Attending: Landen Bain, Caroline Nisbet, Pakis Bessias, Roger Loyd, David Ferriero, Jim Dronsfield, Jonathan Luebbers, Kevin Cheung, Mike Pickett, Robert Wolpert, Betty LeCompagnon, Mike Gower, Leslie Boyd, Rafael Rodriguez, David Jamieson-Drake, Chris Meyer, Alvin Lebeck, Ken Hirsh, John Oates, Melissa Mills, Nevin Fouts, John Board, Rex McAllum
Review of Minutes and Announcements
The minutes from the January 15 meeting were approved.
Next Steps in IT Support Process
Betty LeCompagnon distributed the final report "IT Support Plan for Duke University". The recommendation on page 25, Create a support group responsible for coordinating technical services between OIT, MCIS schools and other support organizations, of the report will be implemented immediately. The committee will be chaired by Ginny Cake, with Neal Paris as vice-chair. Links will be formed between the support committee and the teaching and learning efforts, and to ITAC.
Review and Discussion of Modem Pool Changes
Rafael Rodriguez distributed several charts which illustrate modem pool calling statistics, showing that the pool is saturated. Rafael recommends that a four hour limit be imposed on the extended use modems, and that users requiring more than four hours per day of access use a commercial ISP. Discussion continued and included the following areas:
- experiences from Committee Members who have used the modem pool service
- acknowledgment that there is no easy solution
- general support for the proposed policy
Landen Bain moves that the proposal be approved. David Jamieson-Drake seconds. Discussion continues on the motion, focusing on the need for skillful communication to the Duke community of what could be a contentious issue. Robert Wolpert tables the motion, and volunteers to post the policy to Computing at Duke for comment, and bring back the issue for vote at the next meeting.
Project Design Review Process Discussion
Mike Pickett presents the need for a process of design review. John Board emphasizes a need for such reviews as a means to track progress on major projects, such as SISS. Discussion follows, leading to a prototypical project review of SISS by David Jamieson-Drake.
SISS Design Review
David Jamieson-Drake presents an SISS project review, supported by Chris Meyer. The review sparks numerous questions. John Board asks if Beta participation was worth the effort. David replied that it was. Extra time is spent on the 3-tier architecture, MAC and UNIX support, data conversion, interfaces. The consensus was that the process was valuable. An additional 30 minutes will be needed on the 2/12 agenda to complete the review.