CEENet Session - Balkan Convergence to the Best


1. Introduction

In the early days of CEENet (1994-1996) it was evident that the widespread
usage and acceptance of the Internet and networking technology in general,
was clearly dependent on well-trained and educated individuals that would
be involved in building the infrastructure, the services, the
administration and the education on the network. Thus the main effort was 
dedicated to organize the Network Technology Workshops, which trained 
many of networking pioneers mainly in GE, AZ, UZ but also in AM, KG and KZ.
 
The necessity to address and if possible to define a common set of
problems and their resolutions beyond the technology level (organization,
administration, funding, co-operation) have induced the need for another
type of a workshop. Creating a sucessful National Research and Education 
Network and its later operation requires not only networking technology 
skills, but also a deep understanding of managerial and policy issues. So 
from 1997 the CEENet organizes the Policy type ANW, which addresses those 
questions.

Since the inception of CEENet in 1994, many things have changed both in CEE 
region and in the science and the technology of networking. 

Most of the countries have firmly established multiparty democracy, free
market economy, and have started the process of European and transatlantic
integration. Poland, Czech Republic and Hungary are NATO members. Several
CEEC have an associative status in the waiting room for EU, while some
still slowly and with less then desired stability try to achieve the
aforementioned states of integration. 

Academic networks such as ARNES, CESNET, NASK, HUNGARNET and ACONet were
members of the TEN-34 project, which has its continuation in the TEN-155
project. The intention of the two projects is to bring high-speed and high
quality networking infrastructure relevant to the needs of the research
and academic communities all over Europe (although the costs associated
have been rather prohibitive for most of the CEE countries with the
exception of the very few). 

On the other hand, there are countries, which due to the economic
hardships, political and social challenges, have yet to unite and focus
their efforts and established the lower bounds of co-operation among the
many players within the country under the umbrella of academic and
research networking institutions. 

This was especially true for the CEENet members in some of the Balkan
countries, as well as Baltic ones, which emerged from the former SU. 
Their situation few years ago was in many aspects similar to present 
situation in Caucasus and Central Asia and they have achieved, despite 
many problems and obstacles, a remarkable success. We do hope that their 
experience might help others, and sharing this experience is a part of 
the CEENet mission. 

2. Draft Programme

The half-day CEENet session with an emphasis on the Balkan members should
address the following issues: 

* the creation and present status of the academic and research networking in 
  Albania, Bulgaria, Macedonia, Moldavia, Romania, and Bosnia and Herzegovina

* the problems with the organization and infrastructure

* funding sources (both national and international)

* the relation to the Government and other state agencies

* telecommunication laws

* relations with PNOs and other ISP providers

* mutual co-operation (eg. the possible idea of BARNet - Balkan Academic and
  Research Networking association under the umbrella of CEENet)

* combination and unification of the efforts

* administrative, technical and financial assistance by the prominent
  networking countries in the CEENet

* the role of NRENs in the political and economical stabilization of the
  Balkan region

The foundation of CEENet has proved to be a catalytic for the inception
and improvement of many national networks in the member countries. We
strongly believe that the improvements in the area of research and
education networking in the Balkan countries could be helpful to our 
collegues in Caucasus and Central Asia.

Prof. Oliver Popov
dr Jacek Gajewski