Upload
mark-tweedy
View
219
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Systems AdministrationSub-Committee
Planning, Budgeting, and Accountability For Fiscal Year 2010-2011
Committee Membership
Brett McKeachnie (Chair)IT Systems Administration
Darel HawkinsIT Center for Student Computing
Kevin YoungSchool of Technology and Computing
Mike DuffinIT Automation and Integration
Kurtis OlsenTelephone Services
Gerald BunkerIT HelpDesk
Daniel HutchisonIT Systems Administration
Mission, Scope, and Responsibilities
The Systems Administration Sub-Committee exists to evaluate and recommend criteria for Best Practices, Strategic Directions, and Interoperability of Technology Systems at UVU. The scope of the committee includes decisions and recommendations regarding Hardware, Operating Systems, Data Storage, Backups, and Critical Application Level Software. The responsibilities of the committee include the development and implementation of PBA initiatives that support the IT Strategic Directions, the development of accountability measures, and the evaluation of outcomes.
Department Personnel
Systems AdministrationBrett McKeachnieRoark FisherDaniel HutchisonTed BlaneyPaul NufferAlan Castle
Automation & IntegrationMike DuffinChris JonesDave NielsenWayne WilsonLandon ConoverBrett Partridge
Competencies
Servers (Hardware, Operating Systems)Systems (Automation, Integration, Design, Security)Data Storage (Performance, Allocation)Disaster Recovery (Backups, Replication)Data Center Resources (Needs, Access)
Making it all “work together, work right, work even when parts of it fail”
(http://www.sysadminday.com/whatsysadmin.html)
Vision
A robust systems environment and ecosystem that is flexible and customer
oriented, that provides security and resiliency, that simplifies integration and
masks complexity, and that is fiscally and environmentally efficient.
Guiding Values
Customer ServiceFlexibilityCollaborationBest Effort
Best PracticesEfficiencyRobustnessReliability through
stability
Challenges
Growth in demand for services and systems has not been matched by growth in employee headcount – Need more people and to keep the people we have.
Operating under a historical paradigm which includes structural (training, mindshare, infrastructure) dependencies upon specific technologies that are becoming less capable of meeting the demands of our users – Need a paradigm shift.
SWOT Analysis: Strengths
Team (quality people)Identity Management SystemHardware (largely new or newer)Centralization/Core (efficiency)New Data CenterInternal Communication (within IT)
SWOT Analysis: Weaknesses
Microsoft Training/ExperienceApple Training/ExperienceUser CommunicationUser TrainingStaff NumbersSupport for Mobile DevicesDisaster RecoveryDocumentation
SWOT Analysis: Opportunities
Centralize in DLCVirtualization - ServerVirtualization - DesktopLinux / Open Source SoftwareDisaster Recovery Equipment Grant
SWOT Analysis: Threats
Novell DependenciesUser DemandsPhishing/MalWareFundingApathy/Lack of ParticipationUser Security Training
Cost Reductions?
Outsource?Cloud? Software Licensing?Virtualize ServersVirtualize Secure ServersVirtualize DesktopsTransfer Servers to DLC Data Center
Urgent Needs
Automation and Integration StaffDisaster Recovery Equipment
Progress is being made• Banner database and app server in Richfield
Needed• Off-Site Backup• Disk Space Usage Reduction• Improved Data Transfer to Richfield• Critical Systems/Processing for Emergencies (Virtualized)
• Communications• Urgent Financial Needs
Pain Points
AKA “What Keeps Brett Up at Night”
Can't Get Enough DonePossible Loss of Key StaffNovell
Company Policies / RelationshipsFuture Directions / Questionable ViabilityUser/Administration Perceptions/Support
Strategic Planning
Microsoft (Discovery, Training, Planning)Disaster Recovery (Planning, Equipment)Use DLC Data Center (Increase Efficiency)
Microsoft
Proactive Discovery Process to DetermineCosts of ChangingBenefits to be GainedPitfalls to Avoid and/or Be Aware OfMethods to EmployChanges Required
What do we expect to learn?
