Desktop & Application Virtualization Workshop

Topics Submitted

NOREX SELECT

SELECT WORKSHOP DESKTOP & APPLICATION VIRTUALIZATIONTopics SEPTEMBER 21-22, 2010

• Making the Case for New Technologies• Do you have teams dedicated and focused on virtualization technologies?  • As organizations look at their prospects for virtualization where do they start? • How do they obtain financial concurrence?  • Has anyone developed a straw-man model with costs assigned to individual elements of the infrastructure right down to a per PC model to

demonstrate ROI?  • Do you maintain roadmaps for different technology areas? If so, how are they created and by whom? How do you keep them evergreen?  • How do you communicate technology selection processes, roadmaps, and standards to other groups?  • How do you handle the Wall Street Journal buzz, i.e., executives asking when they are getting xyz?  • Do you use Gartner, Forrester, or any others for research? If so, how do you use them? Who has access? What kind of access do they

have? • What conferences do you plan to attend?

• Virtual Desktop Infrastructure• How are you using VDI and what are your future plans with it? • Describe business use cases for full desktop virtualization. • VDI • VDI Infrastructure: Best on a LAN or can it be run across a WAN effectively? • What specific technologies do you have deployed? VMware View or Citrix in your existing environments? • What tools are you using for VDI? What hypervisor, i.e., ESX, Hyper-V, XenServer, are you running it on and why? • Measurement of the Impact of VDI on a Global Network: How do you properly size a network to minimize the impact VDI can make on other

applications? • Do you use virtual desktops over higher latency overseas environments? What are some experiences? • Do you plan to integrate a BYOPC into your business?

SELECT WORKSHOP DESKTOP & APPLICATION VIRTUALIZATIONTopics SEPTEMBER 21-22, 2010

• Application Virtualization • What do you consider application virtualization? How are you using it? • Describe business use cases for application virtualization. Do you feel or see your company focusing more time and energy on application

virtualization rather than full desktops? •  Have you achieved application virtualization in a production environment using App V, Thin App, Citrix? •  What are your experiences with application virtualization products? (App-V, Altiris SVS, both implementations and individual app.

scenarios) •  What process do you go through to select a standard?

•  Implementation & Support Issues•  How are you using virtualization technologies in Windows 7 migrations? •  Has anyone implemented Workspace or Persistent Virtualization? If so, what tools are you using? •  Does anyone have plans to implement a client hypervisor, i.e., XenClient? If so, when, what? •  Training: How are you training your staff and users? •  Support Diversity Model for VDI:  What is VDI/VHD’s impact on the traditional desk-side support model? •  As components of architecture are decoupled – how do organizations plan for their support by the various infrastructure groups that will

now likely be looking after them?  Are there models for this?  What does this mean in terms of staffing and resources?  •  Are there true desk-side support reduction opportunities, or are these offset by needing additional staff in terms of LAN/WAN, Storage,

etc.? •  Off-shoring/outsourcing infrastructure and service desk support.•  Consumerization? What are your thoughts? How are you handling it? •  Data center consolidation

Desktop & Application Virtualization Workshop

Presentation by Union Pacific Railroad

NOREX SELECT

5

Union Pacific RailroadVDI Past, Present, and FutureSeptember 21, 2010

6

2009 Fast Facts (Year End)

• FreightRevenue $13.4 B

• Route Miles 32,100 in 23 States

• Employees 41,700

• Annual Payroll $3.5 B

• Customers 25,000

• Locomotives 8,350

Portland

Oakland

LA

Calexico

Nogales El Paso

Seattle

Eagle Pass

SLC

Eastport

Brownsville

Houston

KC

St. Louis

Omaha

Twin Cities

Duluth

Denver

Laredo

DallasMemphis

Chicago

New Orleans

Union Pacific System

7

2009 Business MixFreight Revenue $13.4 Billion

Agriculture Products

20%

Autos6%

Chemicals16%

Energy23%

Industrial Products

16%

Intermodal19%

8

Little Known Facts• Daily, Union Pacific Moves Enough:

– Aluminum For 66,000 Pop Cans– Shingle To Roof 245 Homes – Appliances For 9,600 Homes

• Annually, Union Pacific Moves:– 1.8 Billion Gallons Of Domestic Ethanol Which Replaces 76

Million Barrels Of Foreign Oil Production– Enough Ethanol To Keep 1.6 Million Vehicles Running For An

Entire Year– 270 Million Tons of Coal, Which Is A Quarter Of The Annual US

Coal Supply– Enough Beer, That If The Bottles Were Laid End To End, They

Would Circle The Earth 23 Times• We Were The First Railroad To Offer Wind Turbine Service

