[Systems] ping aslo master

[Stephen Jacobs]

HEre's what I propose...

1.  Since this doesn't seem to be a "decide this week" level of urgency, let's wait til Bernie gets back from Paraguay and a phone conference can be scheduled.  IRC is useful, but there's still a lot more bandwidth in a phonecall then a text chat.

2.  There's been a lot of discussion about a lot of items and possibilities here that have (at least as far as I'm concerned) really kind of muddied the waters as to what's being asked for.  So between now and when Bernie gets back i think it would be really helpful to see something along these lines.  WHat I put below is likely too simple as I'm ignorant of most networking issues, but you'll get the idea.

Sugar labs is requesting...

A.  places to put boxes where they will have power and an internet connection of bandwidth X.  RIT research computing is being asked to host X number of physical boxes of Y specification.  If this is still being worked out, RIT research computing just needs to know what the final decision is, not the various possibilities as it just gets kinda hard to follow.

B.  the following list of services required from an on-site human being to support the Sugar Labs servers.

C.  The following list of domain names etc. required for RIT to support.  Research computing may not be able to support some or all based on RIT policies and the main IT organization.

If B is too large for Research computing to support directly, there is a mechanism for RIT to provide a full-time student Co-Op to support Sugar Labs' server needs and Research Computing's needs to support this stuff we can set up.

To summarize a simple document with a clear ask or multiple tiers of ask sent out a few days before a phone conference will make this a lot simpler on our end.

If, for some reason, their are issues that Research computing can't surmount they will reccomend that we move the discussion to a different academic/administrative department or to CSH, depending on what the issues are.  Sound like a plan???






On Jan 19, 2010, at 11:29 AM, Stefan Unterhauser wrote:

> Hi all
> 
> sorry for answering so late :( ... last days I wos in NY :)
> I agree to the syncron thing :P
> therefore I propose to join the weekly infrastructure meeting
> in the channel #treehouse on irc.oftc.net today
> 16:00 ETC
> agenda: http://etherpad.com/ZNBbiFY2BA
> 
> cu
> dogi
> 
> On Tue, Jan 19, 2010 at 3:17 AM, Bernie Innocenti <bernie at codewiz.org> wrote:
>> On 01/18/10 23:15, Stephen Jacobs wrote:
>>> If that works too, great, just think we're getting to the
>>> point where sustained, synchronous conversation would be helpful :-)
>> 
>> I definitely agree, thanks for proposing it!
>> 
>> --
>>   // Bernie Innocenti - http://codewiz.org/
>>  \X/  Sugar Labs       - http://sugarlabs.org/
>>