|
|
ICC Home / Members / Meetings / Peer Support / Documentation / Projects
Minutes of March 11th, 2010 ITAC-NI Meeting: |
Link to ACTION ITEMS from meeting AGENDA: CALL TO ORDER: This meeting was scheduled in CSE E507 at 1:30 pm on Thursday, March 11th and was made available via videoconference with live-streaming and recording for future playback. Prior announcement was made via the Net-Managers-L list, so our broader audience should have been aware of the meeting. The meeting was called to order by ITAC-NI chairman, Dan Miller, Network Coordinator of CNS Network Services. ATTENDEES: Seventeen people attended this meeting locally. There were five attendees via Polycom videoconference and no records of how many may have listened into the stream via a web browser using the web interface. Eleven members were present: Charles Benjamin, Ron Cigna (via Polycom), Clint Collins, Erik Deumens, Craig Gorme, Shawn Lander, Steve Lasley, Chris Leopold, Tom Livoti (via Polycom), Dan Miller, and Handsford (Ty) Tyler (via Polycom). Three members were absent: Dan Cromer, Margaret Fields, and Tim Fitzpatrick. Eleven visitors participated as well: Avi, Baumstein (via Polycom), Dennis Brown (via Polycom), Jeff Capehart, Dan Eicher, Joe Gasper, Todd Hester, Dwight Jesseman, John Madey, Mark McCallister, Scot Matusz, and Erik Schmidt. Viewing the recording You may view the recording via the web at http://128.227.156.84:7734. Currently, you will need to click on the "Top-level folder" link, then the "watch" link next to the "ITAC-NI Meeting_11Mar10_13.48" item; actually there are several files and the recording seems to be fragmented. Generally these recording are moved into the ITAC-NI folder shortly after each meeting. Cross-platform access may not be available; on the Windows platform you will have to install the Codian codec. Audio archive An archive of audio from the meeting is available. 1) Approve prior minutesNo corrections or additions were offered and the minutes were consequently approved. 2) Governance update from Dr. FrazierDr. Frazier was on-hand to provide an update on how development of topical IT advisory committees and the selection of a CIO were progressing. 2-1) Work on the governance committee structureDr. Frazier had anticipated that the new governance structure would be in place by the end of last summer and we are now well past that. 2-1-1) Sub-committees formed first due to need/timing considerations The first committee to be formed which will become part of the new governance structure happened as a result of the Sakai Project. This began as an ad hoc project committee, but some subset of that group will likely become a sub-committee of the Academic Technology topical IT Advisory Committee. The HPC committee was the next to receive attention, mainly due to timing; the chair of many years (Alan George) had decided he wanted a reprieve. In all likelihood, this committee will eventually end up as a sub-committee of Infrastructure. Dr. Frazier pointed out that none of this is cast in stone because Bylaws are being developed which state that the parent topical committees will control the formation of their own sub-committees. Thus, should the main topical committees decide otherwise, these two sub-committees may vanish. Dr. Frazier does not believe that will happen, however. 2-1-2) Four main topical IT advisory committees are planned The four planned committees include: Academic Technology, Enterprise Systems, Infrastructure, and Security and Compliance. Infrastructure would encompass the area currently covered by the ITAC-NI but would have broader scope. The current ITAC-DI committee would be encompassed similarly by Enterprise Systems and the current ITAC-ISM committee by Security and Compliance. 2-1-3) Security and Compliance has made the most progress The Security and Compliance committee has gone through the steps of developing its structure and initial membership and how now held its first meeting. Dr. Frazier has asked the members of the former ITAC-ISM committee to re-form themselves as one or more technical sub-committees to the topical committee. A very small portion of that former committee became part of the new parent committee. Draft Bylaws have been created for this committee which are intended to become a boilerplate for all the topical committees. Dr. Frazier distributed several copies of that draft document to our committee members; he would appreciate any comments and input on that document. 2-1-4) Focus will soon turn to forming the other committees Dr. Frazier noted that focus will turn next to forming the Academic Technology committee, mainly because it should be the easiest next step. After that he anticipates that Infrastructure will be addressed with Enterprise Systems forming last. 2-1-5) What will this mean for ITAC-NI? Dr. Frazier said that the Infrastructure topical committee must be formed first, but that it would be logical to assume that a sub-committee would eventually be formed to deal with our network infrastructure. The entire committee plan will be contingent on the wishes of the new CIO, but all the candidates have indicated being comfortable with the ITAC structure. Dan Miller asked if the ITAC-NI should continue to meet as we feel necessary in the meantime and Dr. Frazier responded in the affirmative. He envisions that once the Infrastructure committee is formed that ITAC-NI members would be invited as members to sub-committees thereof. 2-2) CIO selection processDr. Frazier said that if things follow usual procedures we can expect the selection of our new CIO to occur very soon--possibly even next week. Before leaving, Dr. Frazier took the opportunity to thank the committee members for the time they spend in this important work. He feels that all IT benefits from the service that the committee members provide. 