See All Minutes

Technology Advisory Council Meeting- April 18, 2003

Attendees: Kurt Collins, Tony Coulson, Jim Monaghan, Mike Ross, Steve Cuddigan, Owen Owens, Rob Garcia (Carolyn Aldana’s rep.), Dick Botting, Scott Conklin, Bill Takehara, Joe Scarcella, Javier Torner, Ian Jacobs, William Aguilar

Minutes were read. With minor correction, a motion was made to approve the minutes and that motion was 2^nd. The minutes were approved unanimously.

NAS Subcommittee report: Dell said they would come up with demo unit to do a proof of concept which would address these two criteria:

1. Works with TII infrastructure in SBS building.

2. Works with multiple operating systems

Another issue of concern: authentication. Test will not take that much time, Dell has offered technical assistance. The goal is to be tested and concept proved before the end of the year. Reminder that BATS placed environmental and safety requirements on servers so NAS would fall under that criteria.

The Committee discussed NAS and the advantages of centralized advantages vs. decentralized. This issue is a primary issues. An alternate solution is SAN Storage Area Network that controls the other storage servers. Many issues are tied into centralized vs. decentralized storage. Ultimately, a policy will have to be developed.

A model for replacing computers was shared. This outlined a model for delegating to power users the newest and fastest equipment while recreational users are to get Citrix access and a thin client. Discussion ensued over the current processes and possible problems associated with the computer replacement model. A couple of suggestions were made for disposal of old computers: create a swap meet for old computers for campus users only and donating to needy schools. No consensus was made.

The Committee returned to the issues of determining how many machines, and its systems profile and applications. It was proposed that “push? technology be the answer to providing the answers to these questions. Currently there is an application available through CMS that verifies minimal technical specifications of a user’s computer. It is important to come up with this info in a timely fashion and because it is believed that very few machines are not connected to the Internet this can be very advantageous. Options were discussed for implementation varied. One option was to make it a requirement for everyone who uses a particular application to have the small application downloaded, i.e. email. This transforms this into a political issue and BATS would need to provide a rational and caveats stating that this would not be intrusive. In consensus it is understood that a fairly accurate inventory is critical for future improvements of the network.

An inventory would enable BATS determined how much Citrix will need to be purchased. Kurt Collins has asked each Rep. to obtain a quick thumbnail of all computer users in their areas by the next BATS meeting. This is to be placed into an Excel spreadsheet provided by Kurt which will detail what info is needed along with more specific instructions. Kurt offered a Plan B which defines the different user categories. The Reps would fill out the form accordingly. It was generally agreed that this would be faster. This would be the quick fix while good, reliable data would be gotten from “push?technology later. KC will email to the BATS listserv a template of the information to be collected. Based on this information BATS can begin making some intelligent decisions re: Citrix, replacement computers, etc. Push technology will be needed but this is a 1-year process while a decision and direction is needed now.

Dr. Aguilar reminded the Committee that all BATS job is come up with recommendations for Dr. Aguilar & Dr. Fernandez. The focus should not be on details but through the use of Sub Committees to create something in writing. BATS needs white papers and long term processes for facilitating and determining the campus inventory.

It was suggested that BATS give individual colleges money and allow them to be the beta testers for technology innovations for campus implementation.

Smart Class room group report: Mike Ross reported that the goal for Smart Rooms is maintenance and not additions. A request was made to create a spreadsheet to document the costs of maintaining the current labs, and project future needs. If there is not enough money, Bill Takehara offered to submit a proposal to Dr. Fernandez for extra funding.

Owen Owens stated that he has ordered 25 wireless units that will be installed on campus starting with common areas such as break areas.

Jim Monaghan requested money for Blackboard servers and licenses. A $15,000 server will cover 3000 users and licenses. In the long term this moves into portals. A Sub Committee was formed to investigate this. Members: Jim Monaghan, Owen Owens, Kurt Collins, Mike Ross and Ramiro Diazgranados. Jim Monaghan is to be the chair.

Phone Fee Subcommittee report: Kurt Collins reported that everything is still under evaluation.

A request for streamlining of the discussion process of each subcommittee has been made. Please let discussions be done before the meeting and only let reports be given at the Technology Advisory Council meeting.

It was remarked upon that very little of BATS?funds will be spend this year.

Next BATS Committee meeting will be Friday, May 2, 2003 at 1:00 pm in PL-002d.