Page Comparison

...

1. Working Group Updates Dina Meek (10 mins)

   1. Communications

      1. Working group has discussed channels and mechanisms

      2. Next step is to document the channels, audiences,

      3. Newsletter has been moved from quarterly releases and monthly releases

   2. Branding & Website

      1. Style guide released and feedback requested to finalize

         1. Date has not been set, yet, for compliance to style guide.

         2. Will be getting user feedback once all sites align with style guide

      2. Next up: Resource Provider page, privacy policy, acceptable use, code of conduct
         

2. Approval of summaries from prior EC meetings John Towns (5 mins)

   1. 28 February 2023 EC Summary - no changes noted

3. ACCESS Program Wide Meeting John Towns (10 mins)

   1. EC vote on locations: Chicago, SDSC, Boulder?

      1. Boulder was chosen as the planned location.

   2. EC vote on dates: June 26-27?

      1. Yes: Operations, Allocations, Metrics, ACO

      2. ?: Support

   3. Plan is to:

      1. travel on 25th,

      2. EC on morning of 26th,

      3. staff on afternoon 26th - morning 27th,

      4. travel on afternoon 27th
         

4. SC 23 Strategy John Towns (10 mins)

   1. Host a co-located event? and ask for suggestions from the EC members.

      1. Plan for a BOF and more purposeful events in the ACCESS booth

      2. Support planning an SC23 event - has been submitted to SC for consideration.
         

5. Behind the drop in number of Maximize ACCESS requests David Hart (10 mins)

   1. XRAC Awardees — Where are they now?
      

6. EAB Meeting Review & Thoughts Tom Furlani (10 mins)

   1. What went well, what could have been better, and what we might consider for future meetings…

   2. Need to figure for the future meetings how to make it more two way though as opposed to data dump from each of the tracks (which was appropriate for the first meeting).    

   3. Since we are preaching that ACCESS should not be thought of as 5 separate awards but rather an integrated service, one idea that that occurred to me was to consider presenting by use cases….  For example:

      1. Use Case 1: User applying for an account…what does that process look like.

      2. Use Case 2: User running on the various resources (submitting jobs, checking on jobs, working to improve throughput/performance through the various diagnostic tools, etc)

      3. Use Case 3: Computational scientist/campus champion assisting users - what tools do they have at their disposal for the various stages: 1) helping a user choose a resource, 2) helping them with the account creation, 3) helping them get up and running on a give resource, and 4) helping them tune the users performance…

   4. An idea is to invite a researcher that runs a fair number of jobs to provide their insights on their experience.

7. Informational Items (10 mins)

   1. RAMPS Stephen Deems

      1. AARC meeting next Monday (March 13) to review Maximize ACCESS proposals

      2. Assisted TACC with their Frontera (LRAC) allocations meeting, yesterday.

         1. Some allocation requests may be directed toward ACCESS

         2. Some large ACCESS requests could/may be directed toward Frontera

   2. MATCH Shelley Knuth

      1.  No updates from Shelley at this time.

   3. CONECT Tim Boerner

      1. Security team working to finalize purchase of Cirrus MFA. Alex & team have met with MATCH reps to work out details related to support/ticket queue. Communication will go out to users about this change once final dates are nailed down (pending completion of purchase in UIUC purchasing system).

      2. Question for Tom G: Can you provide clarification re. whether or not we should include PY2 plans in Annual Report or not. Guidance sent by Tom by email indicates that we should only include major changes that would require a PEP update, but the coop agreement states “The Awardee will submit an annual report which shall include a detailed plan for the following year.” And related: If overall plans (other than major changes that would change the PEP) aren’t to be included in Annual Report, does that imply that we should not plan present PY2 plans in annual reviews?

   4. MMS Tom Furlani

   5. OpenCI John Towns

      1. John and Tim met informally with Morin Miron Livny (OSG/PaTH); beginning to explore collaboration possibilities.

      2. ACO met with Allocations team as the first in our series of meetings with Service Teams. A good first discussion with follow-up items. Also a lesson or two learned for improving how these run which will be incorporated into other meetings.

      3. On Friday, John spoke with TomG regarding supplements for program-wide, in-person meetings. Follow-up email went to the PIs. All have not reponded responded to that as yet. Desire to move this forward ASAP.
         

...