Minutes of the JDCMG Meeting
May 13, 2005, Conference Call
| |
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
no
no
no |
UC Berkeley
UC Davis
UC Irvine
UCLA
UCOP
UC San Diego
UC San Francisco
UC Santa Barbara
UC Merced
UC Riverside
UC Santa Cruz |
|
- UCLA reduced printing and associated costs from about $600K to $300K by working with the application owners
to provide the reports online, and asking the users if they really need or want paper reports.
- UCSD has reduced printing costs from $400K to $100K by creating PDF reports and reducing copies
- The application owners and core users must suport reducing or eliminating printing in order to be effective.
- Five locations use Mobius's ViewDirect product. Michael Yuan indicated he would follow up with
Patrick Collins to negotiate a better deal for ViewDirect or look foranother product. One key function of ViewDirect,
needed by a couple of campuses, is it's support for Xerox DJDE forms.
- Berkeley discussed their funding model where printing was centrally funded but Printing Services now has responsibility.
- One high-volumn Santa Barbara customer is considering switching from the campus printing services to FedEx/ Kinkos because it is cheaper.
The Data Center wants to eliminate physical print, so they are pursuing further discussions with FedEx/ Kinkos. A near-term direction is the
conversion to PDF and e-mail delivery of Data Center printouts under a minimum page count size.
- Reports with sensitive data should be good candidates for online reports to decrease security issues.
- Sun granted a grid of 30 single processor systems to Berkeley. They are supposed to be able to tie back to Sun's Grid but Sun is behind
on the interconnect. It may be four or five months until it works. Sun's grid is three banks of 1000 nodes with a fourth bank in California for Research.
- An open issue is how Sun uses it's Grid to "burn in" it's systems before they get sold as new to customers. It doesn't seem possible to
do the same thing if the systems are used at a location other than a Sun facility.
- Shel will keep us current with the progress.
- Davis is the only campus that's excrypting their backup tapes. They are using Veritas Net Backup. They are not happy with Iron Mountain's server
as their tapes are frequently misplaced. Iron Mountain is also trying to increase prices, which should not happen since there's an
UC Iron Mountain contract in place.
- No one had talked with Iron Mountain about the lost tapes that made the National news. It was decided that Iron Mountain
should be the next vendor scorecard we do. Since the Web version of the scorecard isn't ready, Berkeley will send out the spreadsheet version.
- No one is currently encrypting their sensitive data on their main administrative computers. Issues with how and where
the keys are held are the reason why this isn't happening. We are aware of a UCOP lead security group that has this
on their list to assist in addressing. UCLA is looking at solutions to do field/ column level encryption. If we can find a way to do this
the data on the backup tapes will be encrypted.
- A few campuses are interested in e-vaulting including UCSD, UCB, UCOP and UCI.
One aspect of this involves sending a campus's backups over a network to a disk storage unit at another campus.
Another aspect would be to replicate all of the other campuses' critical data to assist in disaster recovery
should the need arise. Shel said that he believes that Haas and Anderson business schools are
looking at doing the backup vaulting as well.
- A work group headed by Tom Kelly at UCSD will pursue this. People interested should e-mail the names of
the people to be involved to Charlotte. This is one portion of the overall disaster recovery discussions that will be ongoing.
- Discussions are underway with IBM to get better discounts for our hardware
and software purchases and maintenance. For hardware, IBM wants us to coordinate
our purchases to get a better discount. The upcoming potential IBM purchases are
Berkeley's disk (currently out to bid), UCLA's mainframe upgrade, UCOP's mainframe
upgrade and possibly tape for UCSD.
- On the software side, Karen would be meeting with IBM soon to find out what it
will take to go from MLC pricing to an Enterprise License Agreement to get better discounts.
- Shel asked if other campuses were using the Burton Group and a few were.
In general, they preferred it over Gartner because it was more practical. The normal
pricing is $9K per vertical. Shel was trying to get a deal that would be $18K per campus for all verticals.
- Dana sent out an e-mail with information. People should fly to Sacramento as it is a 20 to 40 minute drive, depending on traffic.
Flights out on Friday should not be booked for early than a 6:30 pm departure time. Dana will be sending a note asking for
lunch preferences. She will use these responses as RSVPs for the event. They will arrange for wireless internet access at the meeting location.
- The next ITLC Meeting is May 24 - 25 at UC Riverside. The usual protocol is
that the campus representative on the Data Center Managers group gives the report to ITLC on our status.
We have not had participation from UC Riverside in a while. Don Worth will give update as no one from this
group will be attending.
- Conference calls, second Friday of each month, 11 a.m. - 1 p.m.
July 8
August 12
October 11
November 10
December 9, 11:30-1:00
- Meetings
June 10, UC Davis
September 9, UCSD (need to get another co-chair to replace Charlotte)
January 13, 2006, UCSB
- Vendor Scorecard
- Status of putting on the Web
- Iron Mountain status
- Disaster Recovery
- IBM Negotiations
- E vaulting - status from sub group
- Encryption
- SUN Grid Status
- Help Desk Software
- Change Management/ITIL
- How to leverage our hardware and software purchases and maintenance
For questions or changes to the minutes please contact Charlotte Klock,
Director, UCSD Data Center, (858)822-1223.
|
