CSU, Chico – Administrative Technology Council Meeting Notes
Meeting Date: June 24, 2010
Meeting Location: MLIB 338
ATTENDING TEAM MEMBERS AND GUESTS
✔
Post, Bill
✔
Mox, Andrea
✔
Ringel, Jerry
✔
Quinto, Ray
✔
Weddington, Phyllis
✔
Post, Linda
✔
Rosenow, Tom
✔
Hafer, Robyn
✔
Kissinger, Beth
Banks, Brooke
✔
Guest: Ed Hudson
DISCUSSION ITEMS
1.
Workgroup status:
Desktop Management –
 Desktop management subgroup coming back together.
 AD restructure required for common use in desktop management – now that Mike M has attended
AD training the AD restructure can move forward
 ENR – majority of machines moved to SCCM (approx 95%), remaining machines are laptops; will
shut down WSUS service. SA next – issues with Financial Aid redirect. Office updates problematic.
More research to be done on tie-in with Bay
 Discussed differences with SCCM and previous ENR process – more investigation to follow
 Advantages/disadvantages to date
o ENR functional staff will need to make some adjustments – training issue
o ENR will no longer need to maintain their SUS server
o Virus push out, Office updates, /patches faster
o ENR desktops now part of university inventory available for refresh analysis
 First steps completed – more to follow regarding structure/policy
Application Hosting – (morphed from Server Management and Application Hosting)
 Common DB, Web, Application hosting started with SQL server and IIS environment build out
o SQL and IIS server stack (dev, staging, production) up and running
o Tom - Need to educate developers re how to request services
 App servers still need to be addressed.
o Issues with sharing – 3rd party vendor apps
o Questions about vendor remote access and non web-based apps that don’t fit into stack
 Tom shared that the folks in Ray’s shop have been very helpful
 Disk space planning discussions
o Big disk space requests
o Capacity management
o Cost structure impact
o – more discussions to come.
 Andrea - MS licensing questions – distributed upon request
2.
Bay Issues
 Post upgrade issues with extension filtering
o MS best practice file blocking suggested .pst + seven others
o Pre-assessment done – blocking impacted a small population; exceptions were made in
each case
o After some discussion, removed all blocks including .pst


Bay group meets next week. Discussion items are:
o Quotas
o Education process
o Back up issues
o Self retrieval for lost files
o Good mechanism for archiving .pst files
o Continued blocking of .pst files
o Document and communication plan
o Pilot groups
o CO mandate re .pst files – could be onerous for campus
Discussed issues with inconsistencies; mechanics vs. retention policies
o Will meet with Ed to discuss policy issues
3.
ITIL/ITSM
 Jerry reviewed the big picture of ITSM/ITIL as it relates to the business service concept with
diagrams/explanations/discussion
o Linda, Robyn, and Tom agreed to join the Change Advisory Board later in the summer as
representatives from their respective VP areas
4.
Senior Applications Director
 The applications for the Senior Applications Director are now in the hands of the review committee.
They are piloting an evolving review process using SharePoint.
TO DO LIST SUMMARY
#
Task
1.
2.
FUTURE MEETINGS
Date: July 22, 2010
Responsible Party
Time: 2:30 – 4:00
Due Date
Status
Place: MLIB 338
FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS
Held over – Discuss definition of enterprise applications (All)
Review of top projects (BA, EAPP, Warehouse, USRV, ESYS)
SQL server hosting/consolidation
Priorities
Vendor issues
General items from initial ATC meeting:
 Business Continuity/Disaster Planning – where does this responsibility reside
 Sharing of initiatives
 PCI – do not rebuild the wheel
 Carrying the council’s message to units
 Education and Planning opportunities
 Security
 Clear project definition and how projects meet the needs of the university – create a culture of project
description and documentation
 Cross training and back up
 Common framework for discussion
 Project visibility – common tools for planning and documentation
 Definition of project (beginning & end); phases, examples
 Create common culture for talking with/among staff
 IRES project submittal process, approval process, documentation (one sheets)
 Introduction of projects to wider audience
 Technology service cost models
 Numerous ticketing systems – consolidate on one