From emb021@email.mot.com Thu Sep 14 10:07:06 2000 Received: from grubby.research.bell-labs.com (guard.research.bell-labs.com [135.104.2.9]) by starling.research.bell-labs.com (8.9.1/8.9.1) with SMTP id KAA07470 for ; Thu, 14 Sep 2000 10:07:05 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ihrh1.emsr.lucent.com ([135.1.218.53]) by grubby; Thu Sep 14 10:06:29 EDT 2000 Received: from ihemail1.firewall.lucent.com by ihrh1.emsr.lucent.com (8.8.8+Sun/EMS-1.5 Solaris/emsr) id JAA06967 for ; Thu, 14 Sep 2000 09:06:23 -0500 (CDT) Received: from ihemail1.firewall.lucent.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ihemail1.firewall.lucent.com (Pro-8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id KAA15149 for ; Thu, 14 Sep 2000 10:06:21 -0400 (EDT) Received: from usenix.org ([131.106.3.1]) by ihemail1.firewall.lucent.com (Pro-8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id KAB15135 for ; Thu, 14 Sep 2000 10:06:21 -0400 (EDT) Received: from motgate.mot.com (motgate.mot.com [129.188.136.100]) by usenix.org (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e8EE66t18665 for ; Thu, 14 Sep 2000 07:06:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: [from mothost.mot.com (mothost.mot.com [129.188.137.101]) by motgate.mot.com (motgate 2.1) with ESMTP id HAA06865 for ; Thu, 14 Sep 2000 07:06:04 -0700 (MST)] Received: [from plnt014.comm.mot.com (plantation.comm.mot.com [145.2.198.69]) by mothost.mot.com (MOT-mothost 2.0) with ESMTP id HAA00905 for ; Thu, 14 Sep 2000 07:06:00 -0700 (MST)] Received: from email.mot.com (fl08d041012201.comm.mot.com [173.41.12.201]) by plnt014.comm.mot.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail Service Version 5.5.2650.21) id STAJHC8J; Thu, 14 Sep 2000 10:05:59 -0400 Message-ID: <39C0DB42.17B6B72C@email.mot.com> Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 10:05:54 -0400 From: Michael Brown Organization: Motorola, Inc X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (WinNT; I) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: metrics-workshop@usenix.org Subject: Workshop 8 interest Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Keywords: Status: RO Content-Length: 993 Lines: 23 Greetings, I am interested in participating in Workshop 8 on Process Maturity. My organization currently uses a development process for all our projects that was designed to meet the needs of SEI's Capability Maturity Model. We were recently assessed at SEI CMM Level 3, and are working to get to Level 4. I have been involved in learning about the CMM over the last few years, and am fairly familiar with it and our process. I have also done research on my own to look for assessment methodologies that may be more appropriate for systems administration, so I am familair with the SAMM that was put forth by Carol Kubicki. I would like my background in these areas would help my participation in this workshop. Also, please don't refer to SAMM as a 'metric'. Its more correct to call it an assessment methodology. Metrics are what you gather on your use of the methodology to help improve it. Michael Brown Desktop/Server Support Enterprise Computing, Plantation, FL Motorola, Inc.