[164] in Enterprise Print Delivery Team
04/03/2000 Enterprise Printing Delivery Project Status Report
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (David F. Lambert)
Mon Apr 3 08:16:54 2000
Message-Id: <10004031218.AA23290@MIT.EDU>
Date: Mon, 03 Apr 00 08:16:36 EDT
From: "David F. Lambert" <LAMBERT@mitvma.mit.edu>
To: Roger Roach <rar@MIT.EDU>, Bob Ferrara <rferrara@MIT.EDU>
Cc: Enterprise Printing Delivery Project Team <printdel@MIT.EDU>
Project Name: Enterprise Printing Delivery Project
Team Members: Kip Bruggeman, Mary Ellen Bushnell, Rocklyn Clarke
Dave Lambert, Cecilia Talamantes & Mike Whitson
Report Date: 04/03/2000
Project Notebook: http://web.mit.edu/is/delivery/enterprint/
Accomplishments for the past period:
- reached a team agreement on 'buy' vs 'build' issue; we agreed
that we would not pursue the build option if we identify
a commercial solution which:
o is "reasonably" priced
o fulfills our functional requirements
o addresses our I/T infrastructure concerns
- reached a team agreement that we would only minimally review
Xerox's PrintXchange unless IBM's IPM appears to not address our needs
- began testing IPM test environment provided by IBM; IBM agreed to
to provide source code for the clients
- received initial IPM pricing info - $20-25K for software and
$10K for server hardware
- DOST submitted a recommendation to VM-SST to replace the IBM 3827
printer with a InfoPrint60 (3160-2) printer using IBM Matching Grant
credits; real cash = $27K; one year payback in maintenance savings;
this would position us for an easier migration to IPM
- held ITIT follow up meeting with Azary, Anderson & Ferrara to
clarify issues
- continued work of defining current costs; almost completed
- updated Project Notebook with latest & greatest stuff
- wrapped up the Moore consulting work
Goals for the coming period:
- continue IPM evaluation testing
- begin negotiations to obtain server source code and/or identify next
steps for hiring IBM to port IPM for use in our Kerberos environment
- work with ITIT to "ratify" the proposed security position paper
(carry over)
- work with ITIT to address subsequent issues which arose from the
3/9 meeting
- complete the analysis of the current business model & costs
Issues:
none
Key learnings:
IPM is looking significantly less expensive than we expected.
Team dynamics:
Although there's no official notice yet, it appears Mike will be
leaving MIT in the next several weeks. Assuming this does occur,
Mike's departure will leave a big hole on the team, and he'll be
greatly missed. We'll need to reevaluate our technical staffing
needs for the remaining evaluation & implementation work.
Additional comments:
none
