Presence and IntComm WG

["Callahan, Tim" <>]

Sean,
Good question.  This is where we (PIC WG) need to differientiate between the 
PIC.edu package and project, which are both components of our PIC group's 
work.  

The PIC.edu package should be an easy entry point, especially for those with 
little experience. We hope that use of the package will correspond to 
involvement in the PIC.edu project.  We also hope that it will provide a 
"very good" base configuration for all. 

The PIC.edu project does not require use of the package and will certainly 
include institutions which may be further along and who know enough to make 
different decisions.  In fact, these members are the ones that we would like 
a lot of participation from right now so that their experiences and lessons 
learned can be shared.  This will help us build the best base config.
- Tim  





-----Original Message-----
From: Sean Dilda 
<>
Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2008 2:41 PM
To: 

 
<>
Subject: Re: [wg-pic] Notes from 7/10 call

Jorj Bauer wrote:

> 
> The discussion turns to the direction of the pic.edu project; this
> seems to line up with pic.edu's goals. OpenFire should be our
> standard, with tiered service; Penn might provide resources to the
> development effort.
> 

>   MG: does it have to be OpenFire? What does it mean to pic.edu if
>   we're cobbling together a proof of concept? The choice of OpenFire
>   should be the supported recommendation for pic; tiered service. If
>   you want to just communicate, you u

[The entire original message is not included]