Thread Links Date Links
Thread Prev Thread Next Thread Index Date Prev Date Next Date Index

Re: [802SEC] +++SEC MOTION+++802 Plenary network expenditures



I realize that this will likely put me in the grumpy (and probably lonely) minority.

I do not think that it is within our mission/charter to provide each attendee with as good or better connectivity while they are in an 802 meeting as they get when they are at work. When they all get Dot11 VoIP telephones will it be our job to  jump the available bandwidth to meet that demand?

My counter proposal is to limit our expenditure to a single T-1 line and limit the access to the outside world. The limiting of access to the outside world should be kept to something that is administratively easy. For that I would consider the following acceptable:
The following would have access to the outside via the T-1 line:

1) Those connected to the LAN by wire in the meeting office. (i.e. presumably 802 business)
2) Those connected via a single 802.11 Access Point that is in the office (also presumably 802 business but not bulletproof)
3) Those connected to the LAN by wire in the Internet Cafe Facility that we are used to providing. (open to all comers).

In meeting room connectivity would be limited to access to such local facilities as our at-meeting servers, in-meeting peer networking, etc.
I believe that this will provide more than reasonable connectivity for an employee who is "on the road". I believe it will keep our costs contained whereas the proposal to keep up with demand will give us cost curve that will rise uncontrollably and load costs on our operation that have increasingly little to do with our business at hand.

In particular, I object to the logical extension of the work methodology proposed by Mat, i.e.:
"...the convenience of being able to do e-mail and web scanning during meetings."
Which would be: "Oh, I can get a whole week's work done and satisfy the requirement to plant my body in the room >75% of the time..."

It has been often said that it is a bad idea to have sessions that are close to the home base of a significant number of our members. They gripe that if they are commuting to the meeting instead of traveling to a (more or less) distant location then they are expected to do all of their regular work and "standards" too. This would only make that worse.

I am willing to spend money to make it more effective to conduct the business of the meetings. (More LCDs, facilities to support access to meeting material, both real-time and archival)
I am not willing to spend money so that we can inflate the statistics for meeting (session?) attendance and do something else.

I do think we have gotten to the point where real ongoing network support should be considered.

I move to divide the question.
        A) Support for expanded bandwidth to the outside net.
        B) Support for professional network support on an ongoing basis.


At 03:13 PM 6/6/2003 -0400, Paul Nikolich wrote:

Dear SEC members,

This is a 15 day SEC email ballot to make a determination by SEC motion to
authorize an increase in the amount budgeted for network services.  See the
specific motion wording below.

Moved by Bill Quackenbush
Seconded by Carl Stevenson

The email ballot opens on Friday June 6th 4PM ET and closes Saturday June
21st, 2003 4PM ET.

Please direct your responses to the SEC reflector with a CC directly to me


- Paul Nikolich

 That the budget for the network at a LMSC Plenary session be increased
from $25k to $30k with a maximum expenditure of $33k/session and that  the
LMSC is authorized to enter into a multi-session contract contract  for the
configuration, operation and management of said  network subject  to the
above budget and expenditure limits.
MOVED: Bill Qauckenbush
SECOND: Carl Stevenson

RATIONALE (per BillQ's original email):


Given the 30% increase in Plenary session attendance from 11/02 to 3/03 and
even greater projected attendance at the 7/03 and 11/03 Plenary sessions,
the $25k/Pleanry session budget networking does not appear to be enough.
Given the load and dependence a number of the WGs are placing on the Plenary
session network, I believe that we need more bandwidth to the outside world
and we need full-time professional network management.

We had a single T1 to the outside world at DFW which was clearly not enough
and for which we likely set a world record for sustained load.  We are
working on 4xT1 for SF with a cost of something like $8k.

We are also talking with I.D.E.A.L. Technologies about a contract to
configure, operate and manage the network on a full-time basis.

To that end I make the following motion.

That the budget for the network at a LMSC Plenary session be increased  from
$25k to $30k with a maximum expenditure of $33k/session and that the LMSC is
authorized to enter into a multi-session contract contract for the
configuration, operation and management of said  network subject to the
above budget and expenditure limits.