9

August 2010

Server Infrastructure

Services Data Center /

Help Desk / Central LAN

Support Disaster

Recovery

Safety, Asset Utilization, & Fiber Optics Installation

Support Telecom Engineering Telecom

Facilities

Project Mgmt Office

Testing/Change Mgmt

Enterprise Info Mgmt, Business

Intelligence Customer Liaison / Client Implementation Systems

Implementation

Development

Non-Operating

Development & Support

IS Security SAP

Web Infrastructure

Messaging Systems

Communications Systems Design

Voice Automation

Decision Technologies

Train Control Development

Crew Management Physical Resources

Intermodal Support

NetControl Application

Development NetControl Infrastructure / Maintenance

TransportationDevelopment

Production Services &

Security

NetControl

StrategicInitiatives

SystemsEngineering

Telecom

ITOperations

Operations

InformationTechnologies

CIO

10

Infrastructure and Telecommunications

UP would be one of the largest Telecommunications businesses in the Country if we were a stand-alone company. • Track Side Technology: 4,375 defect detector radios• Field/Mobile Technology: 46,000 mobile and portable radios; 7,707 locomotive radios 1,145 base radios; 1,563 WiFi access points; 18,000 personal computers, 800 AEI locations; 700 microwave sites

• OnBoard Technology: 6,700 onboard cameras; 5,000 locomotive computers/ data radios

• Fiber Optic Network: 33,000 miles of fiber optic facilities covering two-thirds of the U.S.

• Wireless Services: Over 1,500 towers and multiple telecom facilities serving the wireless telecommunications industry.

• Research & Development: Remote sensor & monitoring technology applications for transportation industry.

11

IT Operations

• Data Center / Disaster Recovery Site• Over 2,300 Servers• Over 1 Petabyte of Storage• 5 Mainframe Computers

12

Early Thin Client Computing (1995-96)

• IBM Network Stations

• Wyse Winterms and WinFrame

• Potential use cases– Mainframe emulation– Browser applications– Hosted applications and

desktops via WinFrame

• Limitations– Proprietary, slow, limited

functionality, poor printing support, expensive

• Never really implemented these thin clients…

13

• Winterms and WinFrame did lead us somewhere

• Citrix WinFrame for client applications– Better performance for

data intensive client applications

– Better change and release management

Early Application Hosting (1997-2002)

• Limitations– Application conflicts– Exhaustive regression

testing required– Segmented hosting– Intense management and

troubleshooting

• Overall a really useful part of our client server architecture!

14

Early Virtual OS Hosting – Starting in 2001

• VMWare for Server

– Development and test servers– Reduce hardware footprint– Improved provisioning time frames– Not reliable enough for production

15

Early Virtual OS Hosting – Starting in 2001

• VMWare for Client

– Test and second devices– Reduction of admin rights on production machines– Improved provisioning time frames– Cost effective as a second device– Saw great potential for kiosk devices at this time

16

• The Blaster Worm event changed everything!

• Security Assessment and Remediation Project– Dramatically extended our disaster recovery and business

resumption solutions– Dramatically changed our remote access strategy

– Drove more use cases for VMWare– Drove our user culture to remote desktop services– Drove more use cases for Citrix/Terminal services

A Major Shift in Our Strategy (2003/2004)

17

Virtual Client OS Extension

• Test and second devices grew– Primarily driven by reduction of admin rights

• Remote access for vendor support– No more direct access to devices on the UP network

• Remote access for offsite contractors– No longer trust remote networks

• Drove RDP culture with new remote access stuff– No more layer three VPN for untrusted devices

18

Virtual Application Extension

• Increased reliance on terminal services• Enabled by application virtualization

– Softricity really enabled us to extend our vision and reach– Larger clustered terminal server farms– More production worthy environment

• What are all the use cases?– Disaster recovery for mission critical business apps– Business resumption for second tier apps– Production applications grew as well

19

Existing VDI Architecture

VM1

VM2

VM3

VMn

Hypervisor(Desktop)

Juniper

RDP

RDP

Web InterfaceTS1

TS2

TSn

Citrix Farm(Apps)

Apps

Apps

RDP

RDP

Apps

Apps

RDP

20

Maturation of Our Environment

• Continued growth in our terminal services farms• Continued improvements in application virtualization

for terminal services– 120 applications across the farm– 20 production applications with hundreds users

• So successful we drove there for fat clients too– Investigated Softricity for the desktop– Implementing Altiris fat client virtualization and streaming

• Expanding demand for virtual clients– Ease of provisioning and over all agility