3) Demonstrations of host based video conferencing from MS OCSDan Miller thanked Dwight Jesseman who was standing in for Dan Cromer on short notice. Dwight provided a demo of the capabilities of Office Communications Server 2007 R2 as outlined in a handout which he provided. Dwight works for the UF Exchange team and with Erik Schmidt on the UF Active Directory team housed at Building 105. 3-1) RoundTable 360 cameraDwight explained that his demo would involve, in part, the use of the RoundTable 360 panoramic view camera system. This camera/microphone system was originally designed by Microsoft and is now made by Polycom. The camera focuses on the individual who is speaking and can cover a 360 degree area. It also provides a panoramic view of an entire room at one time. 3-2) Getting startedDwight pointed out that the applications he would be demoing involve Office Communications Server 2007 R2 on the server-side. On the client-side are Office Communicator and Office Live Meeting. The installation files as well as updates are available on a file share. The list of application/update files includes: There is a certificate available for use with PCs not connected to UFAD and it is possible to automate installs via the use of AD Group Policy Objects (GPO). 3-3) Office Communicator 2007 R2Dwight went through a very thorough demo of the Office Communicator client showing the following features: 3-3-1) Presence The Office Communicator (OC) application uses colored labeled icons referred to as "jellybeans' to indicate the on-line status of contacts with whom you may communicate. Status levels include: Available, Busy, Do Not Disturb, Be Right Back, and Away. Status levels can be controlled manually or automatically via the scheduled meetings in your Outlook Calendar. Thus your indicated presence can change based on your availability. Additionally, someone using OC can indicate their location (Home, Office or custom locations of their own creation). A number of user configurable options are available which may be adjusted to affect how these work. Integration with the Outlook e-mail client also involves the ability to save OC conversation histories in Outlook as well as messages indicating missed OC calls--if desired. 3-3-2) Search You can search for individuals (Contacts) with whom you wish to communicate. OC searches multiple locations including the Exchange Global Address Book and an individual's own contact list. 3-3-3) Buddy List The Buddy List can include contacts, contact lists and groups. You can find information about contacts by hovering over them and you can add-in Exchange groups which are then dynamically auto-populated from Exchange. 3-3-4) Contact Features Dwight enumerated the wide variety of actions one could take simply by right-clicking a contact from your list. Those included initiating a chat session, making an audio or video call connection, sharing your computer desktop, sending an e-mail message, scheduling a meeting, adding to Outlook contacts, sending a file, sharing information using Live Meeting, viewing UFAD properties, viewing contact card, finding previous conversations, tagging for status change alerts, changing the level of access, and finally, adding/moving/removing that person to/from Contact List or Group. 3-3-5) Conversations Dwight then began a conversation with a colleague to further demo how the above contact features actually worked. He showed the various layout features whereby the user can control how the various communication items are displayed on the screen. He demonstrated how desktop sharing could be used to assist a client in computer troubleshooting. Other contacts can be invited to an on-going conversation. While point-to-point connections are initiated by OCS, it then steps out and is no longer involved; when multiple points are involved OCS manages the entire conversation. 3-4) Live MeetingDwight then demoed Live Meeting which is a separate collaboration tool. Rather than being for day-to-day communication, this tool is more suited to things like teaching an on-line course. It includes such additional features as seating charts, Q and A, handouts, shared notes, recording, and participant feedback. 3-5) Outlook IntegrationLive meeting can be launched directly from Outlook. You can also schedule a Live Meeting event which will place an event on participants' calendars and provide them a one-click method of connection. 3-6) Live Meeting Web SchedulerA web client is also available for scheduling Live Meetings or conference calls. 3-7) Communicator Web Access (CWA)There is a link on the UF Exchange page to Office Communicator Web Access. This access works across multiple browsers. This method of access includes the majority of the features of OC, but does not support video. Communicator calls have been disabled due to the fact that additional VoIP integration would be necessary to support that. This web-client can be used to send an IM or share a desktop, however. Dwight mentioned that a Jabber plug-in is available but that it is not currently enabled. 3-8) Multipoint Control Unit IntegrationDwight then demonstrated a connection to the Video Services videoconference bridge. OC can thus initiate or participate in an ongoing bridged videoconference. 3-9) SIP Enabled Polycom EndpointFinally, Dwight demonstrated a point-to-point connection from an OC client to a SIP-enabled Polycom end-point. 