When Policy and Technology Collide: What CALEA, Community Broadband

Deployment, and Net Neutrality Mean for the Future of the Internet

Loretta Early, University of Oklahoma Dennis Maloney, U of Colorado, Boulder

Garret Sern, EDUCAUSEhttp://www.educause.edu/policy

Copyright [Garret Sern] 2006. This work is the intellectual property of the author. Permission is granted for this material to be shared for non-commercial, educational purposes, provided that

this copyright statement appears on the reproduced materials and notice is given that the copying is by permission of the author. To disseminate otherwise or to republish requires written

permission from the author.

CALEA:The Communications Assistance for

Law Enforcement Act

What is CALEA?

CALEA is the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act. It was originally enacted in 1994. It requires providers of commercial voice services to engineer their networks in such a way as to assist law enforcement agencies in executing wiretap orders.

Until August 5, 2005 that is…..

CALEA: New Report and Order

On August 5, 2005, in response to a request by law enforcement, the FCC voted to extend CALEA to include facilities-based Internet service providers.

Facilities-based Internet service providers are defined as: "entities that provide transmission or switching over their own facilities between the end user and the Internet Service Provider."

Arguments for/against extending CALEA to ISPs

Law EnforcementThe Internet is increasingly the communication of choice for criminal activityLegal intercepts need to be easier and less expensive for LEAn “exempt” system is a magnet for criminal activity

Education and LibrariesCongress should decide not the FCC or DoJLE has sufficient access nowCost to comply can’t be justifiedWill slow innovation

Two Part Decision

Part #1: Decided: CALEA does apply to ISPs and all facilities-based Internet service providers are covered. Full compliance is required in 18 months..

Part #2: Still to be decided: What will be required (standards of compliance) and will there be an “special cases” allowed (i.e. small rural providers or education and research networks).

Currently underway

1. Petition for Review with the Federal Court of Appeals

2. Comments to the FCC on “Part #2” of the CALEA ruling

3. Continued negotiations with the DoJ on a compromise position.

Current Proposal:

Single point-of-contact Standard procedures established24x7 assistance available Personnel trained in procedural, legal and technical demands of assisting legal intercepts.Some gateway equipment would be replaced, but only under the normal replacement cycle

CALEA Tech Group

Doug Carlson (Chair), NYUMark Luker: EDUCAUSE liaisonPete Siegel, UIUCMike Corn, UIUCClair Goldsmith, UT SystemWayne Wedemeyer, UT AustinDavid Walker, UCOPShaun Abshere, WiscNetJim Dolgonas of CENIC Eric Boyd, Internet2

How might a request work?

Lawful Authorization

Law Enforcement

Telecommunication Service ProviderService Provider Administration

(Turn on Lawful Intercept feature of switch)

Delivery Function

Collection Function

Access Function

Law Enforcement Administration

(Switch collects Lawful Intercept

data)

(Securely deliver information to LEA)

(Order generated)

CALEA FAQ

Where can I find out more?Educause

• http://www.educause.edu/calea

AskCALEA• http://www.askcalea.net/

FCC• http://www.fcc.gov/calea/

Selected vendor information • “Cisco Service Independent Intercept

Architecture” (sign on required to access on Cisco web site)

• RFC 3924– http://www.apps.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3924.html

Network Neutrality

What is it?Why is it suddenly so important?

What are the arguments?How could it affect HE?

What is it?

Network neutrality isthe concept of keeping the Internet

open to all lawful content, information, applications, and

equipment on a non-discriminatory basis.

Why is it so important now?

Post “Brand X” World

Phone and cable companies are committed to VoIP and Video over IP services

Phone and cable “duopoly”?

The technologies exist to block or disrupt competing services.

Who controls the Internet?

Everyone wants more and better broadband

“Entertainment” and private investment will drive deployment and better pricing. (85% of the Internet is privately owned)

The Internet is vital for economic growth, education, healthcare and access to public services

Tensions

Encourage investment $$$$

Assure innovation and economic growth

Provide vital public services

What are the arguments?