21

Move from VMWare to Microsoft Virtual Server

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 (YTD)

280

375

450

605

730701

672

0

70100

120168

242

367

Windows Server Mix

Physical Servers Virtual Servers

• Started in 2008• More stable and better

management tools• Financials made the

switch a no brainer• I continue to mention this

because the business case is so dramatic compared to client models primarily because of licensing

22

Technical Struggles with Client Virtualization

• Lack of robust management capabilities– Limitations on over allocation of host resources– Inability to vary slices off when not being used– Would like to be able to load balance across a cluster– Our model makes provisioning tedious

• Off shore contractors moving to other models– Significant moves to fat clients on UP network– Primary driver is inherent latency of RDP– Clients drive increased hardware requirements faster

23

Some Successes for Newer Solutions

• Specific business problems have driven point solutions for us• We have had some success for small cases• Current spot solutions with thin client and VDI

– Harriman Dispatch Center war room – ClearCube• Driven by multi media and other physical hardware requirements

– Corporate Audit – SunRay, ThinAPP, Appsense• Driven by corporate audit security requirements

• Both solutions are really too costly and hard to support for a large scale implementation

24

What We’ve Looked at for the Enterprise

• Our technical short falls drove R&D projects• Kicked the tires on several VDI solutions

– Provision Networks/Quest– VMWare advance solutions– Citrix VDI components

• Current expansion driven by mobile projects– Client agnostic SSL VPN– ICA based remote desktop for non Windows devices

• Definitely an improvement for latency and video

• Would like to make the benefits more universal

25

Future VDI Architecture

VM1

VM2

VM3

VMn

Hypervisor(Desktop)

ICA

orApp

s

Access Gateway

TS1

TS2

TSn

TS Farm(Apps)

Connection Broker

Web Interface

DDC

ICAorApps

App

s

ICA

ICA

or

Apps

ICA

26

VDI, Trying to Go Forward

• Wild success with virtual servers has not translated to success in VDI for us• What are we struggling with to get there?

– The technology in this space is really cool– Costs don’t prove out benefits without other drivers

• Where should we focus with client virtualization?– OS virtualization vs application virtualization– Application virtualization in the cloud vs at the desktop– Which is more strategic, viable, etc.

• How does this gel with our mobile strategy changes?

27

The Business Case for VDI

• Looking for your help to get us there• What other vendors are there in this space and what

is everyone else using?• Experience or recommendations on one vendor vs

multi vendor solutions?• What is the best business case for VDI?

– Where is it best to focus?– What technologies and in what time frames?

Desktop & Application Virtualization Workshop

Presentation by Chesapeake Energy

NOREX SELECT

ONE USER EXPERIENCESeptember 22, 2010

30

Company Stats2nd Largest Producer of Natural GasLargest Driller of Natural GasChesapeake’s focus is on discovering and developing unconventional natural gas and oil fields onshore in the U.S.Headquartered in Oklahoma with 80+ Field SitesMarket Cap: 14 billionRevenue: 8.9 Billion9,000 Employees475 IT employees

31

CHK’s Primary Operating Areas

CHK is transitioning from 92% natural gas production in 2009 to a greater balance between natural gas and liquids

32

The Struggles of Today: Multiples

My Applications experience is one way here.

My Applications experience is another way here.

DesktopPackage

DesktopOperating

SystemDesktopProfile

CitrixPackage

ServerOperatingSystem

CitrixProfile

DESKTOP

CITRIX

33

Our Direction

One Package

One Operating

SystemOne

Profile

One User Experience

-Same applications and settings

available on all devices

Getting to ONE USER EXPERIENCE:

• ONE Package • ONE Operating System• ONE Profile

34

ONE Package

The Vision • A user has the same set of applications available to them no matter which Chesapeake machine they log into: Citrix, desktops, laptops, virtual desktops

The Process • Package ONE time and deploy the package to all devices using the SAME SCCM infrastructure

Application Virtualization • Application virtualization is key as it allows us to target users and deliver applications on demand from multiple devices

35

Application Virtualization

What is it?An application packaging technology that isolates applications from each other and limits the degree to which they interact with the underlying operating system. It also provides on- demand, streaming delivery of the application

36

Why Did Chesapeake Implement Application Virtualization

Reduced the time it takes to package an applicationEliminated issues with application conflictsWe could run multiple versions of an application side-by-side (i.e. Office)Significantly reduced regression testingAllows us to quickly deploy a Citrix server by delivering applications on demandAllowed us to optimize the use of our Citrix servers