3-10) Questions and answersCharles Benjamin mentioned that they have been using OCS for about seven months now. Dan Miller asked how they liked it and Charles responded that they love it. Dan Miller asked about compatibility with Macintosh. Erik Schmidt responded that the upcoming version of Office for the Macintosh will supposedly provide much better cross-platform support. Dan Miller asked if any testing had been done over VPN. Dwight responded that he uses OC over the campus VPN continually. Erik added that they have even used OC via WiFi and VPN to communicate with campus from an airplane over Kansas with great performance. There was a question about whether or not OCS would function over the HSC VPN. Dwight Jesseman has confirmed that Anesthesiology uses OC successfully with the HSC VPN. Clint Collins asked about the cost for OCS. Erik responded that we already have the licensing for faculty and staff across the entire campus. From the department side there is thus no cost to use this. 4) Update on Video Conferencing issues and Sustainability ProposalThis topic referred to a recently funded proposal that included investing in technology which could reduce or eliminate the need to travel for meetings. A portion of that funding went to providing Enterprise Client Access Licenses (eCALS) for UF faculty and staff. Another portion was set aside to help pay the lease on new videoconference bridging equipment. 4-1) Should integration with VoIP be more closely considered?The original proposal was for a Tandberg VCS which would facilitate the integration of OCS into our videoconferencing system; integration with VoIP was not a selection criterion at the time the proposal was made. Some questions arose about a month ago relating to our VoIP equipment and whether the Tandberg was the best choice for overall integration. To that end Dan Miller asked Ty to speak briefly about recent investigations at HSC. 4-2) New Cisco communication equipment at HSCTy reported that they received and installed Cisco equipment recently but have been having significant issues getting all the functionality working with VPN through their firewalls. Ty commented that the OCS capabilities just demonstrated seemed to well-mirror those which the Cisco system purportedly offers. They both seem to have the same overall look and feel. Ty said they should be able to report in more detail as things get further along. 5) Update on centrally provided SSL certificatesThis matter was last discussed at our January meeting. Chris Leopold provided an SSL survey factsheet handout detailing information gathered regarding certificate use at UF and elsewhere. 5-1) SSL survey fact sheetChris suggested that the survey received perhaps 25% participation. Until purchasing records are examined one can only make a rough guess; however, data in-hand suggests that perhaps $100,000 is being spent each year for certificates at UF. 5-2) Available optionsEstimates from the survey led them to investigate our various options. Developing our own PKI infrastructure was estimated to be prohibitively expensive. That left two main options. One would be to continue with the status quo and have each unit negotiate certs on their own. The second would be to investigate some hosted PKI solution. 5-3) Minimum acceptable feature setThe next step was to develop a minimal feature set which any hosted PKI solution must supply. Although not necessarily comprehensive, they came up with a short list which included: 5-4) Is a hosted PKI solution the right fit?Chris provided links to quite a number of universities who have already opted for some hosted solution, outsourcing their SSL certificate management. A quote obtained by Chris Leopold from Verisign came to $140/cert/year. This was just based on a phone call and was not a RFP, but amounts to about $200,000/year for UF overall which may be too much. Entrust and StartCom were investigated as well. UFAD and CNS both currently have a relationship/signed contract with Entrust, so they would not supply much information about pricing until someone provides a release. StartSSL also looks very promising. They essentially allow an organization to provide free certs, just charging for authorizing local individuals at the cost of roughly $100/individual/year. Joe Gasper explained that UF could get two or three people at UF the capability of supplying third and fourth-level wildcard certs for ufl.edu. Requests could then be submitted to those individuals who could supply certificates for UF. 5-5) Next stepCraig Gorme said they wanted to put together a presentation for next month's meeting and from there potentially get someone at a higher level to put together a RFP based on our rough quotes. The alternative is for us to continue as we have been with everyone negotiating on their own. Charles Benjamin suggested that multi-year certificates be investigated. While Charles said their own certs were at least 3-years, Craig responded that they were looking at two-year certs as that was the maximum readily available. Clint Collins commented that he would like this issue to be given a high priority. Not only could this save money potentially, but it could also lead to better management of our certs so, for example, expiration dates could be better tracked and cert users be notified prior so that disruptions in services did not occur. Craig added that he believed UF could get added value along the lines which Clint mentioned even if cost savings were not forthcoming. Dan Miller encouraged discussion to continue through the email list in the hope of getting some progress going before the next meeting. 6) Other topics6-1) Posture assessment/NAC appliance discussionCharles Benjamin asked that we consider discussing this matter at some future meeting. Ty mentioned that the HSC has one in operation and Avi Baumstein just happened to be available for comment. Avi responded "run away, run away" and "don't do it" to which Charles replied that Housing simply has to do something. Action Items
Next MeetingApril 8, 2010 |
last edited 14 March 2010 by Steve Lasley