CCFIT > Calendar & Minutes > 1998-2003 Minutes > September 9, 2002 AdC3 Minutes

1. Approval of Minutes
2. Announcements
3. IT Strategic Planning
4. Mass Electronic Communications Policy
5. World Wide Web Policy
6. Wireless Policy
7. Implementation of Service Unit Recharge Billings in DaFIS
8. Virus Scanning Update

Absent: Bob Franks, Celeste Rose, Steve Roth, and Judy Sakaki.

Staff to the Council: Randy Moory, Julie Saylor, and Babette Schmitt.

The meeting began at 3:00 p.m.

Chair Smiley asked whether there were any edits or amendments to the minutes from the June meeting. Council approved the minutes as submitted.

Chair Smiley introduced the new members to the Council: Bob Murta, Executive Director for Human Resources; Lynn Chronister, Associate Vice Chancellor for Research; and Judy Sakaki, Vice Chancellor for Student Affairs. Chair Smiley also acknowledged Michelle Fulton as the new representative for Adman.

Handout: Draft UC Davis Information Technology Strategic Plan

John Bruno, Vice Provost for Information and Educational Technology (IET), introduced a draft UC Davis IT Strategic Plan that he and John Meyer, Vice Chancellor for Resource Management and Planning (RMP), have developed. Bruno emphasized that the proposed plan provides only a preliminary framework, and he encouraged Council members to participate in its continued development. Bruno indicated that the development of this plan coincides with, and builds on Provost Hinshaw's decision to develop a strategic plan for the campus. Bruno provided a sample graphical representation of the campus strategic plan framework discussed to date (see page 3 of the handout).

Bruno described the elements of the proposed framework for the IT Strategic Plan. Similar to the framework for the campus plan, the IT Strategic Plan would include a mission statement, a vision statement, priorities, goals, and actions. In addition, Bruno emphasized that the plan should include metrics, where possible, for measuring the extent to which we've met our goals. Bruno proceeded through some of the example activities in the handout to explain how they would support the proposed framework.

Bruno then described the Information Technology Proposal Review Process, noting that Council, over the last few months, had discussed previous iterations of the flow diagram (see page 8). The flowchart was revised following consultations with Provost Hinshaw. A simpler, more streamlined process was determined to be more appropriate. The solid arrows between the boxes represent the flow of an IT project proposal through the review process. The dotted arrows denote IET's and RMP's consultative roles. Both organizations will act as facilitators at any stage of a proposal, helping to improve the quality of the proposals and ensuring compatibility and coordination with the campus IT infrastructure, systems, initiatives, and budget processes. Bruno stated that AdC3 and other campus groups will play an important role in refining goals and priorities identified in the strategic plan. Vice Chancellor Meyer added that the IT Strategic Plan is a critical tool that will establish a framework for allocating resources and ultimately setting priorities.

Council asked about the timing of the strategic plan development. Bruno replied that it should be tied to the development of the campus strategic plan, which is expected to reach completion by the end of this academic year. Council responded that Vice Provost Bruno and Vice Chancellor Meyer should move quickly and form a steering committee, establish working groups, and define the processes necessary to complete the plan within the timeframe identified.

Associate Vice Chancellor Chronister stated that the Office of the Vice Chancellor for Research is also working on a strategic plan for their organization. This plan will include a reference to the development and implementation of an Electronic Research Administration (ERA) system. She asked whether this would be added to, or referenced in the IT Strategic Plan. Bruno responded that this could easily be integrated into the IT Strategic Plan.

Handout: Draft Policy

Analyst Moory reported on the draft policy for mass electronic messaging. Moory reported that his report was an information item to inform the Council about the proposed policy and its purpose. Moory identified the principal objective of the policy as the need to provide guidance to campus leaders on the types of communications that are appropriate to distribute to large groups of campus individuals, using the campus electronic communication resources (e.g., email and instant messaging). Moory reported that IET, specifically the Email postmaster, receives numerous questions about what is appropriate for distribution and complaints about spam from individuals who receive unsolicited mail through mass electronic mailings. Moory also identified the need to define what constitutes appropriate mass messaging. He noted that the acceptable use provisions in the UC Davis Electronic Communications Policy define "inappropriate mass messaging" as an abuse of the policy.

Moory gave an overview of the policy and the purpose of each section (see handout).

Council responded with questions about how the minimum number of recipients is defined in mass distribution. Council members considered other possible numbers but agreed to work with the proposed 250 for now. Council also suggested adding another approval authority for distribution of mass communications. Council members suggested that the authority to approve mass communications to specific system users will be delegated to the owners of the systems. Moory replied that he would work with the Council to make this change.

Analyst Moory briefed the Council about the World Wide Web Policy now under development. Moory reported that discussion of the draft policy has been postponed, following a meeting with the AC4 Steering Committee during which issues were raised that need to be addressed before the policy can be vetted further. Moory will return to the Council with a revised draft when these issues are resolved.

Security Coordinator Ono reported on the proposed Wireless Network Policy. The policy was first presented to Council and discussed in October 2001. Ono reported that the revised policy has entered the final review stage through the Chancellor's Office and is expected to be final in a couple of weeks. Ono indicated that, since the Council's last review, the only significant change to the policy pertains to the Interference Management provisions: the new draft reflects a consolidation of the policy language, and the addition of life and safety as top criteria for prioritizing use of the wireless bandwidth.

Council asked whether there will be new building standards for wireless networks similar to those for wired networks. Council asked that a standard template for wireless networks be provided by IET for this purpose.

Associate Vice Chancellor Allred provided an update about the change to DaFIS for billings from campus service units. Allred reported that standards for the information on all billings from campus service units are now being enforced. Campus units were able to meet the July deadline and the automated billings are now reporting significantly more information through DaFIS to the department receiving services. This allows campus units to more easily resolve billings from service units. Allred reported that only three departments chose to not adopt the standard and now use a different method to report billings to DaFIS.

Council members commented that the change will make a significant impact on resolution of billing disputes between service providers and receivers.

Security Coordinator Bob Ono reported on the recent implementation of anti-virus scanning software on the central campus email servers. He noted that virus scanning began in July. During that first month, 57,000 viruses were isolated. The number almost doubled to 113,000 in August. In late August, IET extended an invitation to all campus departments running their own email servers to either redirect their mail to the central campus system (thereby availing themselves of the same software capabilities) or to install the anti-virus software on their own email servers.

Ono indicated that installing the software on a department server could be costly. This option would require configuration management and additional hardware could be needed to support the software. Ono reported that the campus has set up a robust system architecture for the central campus system, including redundant, dedicated systems to perform the scanning.

Ono reported that, to ensure adequate anti-virus protection throughout the campus, IET has asked departments administering their own email servers to report what antivirus software they are using.

Some Council members commented that the campus should consider requiring departments to use anti-virus software, such as the type of software used on the central servers. Ono replied that, at this time, the goal is to better understand and be aware of the antivirus solutions being used by campus departments. IET system administrators will be able to determine if departmental email servers are using effective anti-virus protection solutions. Ono noted that studying logs will help determine the source of viruses, particularly if a significant number of infected messages are found to originate from a departmental server. An appropriate course of action could then be identified.

The meeting adjourned at 4:00 p.m.