as well as AARNet, SABRENet and Skills Tasmania. The group will inform the project on matters to do with the selection and implementation of applications. The group agreed to the following criteria for the selection of applications:

The group suggested a number of applications that satisfied the above criteria, and the project sponsor selected the most appropriate applications for use. The applications reference group will convene a “practitioners” group which will consider options for collaboration in curriculum, sharing of resources and the associated timetabling and staffing issues.

b. Indicative applicationsi. ‘VET Virtual’ is intended to be the central application to be trialled on the network.

ii. A second and, possibly, third “high impact” application will be selected by the project sponsor, DEEWR.

c. Guidelines in relation to the circumstances under which the trialling of an application should be ceased (or varied)The project’s commitment to a certain application will be discontinued if and when the reference group decides that an application is one or more of the following:

i. not effectively demonstrating capabilities (e.g. not working, not working well enough) ii. not demonstrating anything new or is deemed a proven concept or completed project


Applications or content to be used in the TAFE Network project, ideally should:

Be something that is not presently available, or is currently available but not realising its maximum potential due to less-than-adequate bandwidth

Not merely replicate an application that is already available Be an exemplar of the benefits of high-speed connectivity Have an identifiable educational outcome Cross jurisdictional borders (at least 2 applications) Demonstrate cross jurisdictional collaboration (at least 1 application) Involve more than 1 institute (at least 2 applications) Involve video conferencing (at least 1 application) Demonstrate a bandwidth-hungry application (at least 1 application) Be distinctly different in technique and form (not just 3 examples of videoconferencing) Involve a variety of learning disciplines Involve at least one traditional trade Apply across the tertiary sector or whole-of-education sectors (at least 1 application) Be able to be implemented without undue impost of time or other resources by

institutions (essential).

Applications that may also be considered include:

An education administration activity (e.g. RPL, e-portfolio) A staff professional development activity.


iii. leading to a budget blow-out (can’t justify continuing)iv. too demanding of goodwill, accommodation and/or people resources.

6. Communicationsa. How to identify and talk about the project

i. The full title of the project is the “Proof of Concept Fibre-optic TAFE Network Project”.ii. In all publications, promotional material and activities relating to the project

acknowledgement must be given to DEEWR’s sponsorship of the project, and the cross-jurisdictional collaborative arrangements for the project, by including the following statement:

“This work has been undertaken on behalf of the Australian Government, South Australian Government, Victorian Government and Australian Capital Territory Government, with funding provided through the Australian Government Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations.”

iii. The key messages about this project are:1. This is a proof of concept project to test the benefits of, and identify

issues associated with, a cross-jurisdictional high speed, fibre-optic network for vocational education and training.

2. This project is a collaborative endeavour between the Australian Government and the state and territory governments of South Australia, Victoria and the Australian Capital Territory.

3. This project is about governments working together to examine how technology can deliver improved outcomes for vocational education and training.

4. This project builds on previous Australian Government initiatives, including $88 million provided for the development of the university network known as the AREN.

5. This project furthers preliminary work done by the Australian Flexible Learning Framework, through its Access to Bandwidth Project.

6. This project works synergistically with initiatives in the states and territories in relation to high bandwidth connectivity and e-learning.

7. The Australian Government has provided $2.523 million to fund this proof of concept project.

iv. Communications to audiences external to the project, including press releases, must be approved by DEEWR prior to release.

b. Internal communicationsInternal communications should reflect the collaborative and collegial nature of the project. At a minimum, the following communications must occur: Quarterly progress reports, including a final report, from AARNet will be forwarded to

DEEWR for dissemination to the project’s collaborative partners. Individuals, sub-groups or steering committees working on individual aspects of the project

will report to each other (if a group) and to DEEWR under any of the following circumstances:

o Following meetings of the sub group or steering committeeo At all decision points that may impact on the scope, direction, cost and/or

timeline of the projecto Where issues or decisions may impact on other aspects of the project.

DEEWR will communicate with collaborative partners as and when required to ensure coordination of the various aspects of the project, keep the project on track and update collaborative partners on progress of the project and any relevant issues.



7. Procedure for variation of workplanThis workplan includes areas of engagement that are subject to variation, particularly in relation to expenditure amounts, where fibre-optic tail circuits may be built and what applications will be trialled across the network.Where a variation is considered to be necessary, the details of the variation, including the reason why the variation is required, must be submitted to DEEWR as soon as the need for such a variation becomes apparent. DEEWR will, at its absolute discretion, agree, not agree or agree with amendment to the request for variation of the workplan.No variation may be made to this workplan without the written consent of DEEWR.

