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.

Agenda

SWOT AnalysisCost ReductionsUrgent NeedsPain PointsStrategic PlanningRequests

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.

The End