University of Minnesota
Institute of Technology
Minutes of the ITICC Meeting,
October 16, 2003
3:35 p.m., 3-230 EE/CS
Present: John Baxter (Math), Christopher Bingham (Stat), Bryan Carlson (ITLabs, ADCS), Tom Chase (ME), Tracy DeLaney (Astro), Matt Dushek (ECE), Ken Heller (for Roger Rusack, Phys), Peter Hudleston (IT Dean’s Office), Phil Kachelmyer (ADCS), Wonsuck Kim (Geol), Satish Kumar (ChemEMatS), Larry LeMay (ADCS), Ken Loomis (CSciE, ACM), James Maatman (ITSB), Dan MacEwan (Chem), Kent Mein (CSE, ITLabs), David Nordsletten (BME), Hitoshi Sakamoto (ME), Karen Swanberg (Geol), Anand Tripathi (CSciE), Lucas Veverka (ITSB), Doug Victoria (CCE)
1) Status reports from CSciE and ADCS
Labs are running smoothly. Mein reported for the Computer Science & Engineering side of management that there had been some software kinks to iron out. From Rogness, via Baxter, we learned that things in Lind 24 are running well. LeMay reported that controlling temperature in the labs was an issue, with temperatures at the start of fall semester getting too high (and occasionally too low) in several labs, during the periods between air conditioning and heating seasons in buildings. Temperature control is also an issue in the spring. (It is addressed below as the first item under lab improvements.)
2) Initial Presentation of Proposal for Lab Improvements, Fall Round
Mein distributed copies of the first draft of proposed improvements for the public labs, for approval this fall and implementation over the winter break. The proposal had been prepared by the Technical Committee in the previous few weeks.
The first item addresses temperature control in the labs. The idea is to put temperature and humidity sensors in all the labs so that these can be monitored remotely. It would allow lab management to recognize problems as they develop and take action proactively rather than, as now, retroactively. Control measures are still manual, however, like switching off some machines and opening/closing doors and windows.
Other items include replacement of: the old print server; three HP problem-prone printers; 39 Dell and 14 Sun computers that are four years old (the planned lifetime in the labs is 4 years); and optical mice to replace mechanical mice.
The systems staff is requesting a laptop for, among other things, keeping ghost images for the different operating systems in use.
To provide students outside the labs better access to the IT labs software, management is proposing is to set up a dual-processor terminal server (to replace old Dell machines). This is modeled on what Computer Science is using currently in the department. There are concerns about security – we need to be sure students are not using the software for job-related purposes. We thus need to make it clear that users have responsibility to use this only for university work. Victoria asked how many simultaneous users there could be; his experience with this set-up is that it is strongly process and user limited.
The last two items are to complete a security and monitoring system started last year. Hudleston explained that we had received a general estimate for installing fiber optic security cable and CCTV cameras in all the labs. This was approved by ITICC last spring, but the cost had turned out to be considerably more than the estimate. Macdonald is in the process of getting a final estimate to complete the job. Even though more expensive than originally planned for, Hudleston said that this would still end up saving money by reducing the numbers of consultants in the labs.
Hudleston said that the final form of the proposal will be brought to ITICC at the November meeting, after which an e-mail vote will be held. He encouraged members of the committee to let Macdonald and the Tech Committee know of any suggestions for modifications or additional improvements. He also noted that the total cost of improvements, about $200,000, was well within the budget for the year.
3) Lower Division Funding – Review of Procedures.
Hudleston explained how the funding for upper division and lower division students worked, and how the revenue was utilized. Lower Division funds are used to support instructional computing in the lower division, and have been used to support laboratory instruction in Astronomy, Chemistry, Geology, Mathematics, and Physics. In order to allow departments to plan in an orderly way and build facilities over a period of several years, the funding has covered periods of three years. We are now in the third year of the second cycle of Lower Division funding, and must begin a new cycle next year. Since much of the funding up until now has been involved in building infrastructure, and since the main elements of this are now in place, it may make sense to reexamine how the funds should be used. Hudleston said he would form a subcommittee of ITICC to take on this task. He asked for volunteers of faculty and students for this subcommittee, and received both volunteers and nominations. He said he would send an e-mail to ITICC when the committee membership was complete. He expected that the committee would report in time for departments to prepare proposals in the spring for the 2004-2007 cycle.
4) Other Business
Chase raised the issue of a university-wide network upgrade, described in a recent memo from CIO and Vice President Steve Cawley to Deans, Directors and Department heads. Cawley’s memo detailed plans to upgrade the university network capacity to Gigabit Ethernet service. Included in the memo is an offer to take over management of locally managed networks “free of charge.” There is concern about this proposal in AEM and ME (which collaborate on their local networks) and several other departments in IT - including the IT public labs - which manage their own networks and which currently have capacity as good or better as that planned in the upgrade. The concern is that it makes little financial sense for these departments to hand over management of their networks to OIT, and that whether or not they do this there is a belief that there will be a cost that is passed down to colleges and departments for the upgraded service. If this happens, departments that maintain their own networks would in effect be paying twice. Can departments opt out of OIT network management, but be given their share of the funds or equipment to manage their affairs?
Kachelmyer stated that a different funding model is being used for the network upgrade and that the funds are not coming out of NTS operating budgets nor from a tax on departments. Rather, they will be provided by central administration to cover the cost of the network upgrade. There will be no costs passed on to departments for this. Private LANs will likely benefit in some ways indirectly by the network upgrade but there may be compelling reasons for the private LANs to remain private. Each department needs to make that decision for themselves. A move from private LAN to Etherjack would not necessarily be "free of charge." The departments that take this option will be expected to provide some or all of the funding needed to upgrade their existing networks to current standards and to be ready for the coming network upgrade. The later upgrade of the Etherjack would happen at no additional cost to the department. Departments that decide not to convert their private LAN to Etherjack would not be eligible to receive funds from the pot to do their own upgrade..
There was general agreement that departmental and IT lab personnel should meet with representatives of OIT and learn more about Cawley's proposal.
Dushek inquired if it would be possible to improve wireless service for IT students in EE/CSci. He said that he had difficulty getting good signal in parts of the building that previously he had not a problem with, and hoped the situation could be improved. Hudleston said that some wireless service did come under IT labs’ purview, and that he would ask the Tech Committee to look into this and make improvements if and as appropriate. The cost for adding access points is modest. Responsibility for providing wireless service across campus is shared among the departments, ADCS and IT labs.