 |
Systems Support Users
Group Minutes |
|
Systems Support Users
Group Minutes |
E-mail Configurations
Among
the units supported by the Systems Support Office, there are hundreds of
individual configurations for storing e-mail and, while it would be ideal to
have the capability of supporting all possible configurations, Systems Support
is unable to effectively and efficiently service this many formats.
Of the options for which Systems Support can reliably provide support,
they recommend establishing Option 2 as the standard, with users’ prerogatives
to use other options:
Option 1:
storing files on local computers
Option 2:
storing files on servers (POP3)
Option 3:
using a “hybrid model,” i.e., files on central server but with local
mailboxes on the hard drive
The
group agreed that Option 2 should be the built-in standard.
Users who opt to store e-mail in formats other than Options 1 or 3 (or
other configurations), for whatever reasons, will have individual responsibility
for backing up, protecting and/or reconstructing those files. Efforts must be
made to educate and train users regarding the pros and cons of the standard
versus optional configurations, i.e., clarify System Support’s
responsibilities and the ramifications and responsibilities of those who deviate
from the standard configuration.
Info items:
Data store and mail store are two separate functions, but share server
space. Currently, notices are sent
regarding data store, but not for e-mail storage.
It is possible to have mail removed from the server after the user
deletes it; however, not all users want this to occur (for example, some use the
trash bin as their historical mail file).
Windows 2000 has been
installed for 15 staff and 6 student employees, with very successful training
sessions (involving more than the scheduled hour because of the number of
questions). The deployment is being
done department-by-department and will be completed by summer.
For staff, the program is
being configured with administrative rights; for students, power user rights.
“My Documents” is being redirected to server storage; this
configuration has the most ramifications for Finance and Planning who store
files on local computers. (For
example: DataTel related to student accounts had to be modified to
convert to Windows 2000.) “Roaming
Profiles” are being built into the Windows 2000 configuration, enabling
desktop settings, stored on the server, to reconstruct when computers are
changed. Unlike the Microsoft
campus agreement, the Windows 2000 agreement does not make the software
available to remote locations. Tthe
University will not provide upgrades to Windows 2000 (which costs approx $200
for the software) for remote locations.
XP is not on the forefront
for Systems Support until the installation of Windows 2000 at the end of summer.
The package of choice has
been PCOM 4.3, but it is no longer free. The
TWS3270 Pro version is similar to PCOM and should meet most users’ needs.
If this new version does not work, PCOM will cost $134 per computer.
The glitches caused by the
Windows 2000 deployment are being worked through, e.g., fonts, profiles and
field spacing are not consistent. Eric
will provide to the committee the list of problems being encountered, what works
and what doesn’t work with Windows 2000.
Unscheduled downtimes are
mostly due to outages caused by Telecommunications and mostly when the server is
outside the user building, i.e., intra-building service is more reliable than
inter-building connections. Laptops
present a very different situation regarding downtime.
When
experiencing programmatic (not system-related) problems with printers, the first
contact may be Systems Support who will assist or refer.
Proposed discussion topics
for the next group meeting should be shared in advance on the listserv.
Meeting brief prepared by
Cheryl Young and Kathy Beal
11/21/01