Virtual Watercooler - May 2015

May 2015 Virtual Watercooler sessions

Notes from May 4, 2015

In attendance: James Brunt, Gastil Buhl, James Conners, Duane Costa, Hap Garritt, Corinna Gries, Don Henshaw, Margaret O'Brien, Ken Ramsey, Suzanne Remillard, Mark Sevilla, Wade Sheldon, Kristin Vanderbilt, Jonathan Walsh, Yang Xia.

Notetaker: Margaret O'Brien

LNO Transition Period
James Brunt confirmed that the transition funding for LNO was approved and that this will fund operations through to April 2016. Brunt walked the group through the recent IM report to bring everyone up to date on the services the LNO will provide:

  • Software licenses: these will go, but LNO will keep the license server running for as long as possible.
  • Server infrastructure: this will be maintained until October if at all possible.
  • Communication: this will be transitioned to the new communications office.
  • Data catalogs: Metacat was turned off 4/15. PASTA will be maintained throughout transition period.
  • Databases: It is expected that SiteDB and BiblioDB will transition to the new communications office.
  • DNS service: It is expected that this will transition to the new communications office as it is part of the network identity.
  • Document repository: It is expected that this will transition to the new communications office.
  • Subversion repository: this will be maintained and a copy is being placed in Github.
  • LDAP: this will be maintained.

Distributed Information Management Model
Philip Tarrant Informed the group that the IM Committee has been asked to conduct a feasibility study into the idea that the IM community, through consortium style organization, might manage the network data management needs after the transition period finishes. The group then discussed how this might work and what needed to be considered in a management model of this type:

  • Sub-contracting services vs. collaborative management.
  • Continuity issues.
  • Committee needed to manage policy and fiscal distribution. How would this be composed and what is the decision making process.
  • Governance would be a big challenge. Would need to be well-defined.
  • Where/how would coordination be managed?
  • Prioritization of work/projects.
  • What would be the reporting mechanisms?

It was felt by some that we never realized the potential benefit of the existing LNO model and that there are lots of technical challenges to running a distributed model. However, it was agreed that the idea has potential and should be explored as requested.

Tarrant asked for volunteers to indicate their interest via e-mail.

Notes from May 5, 2015

In attendance:Emery Boose, Gastil Buhl, Jason Downing, Hap Garritt, Corinna Gries, Brian Herndon, Jim Laundre, Ken Ramsey, Inigo San Gil, Theresa Valentine.

Notetaker:

IMs volunteering to assist with exercise: Sven Bohm, Emery Boose, Gastil Buhl, Corinna Gries, Eda Melendez-Colom, Margaret O'Brien, John Porter, Ken Ramsey, Inigo San Gil, Philip Tarrant, Jonathan Walsh.

Downloads