The campus network has entered a fine-tuning operation. From initial bandwidth, wireless wireless coverage, it evolved to the current multi-operator intake, joint operations, and student selection of a package. The core system that underpins the system is the campus network Unified Authentication & Billing Platform.
Many universities’ information departments are prone to a miscalculation when selecting systems: using the system as a simple "money-collection tool." In fact, a mature campus network billing system has three responsibilities: certification of authorizations, operating ledgers, compliance audits.
Authentication authorizations: complexities behind a unified entrance
The network of university campuses is complex.……Some schools use a uniform manual, either a cascading or a supporting micro-credit self-help registration.
More importantly, there are more and more business systems within universities: the system of selection, library systems, laboratory resources systems, teaching systems. If each system is a separate certification portal, students have to keep many sets of account codes that are bad experience. Here is the value of the unified authentication platform: one certification, which is available online.
NATSHEL_BRAD V7 Authentication & Billing supports multi-factor authentication, which can be configured flexibly according to the actual scene, such as account passwords, micromail scans, SMS authentication codes, LDAP interfaces. For campus settings, the system can connect with existing sources of identity in schools and avoid building.
Operating splits: core challenges for multi-operator access
The market-based reforms of the network of universities have been moving fast in recent years. Previously, the operators had largely worked together as “buyouts.” More and more schools now required joint operations: schools provided basic network resources, operators provided export bandwidth, students chose their own operators and paid monthly fees.
In this mode, the split is a key link. Operator A and operator B students use the same physical network in the same accommodation building, how to distinguish between usage, how to settle the split, how to prevent cross-operator implosion.……These issues require a system of costing.
The solution for NATSHEL_BRAND V7 is "account penetration plus package segregation". Each operator has an independent management view in the system, which allows for a self-contained set of meals and a free view of users and income.
For students, the authentication portal is uniform regardless of the operator selected.
Compliance audit: hard indicators for insurance requirements, including the Ministry of Public Security
The university campus network is not open to the public, but the Internet log must be kept for at least 180 days and can be linked to the user’s identity, as required by the Cyber Security Act and other security policies of the Ministry of Public Security. This means that the billing system cannot record only “the day an account is online” but also “who is behind this account”.
The Log Audit module is installed within the NETSHELL_BILLING system to support interface with the public security audit system.
This is very important for the university information service.
Device docking: " Bottom Capability" of the billing system
Many ignore this: to be functional, the system must be docked with the core equipment of the campus network (AC wireless controllers, BRAS broadband remote access servers, routers, switches). Only if the equipment supports standard RADIFUS or Portal protocols can the system transmit authentication requests and push strategy back.
NATSHEL_BRAND V7 supports the interface between mainstream equipment manufacturers, both domestic and foreign, including Hakusha, Naking, H3C, Arajuba, RUCKUS.
Alternative recommendations
In selecting a system of billing, the university has several places where it can easily step on the pit:
First, the ability to match the source of identity. Whether the system is connected to a cartoon or a unified identification platform that exists in schools determines the amount of work that will be done on the later stages of the transport.
Second, whether multiple operators are mature in split functions. During the field trip, the manufacturer can demonstrate that "A student creates 100 G traffic, B student produces 50 G flow, and how each side shares settlement."
Third, audit log compliance. Confirms the retention cycle of a log, query convenience and whether it supports public security format export.
Fourth, the experience of the plant. The college landscape is unique, and manufacturers with over-school cases have more experience in network upswing, matchmaking programmes, post-sale responses.
The size of the school is changing every year, the number of operators may increase and the billing strategy may be adjusted. The selection depends on whether the system can smooth out its expansion and not on a structure that will last three or five years.
The V7 implementation team is well aware of the environmental complexity of the campus network.