Duke ITAC - March 27, 1997 Minutes
DUKE ITAC - March 27, 1997 Minutes
March 27, 1997
4:00 pm 211 TelComPresent: Pakis Bessias, Janis Curtis, James Dronsfield, John Eisenmenger (guest), Al Eldridge (guest), Annette Foster, Nevin Fouts, David Jamieson-Drake, Jay Kamm, Dave Kirby, Jef Lamoureux, Betty Le Compagnon, Paula Loendorf, Roger Loyd, Melissa Mills, Caroline Nisbet, Michael Pickett, Alex Reutter, Leslie Saper, Evan Scheessele.
Minutes of the March 13 meeting were approved.
AnnouncementsBetty Le Compagnon: A letter from Pres. Keohane will announce a change in BLC's reporting to a dual reporting relationship to the Executive Vice President and to the Provost. Budget adjustments will begin July 1; the change is effective now.
Mike Pickett: Future forums have been scheduled for four dates in April on technology issues. A session on Lotus Domino/Notes is being scheduled. The forums are open to the Duke community. Registration is through Marilyn Pietrantoini <email@example.com>.
- April 8th - Email and Shared Calendar Services
- April 16th - Application & Web Development Tools
- April 18th - Databases, Query Tools, and Authorization Services
- April 25th - Document Imaging
Agenda Item One: Network Design Committee Report -- Part 1; Wiring RecommendationsJohn Eisenmenger (committee chair) distributed a written progress report. He inquired further as to the role of his committee: reviewing university wiring standards on the network.
The committee has reviewed the wiring in the current bundle. At first, it seemed to them that unnecessary RG6 wiring was being pulled, but cost analysis showed no need to change current patterns. The wiring bundle being pulled to classrooms, laboratories, etc., is adequate (6 fibers). The committee recommends no changes in current practice.
Next steps: review electronics, open environment, and implementation plans with an eye to standards (but not waiting for standards to be adopted). Committee suggestion: Could Duke establish a network testing laboratory for all university network managers (OIT has one; could it be shared?). Requests and comments go to firstname.lastname@example.org.
Discussion: Dronsfield: Key accomplishment of wiring project is getting pathways installed. Kirby: Next move on network's "last leg" (from network to desktop) may well be wireless.
Agenda Item Two: Concept Papers on IT IssuesBackground: BLC distributed guidelines for the four concept papers at the previous meeting. Goal is to complete the writing of the 8-10 page papers by April 24, for presentation to the senior officers. Today's agenda: review outlines and discuss. Each group distributed its outline as work-in-progress.
1) Remote Access: Dave Kirby (chair) [See outline.]
Discussion: What level of service should Duke provide to Duke and non-Duke people off-campus? Should Duke get services to homes, or rely on other vendors (e.g., GTE, as in the ADSL trial)? BLC: Wonders how to verify that it is "Duke work" being accomplished via remote access. Nevin Fouts: Perhaps we need a tiered system, delivering services at three levels (or speeds) remotely. DK: Sees a 'thin client' or 'web TV' developing as a cost-saving means of allowing remote access where computing needs are minimal.
2) Administrative Systems: Mike Pickett (chair) and SICC Core Team. [See outline.]
Discussion: MP: Administrative systems are tools to help deliver the primary missions of Duke: undergraduate and graduate education, research, and health care. Opportunities for standardizing administrative desktops should be maximized. DK: Year 2000 problem can't be delayed, and is therefore unlike most other problems we address. BLC: Recommends discussing issues (under second question) rather than making recommendations. Melissa Mills: Could standardizing include the IP standard for Duke? MP (response): Yes, but within guidelines, not arbitrarily. DK: Use standards in widest possible domain (but not necessarily the entire enterprise). MM: Should security be added to this document, or perhaps to others also?
3) Technology-Supported Teaching and Learning: Al Eldridge (chair). [See outline.]
Discussion: AE: A previously-existing working group on this subject is being used to generate this position paper. Duke seems to have reached a "stall point" in which early adopters have taken advantage of technology in teaching/learning, but the majority has not yet adopted. DK: Can distance learning be added to this paper? BLC: Duke needs to think about possibilities for tele-teaching and faculty sharing as forms of new markets.
4) Desktop Technology Renewal: Janis Curtis, author of draft outline, with a plea for people to join the working group. Suggested new members: Nevin Fouts, Neal Paris, Annette Foster or another ADAC member. [See outline.]
Discussion: JC: The working draft doesn't follow the outline of questions exactly, but will do so in further revisions. AF: Need to explore the issues of haves/have nots. DJD: How about adding "support" and "vendor relationships" as issues to be covered in this paper?
Wrap Up: BLC: Need to find some way to coordinate the four papers, making sure that they inter-relate well. Four chairs should meet prior to the final draft, seeking either internal consistency or at least cross-referencing each other to note where conflicts are. Chairs will email drafts of papers to ITAC, but not necessarily further versions of outlines. DK: Suggests that each chair send one or two crucial points to be included in a cover memo to the four papers.
The meeting adjourned at 5:30 pm.