Scoping of IP Ranges DRAFT

See Best Practices for Decision Pages and Tags for groups

Legend: not started IN PROGRESS STALLED decided

Recommendation

For each of the two use cases of this feature:

1. Campuses that have e-resources restricted to certain user groups which are authenticated by IP address

2. Campuses with multiple libraries in different geographic locations

We recommend that utilizing this feature should be decided at the local level based on library and campus needs.

Impact

Reasoning

A survey of campus libraries showed that most libraries have e-resources available only to select groups, and these are authenticated through several different methods: username/password, VPN or Proxy, and IP address. The survey found that all but two campuses had more than three libraries: UCLA and Berkeley. Given the range of authentication options and the varying number of library locations at each campus, utilization of the Scoping of IP Ranges feature should be decided at the local level.

Campuses interested in using this feature should carefully consider the impact on discovery and user experience. Some impacts and questions to consider include:

For Use Case 1

• Scoping may limit results displayed to the user in UC Library Search based on their location

• Does our library have the ability to separate IP addresses by academic department or building?

• How might walk-in users be impacted

For Use Case 2

• Do we have a large number of libraries and/or duplicate physical items across multiple locations which result in a long list of items in the Find It section of UC Library Search results?

• If so, is there an advantage to ordering these locations by proximity to the user? This could be a consideration for patrons with a mobility impairment.

• As with Use Case 1, this feature depends on the ability to distinguish IP addresses/ranges by building or library.

Background

From AEFG Phase 4: Coordinated investigation with Discovery group. Configuring IP definitions in campus configuration can affect how search results display in Primo (see Ex Libris document: https://knowledge.exlibrisgroup.com/Alma/Product_Documentation/010Alma_Online_Help_(English)/050Administration/050Configuring_General_Alma_Functions/020Managing_Institutions_and_Libraries#Managing_IP_Definitions_for_a_Library ). Impact on electronic resources management, and any troubleshooting, should be understood for campuses wanting to explore using this configuration.

From Ex Libris documentation: “The IP ranges identify a patron's location when considering resource availability and when holdings by location in a Locations Ordering Profile.” This feature could be useful if campuses have licensed resources that are restricted to a specific group of users, for example specialized medical resources licensed solely to a medical school.

This feature could also be used in conjunction with the Locations Ordering Profile to identify holdings nearest the user. For example, if a user is searching for a physical book that is available in multiple library locations, Primo should list holdings in the GetIt section by proximity to the user.

Open

Dependencies

• Local practices: do libraries offer resources that are only available to specific user groups?

• Do campuses need or want this feature?

• What is the impact on off-campuses users?

Questions to consider

• Do campuses have the sort of resources that are only available to certain groups of users?

• If so, are these resources IP or Proxy authenticated versus User ID and Password? (Example: WRDS)

• How is off-campus access managed for these resources?

• Do users notice the location of a physical item in order to find it?

• Do our collections have a large number of physical holdings across many campus libraries that would necessitate using this feature?

Action Log