Well, it seems that not everyone has easy access to video facilities,
so I suggest a phone conference for now. I'm willing to set it up. How
about April 20: this fits with the available dates of everyone who
emailed me. Other dates with no conflicts are: April 28,29,30. Later
may also be possible. Since people from Japan, Europe and North
America would like to connect, the time of day will be awkward-- some
site is going to have to have a crummy time, but there's not much way
around that. I propose: 10 am (EST) = 11 pm (JST) = 4 pm (Europe)
(could be moved forward if later is OK in Japan which would make
it a bit easier for West Coasters).
So, please let me know if you'd like to connect, and send time
preferences/conflicts. Default will be April 20 10 am EST.
I've attached some agenda ideas; please send more suggestions.
Kate.
------------------------------------------------------------
Here's a suggested agenda for the working group meeting
(please send any additional suggestions.)
The first item I think we've informally agreed on by email, but let's
"ratify" it and approve a privacy agreement draft.
1. Privacy issues:
- Who gets access to which information?
Access to alarm information is a sensitive issue, and it's also
important for security against hackers. Please see the working group
page
(http://mochi.icrr.u-tokyo.ac.jp/~kate/snnet/wg/working_group.html)
for a draft of an agreement which is an attempt to keep as many people
happy as possible. Suggestions are very welcome.
- Working group members acting as liaisons to their
collaborations: this is something that came up at a recent Super-K
collaboration meeting. Experimental collaborators may worry that
decisions are being made about their data by a group of people outside
their control. So, I propose that we make sure that the working group
members are officially designated as "liasons" between the supernova
group members and the individual collaborations. They should
responsible for soliciting and transmitting suggestions from the rest
of the experimental collaborators to the working group.
OK, enough of the stuffy "official" stuff, now the real work:
2. Technical issues:
Right now the coincidence machine is running in a quite simple
configuration. There's still work to do: there are technical
decisions to make and actual coding jobs still to be done.
- implementation of multiple servers
- anti-coincidence check (ping for alive-or-dead) and timeout
- consistency check (events/kton)
- secure socket implementation
- tests of timing, other tests
- alarm retraction utilities
Later:
- triangulation, if do-able
- dedicated phone line (s)?
(Check the summary of the workshop discussion for more details).
Are there any people interested in getting involved in some of this
work? (Grad students?)
This brings up the question of how to actually share the coding work.
My proposal is to use a cvs repository; we've used this for Super-K
quite successfully. It's very convenient for dealing with multiple
code developers, allowing the tagging of releases and easy reversal of
changes. Alternative suggestions are welcome.
3. Publishing a paper
4. The name thing, again...