_____________


Attachment 7.1 - Project Workplan

Attachment A - Indicative timeline for Proof of Concept Fibre-optic TAFE Network Project

Date Activity Outputs (Who)

2008

September 5 Workplan agreed Workplan agreed (All)

October 17 Decision - which sites will be included in Stage 3.1 tail builds Decision (DEEWR)

November 14 Sign off on funding agreement between Victoria and AARNet, based on agreed workplan; Stages 1.1 and 1.2 begin Funding Agreement (Victoria AARNet)

November 17 Stage 3.1 – Commencement of Round 1 tail builds (they will be added to network as they come online) Tail builds begin (AARNet/DEEWR)

Meeting of collaborative partners to evaluate project progress, resolve issues and identify actions to be taken Teleconference (All)

Meeting of Applications sub-group to plan initial applications to be run on network and decide future actions Teleconference (Aps)

Meeting of Technical sub-group to plan and coordinate build, identify issues and resolve to meet timeline Teleconference (Tech)

December 15 Stage 2 – Applications begin running on network Applications begin (Aps)

Meeting of Applications sub-group to decide next steps and ensure activities on track

December 17 Meeting of Technical sub-group to evaluate progress of network project to date, ensure build is on schedule, network is running effectively and initiate any actions necessary to resolve issues

Teleconference (Tech)

December 24 Stage 1.1 complete - TAFE network established; AARNet-connected VIC/ACT TAFEs connected to network; peering with universities established

Teleconference (All)

Stage 1.2 complete - SABRENet sites connected to the network SABRENet connected (SABRENet, AARNet, DFEEST)

December 15 Quarterly Report No. 1 submitted by AARNet to DEEWR Quarterly Report (AARNet)

2009

January 17 Meeting of Technical sub-group to evaluate progress of network project to date, ensure build is on schedule, network is running effectively and initiate any actions necessary to resolve issues


January 24 Meeting of Applications sub-group to evaluate effectiveness of initial network uses and refine future activities Teleconference (Aps)Table of abbreviations

All All collaborative partnersAps Applications reference

groupTech Technical reference group

Proof of Concept Network Project Final Report January 2010 of 55

Attachment 7.1 - Project Workplan

(Attachment A continued)

Date Activity Outputs (Who)

2009

February 5 Applications sub-group meets to evaluate roll out of applications and refine future activities Teleconference (Aps)

February 14 Decision - which sites will be included in Stage 3.2 tail builds, if any Decision (DEEWR)

February 17 Meeting of Technical sub-group to evaluate progress of network project to date, ensure build is on schedule, network is running effectively and initiate any actions necessary to resolve issues


February 21 Mid Stage 2 evaluation of applications commences Mid Stage 2 evaluation (Aps)

March 2 Stage 3.2 - commencement of Round 2 tail builds R2 tails begin (AARNet/DEEWR)

March 5 Applications sub-group meets to evaluate roll out of applications and refine future activities Teleconference (Aps)

March 12 Technical sub-group meets to evaluate progress of network to date, ensure build is on schedule, network is running effectively and initiate any actions necessary to resolve issues


March 15 Quarterly Report No. 2 submitted by AARNet to DEEWR Quarterly Report (AARNet)

April 30 Stage 3.1 - completion of Round 1 tail builds Stage 3.1 builds complete (AARNet/DEEWR)

June 5 Applications sub-group meets to evaluate roll out of applications and refine future activities Teleconference (Aps)

Technical sub-group meets to evaluate progress of network to date, ensure build is on schedule, network is running effectively and initiate any actions necessary to resolve issues


June 15 Quarterly Report No. 3 submitted by AARNet to DEEWR Quarterly Report (AARNet)

August 28 All tail builds completed Tails build complete (AARNet/DEEWR)

Stage 4 - Evaluation of project begins Project evaluation (All)

September 15 Final AARNet Report submitted by AARNet to DEEWR Final Report (AARNet)

December 15 Evaluation, reporting, project complete Project complete (DEEWR)


6.2 Participating Partners and Teaching Institutions

Participating Jurisdictions and Partners

Australian Government through DEEWR South Australia through DFEEST Victoria through the Victorian Skills Commission Australian Capital Territory through Canberra Institute of Technology AARNet SABRENet

Participating Institutions

South Australia

Elizabeth Gawler Gilles Plains Panorama Regency Roseworthy Salisbury Tea Tree Gully Urrbrae

Victoria

Swinburne University of Technology RMIT Victoria UniversityProof of Concept Network Project Final Report January 2010 of 55

University of Ballarat Wodonga William Angliss Kangan Batman Gordon Holmesglen (withdrawn) East Gippsland (withdrawn)

ACT

Canberra Institute of Technology


6.3 VET Virtual Flyer


6.4 Practitioners’ Large Mailbox Flyer


Proof of Concept

Documents

Transcript of Proof of Concept