RE: [802SEC] +++SEC MOTION+++802 Plenary network expenditures
Carl/Bob:
I did vote to approve didn't I? I thought I was presenting quick typical and bad-case analysis for how the fee was still reasonable for a typical attendee.
While I personally appreciate the network access you talk about below as much as you do, I don't believe the network is there for members of the SEC it has to be justified for the average attendee. I still receive occasional complaints from some of my members that they can't (because of corporate policies) or don't use the network. The number of attendees using the network is increasing, and I believe now is certainly in the majority, but as Bob pointed out, it isn't universal.
Why did I pick 3 and 4 days? 3 days is what is required for 75% attendance in some of the WGs and 4 is 75% for the other WGs. Though the original numbers were purely a SWAG, I checked the average attendance for 802.3 registrants at DFW and guess what, it was 3.16 days. (I do recognize hotel nights would be slightly larger because no one from 802.3 signs in on Sunday or Friday yet we are there using the network).
Have a nice weekend!
--Bob Grow
-----Original Message-----
From: Stevenson, Carl R (Carl) [mailto:carlstevenson@agere.com]
Sent: Friday, June 06, 2003 5:39 PM
To: Grow, Bob; Paul Nikolich; Stevenson, Carl R (Carl); Bill
Quackenbush; IEEE 802 SEC; Paul Nikolich
Subject: RE: [802SEC] +++SEC MOTION+++802 Plenary network expenditures
I view the network support (and access to the internet)
as indispensable ... first, I cannot afford to have a
week of lack of access to my corporate e-mail (via a
VPN tunnel) ... second, 802.18 often has to access
resources on the web (FCC documents from past proceedings
that are referenced in proceedings that we are working
on comments/reply comments for) ... third, access to
the working documents and servers on our local network
is KEY to the efficient operation of our meetings.
Finally, what's with the 4 day and 3 day attendance
numbers? Pleanaries run Mon-Fri, with ExCom members
typically arriving on SAT pm and leaving the following
Sat am ...
I realize that there is a cost involved, but we have
grown well beyond the ability to support our network
needs with volunteer help ... we MUST retain competent,
dependable network support if we are to have efficient
meetings.
Regards,
Carl
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Grow, Bob [mailto:bob.grow@intel.com]
> Sent: Friday, June 06, 2003 4:59 PM
> To: Paul Nikolich; Stevenson, Carl R (Carl); Bill
> Quackenbush; IEEE 802
> SEC; Paul Nikolich
> Subject: RE: [802SEC] +++SEC MOTION+++802 Plenary network expenditures
>
>
> Vote = approve
>
> As a sanity check, this works out at $7.50/day (1000, 4-day
> attendance) to $13.33/day (750, 3-day attendance). That is
> comparable to typical hotel broadband connection rates. We
> should remember not all of our attendees take advantage of
> the service and for them our networking expenditures are
> simply raising the costs of attending the meeting.
>
> --Bob Grow
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Paul Nikolich [mailto:paul.nikolich@att.net]
> Sent: Friday, June 06, 2003 12:13 PM
> To: Stevenson, Carl R (Carl); 'Bill Quackenbush'; IEEE 802 SEC; Paul
> Nikolich
> Subject: [802SEC] +++SEC MOTION+++802 Plenary network expenditures
>
>
>
> 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
> (p.nikolich@ieee.org).
>
> Regards,
>
> - Paul Nikolich
>
>
> 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.
> MOVED: Bill Qauckenbush
> SECOND: Carl Stevenson
>
> RATIONALE (per BillQ's original email):
>
> All,
>
> 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.
>
> Thanks,
>
> wlq
>