Member Node Wranglers  - please note time change to half-past the hour
    Fridays at 10:30 am Alaska
                    11:30 am Pacific
                    12:30 noon Mountain
                    1:30 pm Central
                    2:30 pm Eastern

Please note new GTM info, also:
20 June 2014
                                                                       
Attending:  Laura, John, Rebecca, Amber, Bruce

Regrets:  Dave


Agenda: 

NOTE:  New meeting time at least through the end of July - 2:30p Eastern

        1. High profile issues (or current items of interest)
        
                    >>>  DUG prep:  slides for session 2 (MN showcase/lightning talks), etc.
                    2014 presenters:
                    Laura/Amber/Chris to work on the overview part of Session 2; also any leading/summary info for sessions 3 and 4 (forum/network/holdings) - send to Bruce (will be in SF)

                    2013 presenters (updating their information; NOT presenting) - made available on the public website
        1.5   Current MNs
                 CDL's synchronization is still turned off - email out to Stephen Abrams asking if they've updated their certificates post-heartbleed; Stephen says they have reinstalled their certs and their "MN is configured to allow harvesting", but I think they haven't gotten the message to the CNs yet.  Working.
                Memorandum of Understanding - this would be a good thing to have with MNs (and not get legal departments involved) - LT to address.
                
        2. Status of upcoming MNs
    
    Future
        3. Old action items
             MN Documentation - MN Deployment and MN Ongoing Operations - holding
             
        4. Not-high profile issues
       
        5. Around the room
            Bruce - nothing other than above
            Rebecca - nope
            Amber - nope
            John - nothing else
            Laura - nothing other than above



        1.1 (Leftover from last time - don't want to remove from this epad yet)
                    >>>Purpose of MN Description Document (past and future) - past: identify data holdings (type, volume, etc.), operations, to aid in MN development.  future: ???  
                 Intent  is to describe the (potential) MN, identify the  types/quantity/formats  of data they hold, - perhaps we need a  "friendlier" format, perhaps an  interview process; 
                  Workflow: should this information (MNDD) be collected at the beginning   of the process, or is the way we've been doing it lately (after the   fact) a new way of doing business??  Also consider if this information   gathering (form or interview) is the best use of resources for those   potential MNs who may or may not become a MN if implemented as a frist  step.  Possibly change the workflow? Is a pdf the best was to view the  information?
                Next steps:  Laura to come up with alternative(s) to current MNDD - content is good, but format/mechanism needs some work.  
                Another thing: Laura and Amber to look at workflow for last stages of implementation, test with EDAC
                
                Also -- how does the MN DD relate to the node document:
                    https://cn.dataone.org/cn/v1/node  - developers have/create this information (node registration, see updateNodeCapabilities)
                and redmine??    <--- work with redmine as mostly-authoritative source
                
                  Could a spreadsheet be a viable solution?  Maybe.  A database would   work.  In any case, some information is appropriately "private" - how   would we handle that?
                
                
                >>>Question: revisit the default "only results with data"    checkbox to unchecked; what is the process for making this decision?     Let's bring it up at the DUG.  Dave suggests not having that checkbox   at  the beginning of the search, but when you get results have a   checkbox  there to specify all/only results with data.  Dave to talk   with Skye re:  what it would involve.
                  From 20120918 UA meeting notes: "Consider making "showing results as   data" option post-search as a filter or ordering mechanism, rather than  a  pre-search filter."
                 Dave will ensure this is brought up at the CCIT mtg next week; needs to  be discussed/decided upon before any changes made.
                
                  >>> Bob's feedback about the dashboard - he suggested a count   of MNs on the dashboard (MNs, RNs), probably/maybe an easy thing to do  a  count of MNs and RNs and display
                
                  >>> SANParks is often off-line because of their location;  EDAC  is sometimes non-responsive (could be due to their size).  Should  we  have performance expectations or requirements of a MN before they  commit  to participate in DataONE?  Would this present a barrier to a  MN's  participation?
                      SANParks is replicating (i.e. if they are off-line, their data is   available from another site where their data is replicated).  
                      There was some talk previously of doing a metadata dump of a MN's   content to help when a MN is unavailable for a time.
                      Check heartbeat of MN, if last check indicated down, put them last in   the list of sources to check with the resolve function.