Committee on IT Infrastructure (CITI)

February 1, 2005

Meeting Summary

CITI Attendees: Sue Abeles, Glyn Davies, Jim Davis, Kathleen Kiser, Tom Lifka, Mike McCoy, Sam Morabito, Steve Olsen, John Sandbrook, Albert Setton

Guests: Mike Lee (PDP participant), Nick Reddingius (OIT), Mike Schilling (CTS), Marsha Smith (OIT), Esther Woo-Benjamin (OIT), Don Worth (AIS)

Agenda:

1) EDIMI (Enterprise Directory & Identity Management Infrastructure) Policy on email addresses

At their December meeting, the ITPB endorsed a policy requiring all students, faculty, and staff (knowledge workers) to have a UCLA email address entered into:

a. An internal database used only for internal business purposes/applications such as payroll or human resources. It will not be searchable by individuals

.

b. An internal campus directory, available to be searched only by UCLA faculty, staff and students. Individual employees may opt to be removed from this internal campus directory.

c. A public campus directory, available to be searched by anyone on the Internet. Individual employees may opt to be removed from this public campus directory.

An exemption for an individual to use a non-UCLA email address may be permitted for special cases.

The CITI discussed implications for implementing this policy for staff. Most of the issues are related to the definitions of ‘staff’ and ‘knowledge worker’. There was agreement that the definition should be as broad as possible.

2) Technology Infrastructure Fee (TIF) Model

There was agreement with the principles underlying the formulation of the Technology Infrastructure Fee (TIF) model recommendations:

· Upon separation of phone and IT infrastructure service charges, the framework for funding campus IT infrastructure services will be a Technology Infrastructure Fee (TIF) charged to campus units.

· The TIF will be initialized based on a spectrum of ‘common good’ services that are currently covered in the augmented phone bill (e.g. network backbone, BOL, campus wireless, etc.).

· The TIF will be the funding mechanism for the ‘common good’ services that emerge from the Repositioning IT Initiative.

· The Repositioning IT Initiative leaves open the possibility of centralization and regionalization of ‘common good’ services. The TIF can be applied to centralized or regionalized service delivery models.

· There will need to be a campus process by which ‘common good’ services in the TIF can be reviewed, added or changed and there will need to be an appropriate process for rate setting.

There was agreement that 1) a TIF that covers a spectrum of ‘common good’ services argues for user-based allocation models (FTE, Headcount, FTE Knowledge Worker) and against technology based allocation models (ip address, networking port, etc.); and 2) within the possible user-based models, FTE and FTE Knowledge Worker models are preferred over Headcount.

The CITI agreed on the following next steps:

· Advance both the FTE and FTE Knowledge Worker models - present to the Policy Committee on Sales and Service Activities and Service Enterprises (POSSSE).

· Steve Olsen to communicate models to campus leadership.

· A general communication should go out to the campus explaining the TIF.