Anti-net neutralityNet neutrality is a “quaint” 19th century ideal that does not fit today’s marketplaceNet neutrality is a solution looking for a problemWe take the risks $$$;we should be able to control the network as we see fit. (SBC promoting a “tiered” approach.)Content providers have been getting a “free ride”

Pro-net neutralityOpenness “was, is, and will be” vital to the Internet’s development

This is not a unique or new problem… Common Carriage…differentiation versus discrimination

Government regulation of the Internet is not new

And many more…..

How could this affect HE?

Business costs: As large consumers of bandwidth

Educational costs: Student/faculty access to broadband for distance education, research, information transfer

Innovation costs: if network providers can block or “throttle down” access

Net Neutrality Resources

Internet2, Testimony before Senate Commerce Committee, February 7, 2006Proposed Legislative LanguageEDUCAUSE Net Neutrality Talking Pointshttp://www.educause.edu/netneutrality

Municipal Networks

Issue: Should communities have THE RIGHT to enable their citizens affordable access to information and services provided over the Internet. Arguments Against:

No need for government mandates – market is already taking care of thisUnfair competition - no incentive for companies to build out if competing against taxpayer funded projects

Why Should the HEC Care?

Higher Ed needs “extended campuses” to deliver continuing education to the home and distance edHigher Ed can’t realize the national goal of universal high-speed access by itselfMunicipal and community networks are natural partners and allies

Current Status

13 States currently have barriers to community broadband services5 “compromise bills” were signed into law last yearEDUCAUSE and our partners are encouraging Congress to enact the “Community Broadband Act (S.1294) Industry opponents backing off, concentrating on national video franchising

Universal Service Fund

The goals of Universal Service, as mandated by the 1996 Act, are to promote the availability of quality services at just, reasonable, and affordable rates; increase access to advanced telecommunications services throughout the Nation; advance the availability of such services to all consumers, including those in low income, rural, insular, and high cost areas at rates that are reasonably comparable to those charged in urban areas.

--FCC Websitehttp://www.fcc.gov/wcb/universal_service/

welcome.html

Components of USF

Low-IncomeHigh-CostSchools and Libraries (E-Rate)Rural Health Care

Universal Service Reform

Issue: What is the most effective means for updating this federal government program in order to facilitate affordable deployment of the next generation communications to all Americans? Challenges:

Maintaining level of funding as more Americans move away from traditional land lines (POTS)Determining the most equitable means for collecting USF

Why Should HEC Care?

Students living in rural and low-income areas need access to information and education applications FCC favored number-based approach for collecting USF funds could pose a financial burden on HEC

ACUTA Study

In a survey of ACUTA members conducted in October 2005 with 51 institutions responding, ACUTA found that the average USF contribution in a “typical” month was just under $1,260. Based on a $1.00 per DID number charge under the numbers-based proposal, the average contribution would increase to over $15,000 per month, not including additional charges for high-capacity circuits.

Ideals for USF Reform

Enact a “means-test” to determine who receives fundingRequire USF funding to be used for broadband facilitiesBroaden the base of USF funding to include VOIP, cable modems and intrastate revenuesFor HEC:

Seek exemptions from numbers-based approachBase on number-blocked fees

Current Status

ACUTA continuing discussions with goal of reaching compromise regulations via FCC Wireline BureauDorgan/Smith bill to require $500 million of current USF to be spent on broadbandSenate Commerce Committee scheduled hearing on USF collection mechanisms, February 28, 2006http://commerce.senate.gov/

What Does the HEC Offer?

Vision of the Internet’s PotentialExperience Using Tomorrow’s Applications Today Dealing with the Practical Technical Challenges Associated with Incorporating the New Technology (ex. Ensuring E911 Access with VOIP)We helped invent the Internet!

What Can YOU Do?

Engage Your Government Relations Representatives!

Educate them on WHY IT Policy Is Important for your institution and how it fits into the mission of higher educationAsk for their expertise in how to lobby policymakers

Join Us For

Policy 2006 April 26-27, 2006 • Washington, D.C.