1. Approval of minutes
2. Approval of AC4 Subcommittee Structure
3. Remote Access
4. Other Business

Excused: Matt Bishop.

Absent: Bob Becker, Sheila Desai, Zack O'Donnell, and Mel Ramey.

Guests: Caroline Bledsoe, Mark Redican, and Kevin Rhodes.

Caroline Bledsoe is here for the Remote Access discussion. Remote Access was a major topic when Caroline was the Chair of the Joint Campus Committee on Information Technology (JCCIT).

Kevin Rhodes and Mark Redican are here to provide staff support to AC4.

Staff to the Council: Gilda Garcia, Paula King, Bob Loessberg-Zahl.

Bob Loessberg-Zahl joins the AC4, as of April 1, 1999. He has been appointed by the Provost to provide staff support to the Council, along with Paula King.

1. Approval of minutes - Harry Matthews

   The minutes were approved as submitted.

2. Approval of AC4 Subcommittee Structure - Harry Matthews

   Handout:

   1. Proposed Subcommittee Structure (Distributed via email and at the meeting)

   Chair Harry Matthews asked for comments on the proposed subcommittee structure.

   It is recommended that an Academic Federation member, who is actively engaged in research, be added to the Subcommittee on Research Computing.

   The Subcommittee on Educational Computing will meet every two weeks, beginning as soon as possible. The Research Computing Subcommittee will meet monthly, beginning after July 1, 1999.

   Actions:

   1. Chair Harry Matthews to add the Academic Federation member to the Research Computing Subcommittee membership.

   2. AC4 Steering Committee to get started with the subcommittee work. The subcommittees will get started as soon the Steering Committee appoints its members.

3. Remote Access - Harry Matthews

   Handouts:

   1. Remote Access Project (Distributed via email and at the meeting)
   2. Remote Access Spreadsheet (Excel file) dated 4/19/1999 (Distributed at the meeting)
   3. Remote Access Spreadsheet (Excel file accessible by members only; click here then click on the "Remote Access Spreadsheet" link after you authenticate) dated 4/19/1999

   Chair Harry Matthews went over some of the material discussed at previous meetings and the Remote Access Report.

   It is not acceptable that the staff/student modem pool is saturated for most of the day. One of the issues is to improve facilities. Persuading students to use an ISP hasn't worked. Figure 2 from the Remote Access report summarizes the work done to select appropriate models. The chosen model will need to be sustainable. One of the questions is what does it cost to give people access to Internet. The answer is that it's a different number within the groups. The report tries to address what will happen when we hit the limit of all campus constituents using remote access. The two tables in the report refer to two possible models. The student pool is the most expensive because there are more students. The models currently assume all members of the staff, who need it, will be provided access. The report recommends that departments decide which staff need access and pay according on to the need for access.

   Action: Mary Jo Anderson to check into the staff members' access issue of how to deal with the possibility of staff member from the same job class not having the same access.

   The other issue is that changes will be phased in over a three to five-year period. UC Davis is currently in the middle compared to other UC campuses. It is safe to say that no other campus is currently committed to on-going support for the modems or upgrades.

   Some suggested that the first model option is not necessary. We can commit to a plan today that is less aggressive, and then we will be able to adjust, if necessary. Others pointed out that this may result in a model that is not sustainable as use of remote access increases. There was agreement that, whatever model is adopted, there should be a re-evaluation every year, or more frequently, to ensure adequate but not excessive provision of modems, in the light of experience.

   It was suggested that we explore reallocation of modems between pools at times of peak demand in one pool.

   IT is actively trying to support campus authentication needs. It is one of the AC4 98-99 instructional technology funds' approved projects. The direction seen is the use of Kerberos and Public Key Infrastructure certificates.

   Caroline Bledsoe commented that the economics are very different than when JCCIT reviewed Remote Access. The recommendation at the time was to outsource everything.

   Actions:

   1. The AC4 Steering Committee to develop a new version of Remote Access Report which will go forward as a final set of recommendations.

   2. A joint meeting of AdC3 and AC4 Steering Committee will be held after AdC3 has a chance to review the Remote Access report and has agreed on a set of recommendations. AC4 reserved the right to review AdC3s recommendations.

4. Other Business

   Provost & EVC Grey accepted the Instructional Technology Fund recommendations. IT is developing proposals. More details to follow in coming months.