[266] in Kakapo Windows Team
Minutes 1/8/04 meeting
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Brian Murphy)
Fri Jan 9 09:07:12 2004
Reply-To: <bmurphy@MIT.EDU>
From: "Brian Murphy" <bmurphy@MIT.EDU>
To: <kakapo@mit.edu>
Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2004 09:07:11 -0500
Message-ID: <000601c3d6b9$dfef1f70$a200bb12@bmurphy>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Attending: Brian M., Tom t., Phil L., Jonathon W., Jonathan H., Richard
E.
New meeting schedule is every other Wednesday at 11:00am starting on
Jan. 21. Brian to confirm room.
Review of proposed agenda topics resulted in the following:
1). SLA's for win.mit.edu customers. General SLA for the service and
possibly some more specific ones for some customers. -
General rules for joining central domain. Setting expectations - Richard
Should include #2
2). Event Management: Response times, Levels of events, Escalation
3). Change Management: Patching, time windows, notification policies,
testing criteria.
- Richard/Paul/Tom currently working on something.
4). Roles of support groups - Would be included in Support Model (#9)
5). Software distribution: web, msi's
- Random machine should be able to pull from a list if license exists.
MSI's deployable via group policy, who moves it to Win.mit.edu Richard
and JMHunt will discuss
6). Application support: Enterprise apps, Desktop apps
- What is the departments responsibility and what is the help desks
responsibility. Helpdesk could use a list of applications and where to
go. Chad and Richard - list of apps installed. Oliver- What does the
helpdesk need?
7). Release Engineering - JMHunt to articulate current SWR engineering
policy for Richard
8). Documentation - Tom T sending to Tech-Pubs and then to Pismere
team. Tom will keep Kakapo updated on progress.
9). Support Model - DITR to provide an SLA for review by the team and
suggestions from Chad for Academic Customers SLA options (may be simply
"Go to DITR"), Oliver - Chad to describe what is important for KeyServed
Apps.
Should include #2,#4
10). Scope of central domain, purpose of independent domains (I believe
we inadvertently skipped this one)
11). Evaluation: Review of new Windows service offerings / extended
services
- New products from MS for Server Applications (project server
2000/Sequel) do we look at them. How proactive should we be in
evaluating new products? Track CSG for potential useful products.
Windows developers know when products come out. Given resource
constraints the best we can expect for the foreseeable future is to ping
peer institutions for what products are coming out and if a customer
requests a product, have that drive evaluations. Paul may be in the best
position to query peer institutions on new products and any possible
evaluation done by them.
12). Security: Model/distribution. How proactive should IS be. can we
provide more granular choices to customers. Review of processes, i.e.
how
patches are evaluated.
Need to communicate to Cont. Admins when patches need to be applied. Our
obligations is the "Big Bad Patch" Customer needs range from "they'll
take care of it" to "Wanting IS&T to handle everything". Wait for SUS to
come out and evaluate its effectiveness. If we want to do more we need
to determine resource and effort required to determine if we could
provide it.