37

The Process

Streaming Servers

Desktops

App l i ca t i on V i r t ua l i zat i on C l i ent

Dev i ces

Terminal Servers (Citrix)

Virtual Desktops

Application Virtualization Sequencer

Application

Laptops

38

Quick Stats

Citrix• 100 Servers Running

Windows Server 2003• App-V 4.2

• 325 Packaged Applications

• 300 Applications Virtualized

• 64 Servers dedicated to virtual applications

• 1,500 Concurrent Users• 7,700 Unique Users

Desktops/Laptops• 7,500 Windows XP

• 3,500 Windows 7 64-bit

• App-V 4.6• 400 Packaged

Applications• 80+ Applications

Virtualized• 6,500 Laptops /

4,500 Desktops

39

Lessons LearnedNot all applications can be or should be virtualized

In Citrix, out of 317 applications around 25 had to be locally installed. Reasons an application could not be virtualized:

― Uses COM+― Installs boot-time services― Requires a system-level driver― Licensing information is tied to the machine― In older versions of App-V, virtual packages over

1 GB had performances issues (has been fixed in newer versions)

Other reasons we did not virtualize an application― Used by many other applications (i.e. Office was

installed locally)― Integrates with Internet Explorer or Office (i.e.

Adobe Reader, Flash)

40

Lessons Learned - ContinuedNot all vendors support user-based licensing for their applicationsTraining:

The packagers needed to be trained on the new packaging formatThe HelpDesk and support staff needed to be trained on how to test their applications and troubleshoot issues

41

Next StepsEvaluate and Deploy ONE Profile• F

ind a persistent personalization product that allows us to share a single profile between the desktop/laptop environment and the Citrix environment

42

Technology Service Roadmap: End User Services

Roadmap OverviewTechnology Rating Definitions

Medium Impact

Low Impact

High Impact

Color: Deployment Impact

Size: Enterprise Value

DeployedOutline: Deployment Status

Represents the potential benefit that could be delivered to the business

High Value

Medium Value

Low Value

The following factors influence value:• Enhances Employee

Productivity• Enables quicker decisions• Improves reliability and

scalability• Improves security and

compliance• Cost ReductionRepresents the total effort and change to IT and business processes required to implement the technology

The following factors influence impact:• Total Cost• Training• Resources• Effort

2010

2011

2012+

No Date for Deployment

Exchange 2010

Citrix Access Gateway

Presence

GP Preferences

XenApp 6

Citrix Web Interface 5.x

Citrix Provisioning Server

Virtual Desktops

DirectAccess

Office 2010

Internet Explorer 9

Windows XP SP3

Windows 7

Internet Explorer 8.0

USMT/OSD/Backup

IntegrationPower

Management

vPro

Enterprise IM

Expanded Handheld Options

Blackberry Enterprise Server 5.0

App-V Package

Conversion

SCCM R3

Unified PackagingSCCM

v.NextPersistent

Personalization

App-V 4.6 (Desktops)

Multi-Party Desktop VideoPerson to Person

VideoGroup Chat

Voicemail to Email

Office Communications

Server 2010

Softphone/One Phone #

App-V 4.6 (Citrix)

Client Hypervisor

43

App-V

Product Overview

44

Microsoft Application VirtualizationWas Softricity SoftGrid (CHK Citrix farm)

Decouples applications from O.S. and runs them as servicesApps are turned into on-demand easy to use utilitiesApps are no longer tied to specific systems

Can be used on any system, in real-time, on an as-needed basis

App-V (What is it?)

45

App-V (Demonstration)

46

Reduce Citrix licensing & infrastructure costQuicker packagingIsolated installation

Eliminates application conflictsDynamic delivery – Follows the customerMultiple app versions can run Side-by-Side

App-V Benefits

47

& FTAs

The App-V (Sequence)

Feature

Block 1

Feature

Block 2

Services

FilesEXE, DLL, OCX

Registry

INI Files

ODBC

ODBC

FilesEXE, DLL, OCX

Registry

INI Files

ODBC

FilesEXE, DLL, OCX

Registry

INI Files

48

Same packaging tool for desktops and CitrixSignificantly reduces regression testingRemoves complexity of enterprise deploymentsIntegrates with existing SCCM infrastructureFast and Complete application repairRebuilds & O.S. Migration – Apps solved!

App-V more Benefits

49

App-V Components

Streaming Servers

Desktops

App l i ca t i on V i r t ua l i zat i on C l i ent

Dev i ces

Terminal Servers (Citrix)

Virtual Desktops

Application Virtualization Sequencer

Application

Laptops

50

Comparing Environments

51

Thank you!