Costs – Financially Expensive (Licensing, Support), Migration Costly if Consultants are Used, Need More Administrators, More Servers, Lots of Training Required, Time Investment, Parallel Deployment, Major Adjustments to IDM Systems
Benefits – Increased Integration with 3rd Party Systems and Devices, Market Share (Easy to Find Help and Training)
What do we expect to learn?
Pitfalls – Not a Panacea, Trade One Set of Problems for Another, Systems Can Get Very Large, Compliance Issues, More Exploits (Market Share)
Methods – Many Best Practices, Different Paradigms (Adapt Our Thinking), Adjust to Different Strengths & Weaknesses
Changes – Few Visible Differences, E-Mail Client Change (Expect Detractors), Administration/Management Completely Different, Numerous Additional Systems Possible (SharePoint)
Why Not Novell?
Policies Maintenance Required for Patches Maintenance Required for
KnowledgeBase ShareHolders / Board Short Sighted –
Looking for Buyout? Development Moved Offshore Prices Increasing, Despite Market Share
and Economy Premium Attitude, Inferior Products Wait for partners to build solutions, then
re-invent the solution to sell, putting partners out of business
Support Quality Poor / Finger Pointing OffShore (Language/Culture Barrier) Knowledgebase Constantly Changing,
Difficult to Find Answers
Products Quality Poor Require Patches for Functionality Reduced Features in New Versions Integration of Systems and Devices
Difficult Partners (and some Novell Products)
Delayed or Refused Support for Linux – Left Market
Future Important Partners Leaving Customers Leaving Market Share / Mind Share Difficult to Get Training Difficult to Find Experienced Help Constant Rumors about Future
Changes/Improvements? “Too Little Too Late” –Joe Martin
Why Not Apple, Linux, or SUN?
Don’t Scale for Windows and MAC ClientsNo Collaboration Suite AvailableSimilar to Novell’s Lack of Integration
Why Microsoft?
Market Share / Mind ShareEasy To Find Trained HelpAny Problem We Have, Many More Also HaveSame Benefits Achieved in Move to Cisco from Alcatel
IntegrationMobile DevicesEnterprise SystemsExtensive Partner Network
Administration Support“Why haven’t we moved to Microsoft yet?”“When are we going to move to Microsoft?”“If we were on Microsoft, my <product> would work.”
Questions
Is This Just An Emotional Reaction?No. We can plan now, or we can try to figure it out under pressure
if/when it’s required.Won’t This Be Expensive?
Yes. But we don’t yet know how much it will cost. That’s one of the things we need to learn.
Won’t This Be a Very Difficult and Problematic Move?Yes. That’s why we need to plan.
Are We For Sure Moving to Microsoft?No. We want to investigate, learn, plan and budget to determine if
it’s the right move for UVU.When Would We Make This Change?
Guessing, I’d say 3 to 5 years to prepare and move.
Disaster Recovery
Data De-Duplication Devices (Orem & Richfield)Off-site backupImproved disk space usageImproved data transfer between sites
VMWare Host(s) at RichfieldWeb ServerCritical Services/Processing (Payroll, Purchasing)Emergency E-Mail System, etc.
Data Center Usage
No financial costsCreate a single point of contact empowered to help
departments move in.This is in progress in Infrastructure Services
Requests
Ongoing FundingPositions
• Systems Administrator – AIS• Application Administrator – VMWare• Systems Specialist – AIS
Equity/Career Ladder Upgrades• Alan, Chris, Dave, Paul
One Time FundingDisaster Recovery Equipment ($250,000)Microsoft Discovery/Training/Planning ($30,000)
Summary/Conclusion
WeAdd value by creating systems that work better, meet our
unique needs, and help people do their jobs more efficiently.
Need help in the form of positions in the AIS Department and equity funding so we can keep key employees.
Need to put some basic DR equipment in place to augment the systems we have been granted – A basic infrastructure we can build upon.
Need to look seriously at alternatives to Novell technologies, so we have a plan to meet our needs, come what may.