Date post: | 15-Jan-2016 |
Category: |
Documents |
Upload: | emory-jacobs |
View: | 215 times |
Download: | 0 times |
SHARING MODELSCOIT SEPTEMBER 2013
Playground Sharing
High Demand Lots of Kids & Pets
Limited Capacity Few Desirable Toys, Snacks
Mandates Right thing to doMom made us
Models & Tools Take Turns, Fight, Straws
Agenda
• Our Problem: High Demand, Limited Capacity, Mandates
• Sharing Models including Shared Services
• Update: OU Shared Services• Possible IT Sharing for COIT
Institutional Sharing
High Demand Near-record EnrollmentsHigh Expectation of Services
Limited Capacity Funding, Facilities, Infrastructure, Services
Mandates Graduate more students at lowest possible cost
Models & Tools
Service Frameworks, Purchasing Contracts, Committees, Collaboration, Cloud, Outsourcing
*Fall enrollment has increased by more
than 14,000 students since 2008.
*Oklahoma State Regents for Higher Education
OU Norman Unique Network Devices
Wifi Concurrent Peak
May 2013 Sept 2013
32,404 37,475
2011 Higher Ed Compromise
• Exempted from Consolidation • Created a State Regents’ CIO• Accomplish Governor’s goals:– Accountability– Transparency– Cost-efficiencies– OversightAcross 25 Oklahoma HE public institutions
Recent Oklahoma Legislation
Open Source and Open Standards Purchasing PolicyHouse Bill 2197 (Murphey - Breechen)
Shared Services Agency ConsolidationHouse Bill 3053 (Steele - David)
Creation of Unified IT Purchasing SystemHouse Bill 2939 (Derby - Brinkley)
Using Higher Ed Spend to Increase Purchasing SavingsHouse Bill 2197 (Murphey - Breechen)
Determining the Performance of Government AgenciesHouse Bill 3053 (Steele - David)
State CIO (2013)House Bill 2062 (Derby)
Governor Mary Fallin:Two years ago, I asked you to work with me and our state’s Chief Information Officer Alex Petit to consolidate and improve IT. As I said in my state of the State address then, state government can’t continue to operate like an 8-track in an iPod world.
Rep. Jason Murphey:The consolidation of information technology among agencies has been beneficial. But the lobbying strength of higher education institutions has been successful in exempting itself from reforming information technology.
Higher education’s reluctance to give up control is a huge stumbling block in that effort.
Higher education fought consolidation efforts last year so it could charge state agencies more money.
“Push for state IT update targets Higher Ed” The Edmond Sun, Feb. 5, 2013
Restructure and reorganize administrative offices, academic departments, and other units (e.g. IT services,…) resulting in fewer personnel
Consolidate and outsource services such as email and other information technology when cost-efficient
Outsource all or selected IT functions; contract to use off-site servers; contract to use Blackboard’s servers; share and consolidate IT services
“For the last two to three years, our board is working closely with institutions on cost efficiency. We recognize that if we’re going to maintain the same level of access and service at our institutions, we have to bend the long-term cost curve.”
