Integrated Technologies Committee 1999
ITC Meeting Minutes
April 13, 1999
IUPUI Library, 1116
Present:
Wayne Bohm, University of
Southern Indiana
Vernon Draper, Ball State
University
Carl Koenig, Vincennes University
Fred Nay, Ball State University
Ellen Watson, Chair Indiana
State University
IHETS Staff:
Max
Gordon
Betty Hart
Dave King
Nancy Millichap
Jennifer Ping
Tim Ping
Mark Rottler
Susan Scott
Ed Stockey
Ed Tully
Jeff Walker
H.323 Video Technology Demonstration
Staff demonstrated interactive video conferencing with H.323 video technology (IP video) at IHETS prior to the start of the ITC business meeting. Both workstations and the small room based systems were demonstrated.
Chair Ellen Watson called the meeting to order at 1:00 p.m. in Room 1116 of University Library on the IUPUI campus.
Approval of the minutes
Wayne Bohm asked for clarification of a paragraph in the minutes of March 9th. This paragraph will be rewritten and re-addressed at the next meeting. With the exception of this notation, the minutes were approved as submitted.
Watson reported that the Management Committee approved the committee’s action items regarding the revised flat pricing structure for institutional costs for T1 service. She noted that the Management Committee also concurred with the ITC recommendation that there be quarterly budgetary review and a formal review to occur on a six-month basis. King reminded the group that effective July 1 the cost will be $9,000 for each T1, regardless of intended primary use (voice, video, or data).
Task Force report on scheduling for AISB video conferencing
Ellen Watson noted that there are two items that are related and asked Susan Scott to discuss them. Scott reviewed the ITC charge to an ad hoc task group to develop recommendations for scheduling the Access Indiana State Backbone video bridge and presented the resulting recommendations. She noted that higher education cannot itself establish policy, but it seemed appropriate that we begin the discussions both because of our experience in dealing with complex scheduling issues and because our member institutions will be the first major users. Two key issues were (a) to establish the principle that once scheduled, an activity cannot be pre-empted by another backbone user and (b) to create understanding that higher education course enrollment needs will require scheduling far in advance of other kinds of equally legitimate bridge activities. After discussion, the ITC consensus was to carry the policy recommendations forward to the Access Indiana leadership for whatever action they may wish to take. Watson and King will also inform the Management Committee.
Reduction of satellite channels from 6 to 4 for the year 2000-2001
Susan Scott reported on the concerns from the Scheduling Committee meeting on March 18 regarding satellite reduction from 6 to 4 channels. The Working Group members decided not to proceed with any further reduction until the Scheduling Committee questions were addressed. Staff prepared various kinds of information in response, circulated electronically to the ITC, Working Group, and Scheduling Committee. She summarized the intent to display that higher education institutions now have choices; when satellite was the only option, all courses needed to use that delivery mode, but now courses or parts of courses can select the most instructionally appropriate medium for the subject and audience. The example schedule indicates that those programs which need satellite (because of out-of-state, business, or large numbers of receive sites or because of high-motion video needs) can continue to be accommodated within four channels. An important concern had been that with insufficient receiving sites on the backbone, forcing courses to move might result in loss of students. Scott noted that, assuming IHETS receives the funding requested for equipping satellite sites with backbone video capability, by Fall 2000 we can reasonably anticipate a base of 126 video-equipped sites. Forty of those are planned by the State Library, and most of those will not be satellite sites but rather will represent access to university programs in new communities.
In response to a question from Wayne Bohm about enrollment data, Scott indicated that she had brought the raw data with her for those committee members who wanted to review it. She noted, however, that a potentially more significant issue was the number of sites per course: if a course goes from one campus to two other campuses, it may not need the breadth of satellite delivery and might even benefit pedagogically by having the potential for two-way interactivity on the backbone. Scott will review the information with the Scheduling Committee Wednesday and with the Working Group Friday.
Watson recommended that we continue with the planned reduction to four satellite channels. King noted that budget projections in the IHETS appropriation request had assumed availability of savings from reducing the channel lease to support two-way video conferencing capability at the campuses. If the institutions believe six or five channels are necessary, we may need to recover the cost of the extra channel or two by charging users for that time, probably in the range of $20 - $25/hour, which would certainly be unpopular with those users. Watson summarized that the ITC consensus appeared to be in favor of the reduction, and there was unanimous agreement to recommend to the Management Committee the reduction of two satellite channels for 2000-2001.
Legislative Update
King provided an update on the status of IHETS’ appropriation request. The House and Senate versions of the budget provide approximately $2 million less than we requested in the capital equipment line, including no mention of the equipment for CES sites to host local government and other small providers for AISB connection. He noted that John Huie and Stan Jones are working to restore those funds in conference committee. The base request, including a one-time adjustment to cover our increased facilities lease, has been changed only according to the formulas applied to all of higher education.
Wayne Bohm asked what equipment would be provided to a receive site at the price of a $17,500 per site installed. Tully noted that that amount was a reasonable budgetary planning figure based on the backbone pricing assumptions last summer. Staff is currently evaluating the actual amount needed to install a Vtel T1000 room unit. Watson thanked King for providing the legislative update.
CES/AISB Road Trip
On Monday Dave King, Ed Tully, Jennifer Ping, Mark Rottler, Jeff Walker all of IHETS, Darcie Webster of Intelenet, and Neal Vines of Purdue all visited CES offices in Marshall, Adams, and Wayne counties The purpose of this road trip was to talk to the counties about their connectivity needs and see where the Access Indiana State Backbone would be able to assist in their technology plans.
Executive Director Position Update
Dave King reported that in order to be given full consideration for the Executive Director position, all credentials must be received before Monday, April 12. A total of forty resumes have been received, with thirty meeting the criteria standards. The search and screen committee will be meeting after the Management Committee meeting on Tuesday, April 20th.
Break
Ellen Watson called for a break before the continuation of the meeting.
Abilene Project and Internet2 Presentation by Jacob Levanon
Dave King introduced Jacob Levanon, Director of Telecommunications Data Services. Levanon then introduced Steve Wallace and Dave Jent of his staff, who assisted with the presentation. He began with a slide presentation on the Abilene Project along with discussion on the technical applications and details involved in the deployment and operation of Internet2.
The following web sites are available for further information.
http://www.internet2.edu/abilene/
A question and answer session followed the presentation, largely with questions from committee members regarding future expansion of Internet2 to other universities, the potential role of the Indianapolis GigaPop in providing access to Abilene at that future point, and the extent to which IHETS might help consolidate other members’ participation. Watson requested that the Abilene Project be added as an agenda item for further discussion at the next meeting.
The meeting adjourned at 3:00 p.m.
