Minutes - July 14, 2000
1:30-3pm - I.G. Greer Room 224
I. Welcome and announcements
Jeff Williams called the meeting to order at 1:35 p.m. and noted that the attending membership did not constitute a quorum; hence the meeting would be informational in nature. Members absent were Jeff Craven, Beth Davison, William Griffin, Kevin Howell, Troy McHenry, Ed Pekarek, Don Rankins, Dick Riedl, Dave Sampson, Greg Simmons, and Peter Wachs. Ray Pittman attended for Clayton Cooke, Tamara Swedberg for Len Johnson, and Mary Reichel for Lynn Lysiak. Steve Breiner (ICS) and Mick Kreszock (ITC) were present as visitors.
II. Review of Minutes - May 12, 2000
Minutes of the last meeting (May 12, 2000) were reviewed and three minor amendments were offered. The minutes were approved pending those amendments.
III. Update on IT infrastructure improvements and goals
David Hayler (NSS) reported that an Internet firewall had been installed between Appalachian and the rest of the Internet. He noted that filtering rules for the firewall would need to be established as part of a general University policy on networking and computer security. He reported that implementation of the on-campus Resnet (Residential Network) was moving ahead of schedule and was working more smoothly than had been anticipated. Users of the Resnet simply plug the cable from their machine’s Ethernet adapter into an active Ethernet socket and will be placed directly into a registration server where the user must provide authenticate his identities, after which an IP (Internet) address is assigned to the Ethernet adapter, and the person may access the Internet. Hayler mentioned that the network rewiring for Duncan Hall had been approved.
Steve Breiner (ICS) asked if departmental machines would have access to an IP registration procedure similar to that employed by the Resnet. Hayler responded that this was a long-term goal for Network Services, but that there were a number of administrative issues, which must be addressed first.
Mick Kreszock (ITC) asked whether bandwidth usage might be monitored to prevent overuse and/or abuse of the network and suggested that, with upcoming changes in the billing structure for our Internet access, this should be considered. Hayler responded that some of this type of monitoring was being done now, and that the process had identified several problem situations, which were corrected.
IV. Update on Preferred Internet Service Provider Selection
Williams reported that Wave Communications (formerly, Boone Online) will contract for and implement Appalachian’s preferred ISP project by the beginning of fall semester. University users will see a 40% -50% discount over regular ISP rates, and departments will be able to purchase “block” accounts at even more favorable rates.
V. Discussion of technology policies
Kreszock brought up the issue as to whether some of the newly installed servers might be used for ancillary services, giving print servers services as an example. Doug May (ACS) stated that the servers being implemented were dedicated for specific services and would not be used for other purposes.
Williams asked the group to consider the issue of servers installed outside of the ITS fold. Should such servers be required to meet state auditors’ requirements with respect to security, access, and use, in the same manner as are those under the ITS umbrella. In this context he provided to the membership an executive summary of a state auditors’ report about computer security and access controls based on a recent visit by the State Auditor’s office to Appalachian. Williams asked the membership to seriously consider if and how Appalachian should implement the auditors’ suggestions.
Mary Reichel (Library) brought up the issue of lack of notification regarding changes in IT structures and systems at Appalachian. Her concern was, that despite hopes to the contrary, such changes could seriously affect end users. The frustration and anger experienced when unanticipated disruption occurs, noted Reichel, might be avoided if ample notice about pending operations were provided to users. Al Harris (ITOM) echoed Reichel’s concerns and suggested that any IT operations, which might potentially affect academic users, should be announced in advance.
Williams noted that the NETADM email list frequently notified those on the list of pending operations prompting the questioners to respond that there should be more and more comprehensive notification. After discussions of possible ways to achieve such notification, a seeming consensus arose that, at minimum, the Council of Chairs and general IT staff should be notified, if possible, in advance of any potentially disruptive IT operations. Williams responded that ITS would investigate options for providing wider notification and report back to the group next meeting.
Williams then revisited a number of previously discussed projects, reporting that, in general, those updates were on schedule.
VI. Update on Student Lab Printing
May reported that tests of the Pharos printing system had exceeded expectations with regard to reliability and student acceptance. He noted further that preliminary indications are that a 50 - 60% decrease in number of pages printed will provide a rapid payoff of the initial investment in the system. The ad-hoc printing services committee will receive details about the trial runs to date. May revisited and addressed concerns expressed by Dick Riedl in the May meeting that there would need to be an intensive notice and marketing effort to assure that implementation of the service goes as smoothly as possible.
VII. Update on Support Services
Breiner reported that the university (through ICS) had subscribed to two major support organizations for Teaching and Learning with Technology (TLT). The UNC General Administration has funded Appalachian’s membership in the Flashlight Online project and in the TLT Roundtable Network (information about both are available at http://www.tltgroup.org/). The organizations provide numerous resources for teachers, support staff and administrators involved in TLT. Breiner also announced that the ICS office had received (with counterparts at UNC-G) a State Aid Grant of $84,000 from the UNC GA to coordinate efforts to research, develop, and recommend system wide guidelines for “Best Practices” in TLT at the university level.
May reported that the UHL helpline service was to be replaced beginning on Monday, July 17. At that time, the new helpdesk software, RightNow Web, would be deployed. He further stated that information sheets were being distributed to users who had historically used the UHL system and that affected users would be notified via email of the changes and of rudiments of using the new system. May stated that positions for two additional helpdesk support personnel had been approved and that the hiring process was in progress.
VIII. Other Business
Williams mentioned that the division of Student Development has adopted a set of web-related standards based on W3C (World Wide Web Consortium) - more information available at http://www.w3.org/ ). Since not everyone is familiar with those standards, they need to be reviewed to consider the implication of a campus-wide standard.
Williams mentioned a web advisory group, called for by the chancellor to evaluate Appalachian’s web image. One aspect is to evaluate the current look and feel of our web presence and consider whether it should be changed. The other component is to discuss guidelines, policies and standards. Williams suggested that such proposals by any university group should be made in consultation with the Appalachian IT community, at large, and that recommendations t should come through ITAC for open and full debate.
Teresa Canton (University Advancement) asked about the status of SCT’s Web for Alumni product (information available at http://www.sctcorp.com/industrysolutions/education/walumniS.htm) in the context of the GA’s UNC Shared Services Alliance (information available at http://www.northcarolina.edu/ir/alliance/alliance.cfm. ) Williams replied that the Web for Alumni issue was on the agenda for the next meeting of the “Alliance” and that he would report back to ITAC after that meeting.
IX. With no further business to discuss, the meeting adjourned at approximately 2:45 PM.
