1 / 9

The changing relation between the NREN and the government in Hungary

Explore the historical shifts, recent changes, and challenges faced by NRENs in Hungary amid government control and evolving roles. Learn key lessons and insights for navigating this dynamic relationship.

margaretreynolds
Download Presentation

The changing relation between the NREN and the government in Hungary

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. The changing relation betweenthe NREN and the government in Hungary Bálint Lajos, NIIF Institute <lajos.balint@niif.hu> TERENA TF-MSP meeting Alcala de Henares, 6-7 May 2013

  2. Contents • NIIFI & Hungarnet status and history • Embedding and wider environment • Recent overall changes in Hungary • Recent overall changes in NREN roles / functions • Warning signals to NRENs in Europe • The bomb in Hungary at late 2010 • NIIFI’s 2011-2012 fight for freedom and liberty • Final (?) outcome early 2013 • Advantages and disadvantages • Lessons to learn

  3. NIIFI & HungarNet status and history • NIIF Institute • top-down hierarchy • government control, funding (100 % … 50 %) • independent execution (development & operation) • HungarNet • bottom-up hierarchy • membership control, no funding • independent representation of user interest • status • independent legal entities • close cooperation, joint actions • history • periodic fighting for survival (changing governments …) • alternate focus on NIIFI or HungarNet – depending on risks

  4. Embedding and wider environment Government control and funding of NIIFI • Changing umbrella ministry in every 4 year (Education, Industry, Economy … Academy … Development) • Repeated informal govt. testing of NIIFI loyalty and fairness • Repeated trial of discontinuing / commercialising / merging NIIFI • Central funding increased until late 90’s, decreasing since then Changing relations to commercial operators (partnership / competition) • Technology and macro market (since TEN-34)  • Micro market (10K … 700K … 2500K users)  Good luck: • Definite continuous willingness of keeping political neutrality • Single organisation (NIIFI) comprising complete e-Infrastructure (networking, grids, clouds, HPC, VRC, data …)

  5. Recent overall changes • Recent overall changes in Hungary • General elections every 4 years (latest: Mid-2010, abs.majority) • Intention of increasing government control • Deprivatisation, mergers … decreasing freedom in operations • Recent overall changes in NREN roles / functions • Vertical opening (new e-Infrastructure functions, wider portfolio) • Horizontal opening (widening user community: govt., health, PPP) • Changing attitude / habit (focus on innovation, friendliness …) • Changing priorities (sustainability, stability, business models) • Warning signals to NRENs in Europe • RoEduNet, FuNet, FCCN … (govt. reactions to crisis etc.) • different responses (from fighting to resignation …)

  6. The late 2010 bomb in Hungary Draft Government Decree 346/2010: • Intention of integrating all public ICT functions (govt., taxation, army, police, fire brigade, ambulance, …) • NIIFI among the involved organisations (!) Fight for jointly acceptable / agreeable solution (freedom & liberty): • Immediate start early 2011 • NIIFI not alone trying to escape • Dozens of actions during 2011-2012: • letters, discussions • modification requests, suggested alternative text versions Our major weapons (references): • International relations (eligibility), projects (contracts), funds (eg.SF) • Internal responsibilities (research, education), risks (degradation) • HungarNet in the background

  7. Final (?) outcome early 2013 Background parallel happenings: • Discontinued ICT support by incumbent (govt. intention) • Plans for separate govt.network on MVM DF background (el.comp.) • NIIFI discussions with MVM on DF IRU Outcome: • NIIFI CEF DWDM optical backbone on MVM DF • NIIFI equipment + NIIFI mgmt. – free capacity (60%) offered to MVM • MVM free capacity (managed by NIIFI) offered to govt. (expertise!) • Independent NIIFI operation, limited contribution to govt.backbone Additional elements of the early 2013 solution: • Schoolnet (Sulinet in Hungary) overtaken by NIIFI (5000 / 1,8M) • Community net (Koznet in Hungary) of libraries, e-Hungary nodes too • Modified 346/2010 (on govt.networks) govt.decree approved • Modified 5/2011 (on NIIFI) govt.decree approved

  8. Advantages and disavantages + Lessons Of course nothing is perfect … • Advantages: • stable e-Infrastructure • promising sustainability • Disadvantages: • staff shortage • Jolly Joker functions • horizontal opening questionable (children rather than innovators) Lessons learned / to learn: • ”never give up” • ”be continuously alerted” • ”act/react immediately” and ”apply your weapons” • ”try to keep political independence”

  9. Here we are at the moment … Challenging but difficult …  Difficult but challenging … 

More Related