-Dominic Chavez, Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board
It is critical that we make sure that college is affordable for every single American who’s willing to work for it. Families and taxpayers can’t just keep paying more and more and more into an undisciplined system where costs just keep on going up and up and up. We’ll never have enough loan money, we’ll never have enough grant money, to keep up with costs that are going up 5, 6, 7 percent a year. We’ve got to get more out of what we pay for…
President ObamaJuly 24, 2013
Across the Public Sector
Public Sector SharingFactor Institutions
High Demand Near-record EnrollmentsHigh Expectation of Services
Limited Capacity
Funding, Facilities, Infrastructure, Services
Mandates Graduate more students at lowest possible cost
Models & Tools
Grants, Services, Contracts, Committees, Collaboration, Communities, Clouds, Outsourcing
State of Oklahoma Shared Services Center
*Source: Harvard Shared Services Summit
OU Shared Services
• IT Function Only• Significant Investment by OU• Virtual Shared Services Center• Cross-Campuses• External Institutions and Affiliates• Private Cloud Solution Building Blocks• Insourcing: “Outsourced to ourselves”• Local Campus Budgets
Virtual Shared Services Center
• People First - No Consolidation• Management Team + Fractional
Resources• Availability determined by local Director• Collaboration Tools• No Physical Workspace currently• Work Aligned to ITILv3 Design,
Transition, Operations
Shared Services
S2 Program Timeline
August 2011
October 2011
March 2012
March 2013
April 2013
October 2012
OU-Tulsa Data Center Live
Norman Data Center Live
A Private Cloud for OU
Virtual Operations TeamTri-campus designGeo-RedundantPurpose-Built for University-wide servicesStandardizedDe-duplicatedCost efficient
OU IT Shared Services
Live• Data Center Co-
Location• Data Center
Connectivity• Block Storage (SAN)• File Storage (NAS)• Sharepoint• Virtual Server Hosting• Professional Services
Pipeline• Data Protection (Fall
2013)• SQL Cluster (Fall 2013)• Oracle Cluster (Fall 2013)• Virtual Desktops (Fall
2013)• Log Management (tbd)• Archive Storage (tbd)• Voice Services (tbd)
S2 Acquisitions 5 Year
Campus To-Date FY 14-18 Total % Annual
Norman 6,853,998 5,980,025 12,834,024 54% 2,566,805
HSC 5,909,973 4,017,805 9,927,778 42% 1,985,556
Tulsa 693,045 167,923 860,968 4% 172,194
TOTALS 13,457,016 10,165,753 23, 622,769 100% 4,724,554
S2 Acquisitions By Category 5 Yrs
Category 5 Year TotalBackups $1.6M
DHCP/DNS $0.6M
Facility $1.2M
Network $7.7M
Security $1.9M
Storage $3.1M
SQL Server Licensing $1.0M
Tools $1.7M
Virtualization $1.3M
Voice $2.8M
Cost Efficiency Goal (5 Years)
Cost Efficiencies
StaffingDatacenter PurchasesDe-DuplicationVolume Discounts
Energy Savings External Chargeback
License PoolingMaintenance Savings
*Business Process Efficiencies
Efficiency ExamplesActivity Type 5 Yr Projection
Storage Sharing Data center purchases 1.5M
VMWare ELA License Pooling 300K
Microsoft ELA Volume Discount 2.2M
Avaya Contract Maintenance 400K
Initial Cisco DC Purchase Volume Discount 1M
Border Router Consolidation De-duplication 1.6M
Sharepoint (5 departments) De-duplication 50K
DC Network sharing De-duplication 275K
One-Net Lambdas Enhanced Value 4.6M
CommVault Maintenance 200K
Example Totals: $12,125,000
Efficiency ExampleActivity Type 5 Yr Projection
Storage Sharing Data center purchases 1.5M
VMWare ELA License Pooling 300K
Microsoft ELA Volume Discount 2.2M
Avaya Contract Maintenance 400K
Initial Cisco DC Purchase Volume Discount 1M
Border Router Consolidation De-duplication 1.6M
Sharepoint (5 departments) De-duplication 50K
DC Network sharing De-duplication 275K
One-Net Lambdas Enhanced Value 4.6M
CommVault Maintenance 200K
Example Totals: $12,125,000
Initial Cisco DC Purchase
List Price $7,129,950
Discount Rate 40%
Total Discount $2,851,980
OU Price $4,277,970
List Price $7,129,950
Discount Rate 55%
Total Discount $3,921,473
OU Price $3,208,478
Savings $1,069,493
Best OU Discount Before S2 S2: Standardized, Volume
S2 Staffing: Example Plan
Admin Design Transition Operations Total Budget32,982 18,513 437 33,128 85,061 71%
June2013June2013
S2 Staffing: Example Impact
Before S2
Before S2
After S2After S2
Staffing: Driving to Versatility
Defining Work UnitsRestore a Server from Backup CommvaultRestore a VM from Backup CommvaultConfigure Backup Job CommvaultDeploy Backup Agent on a Server CommvaultAdd a LUN CompellentGrow a LUN CompellentDelete a LUN CompellentConfigure Dedupe CompellentConfigure Storage Tiers CompellentModify Storage Tier for a LUN CompellentUpkeep and maintenance of CyberArk services CyberArkHot a Port DCNMAssign a VLAN to a Port DCNMCreate a Port Trunk DCNMAdd a VLAN to a Port Trunk DCNMConfigure Duplex & Port Speed Settings for Port DCNMManage SharePoint content and site migrations DocAveCreate an Upgrade Policy EmminentwareManually Upgrade a Machine EmminentwareInstall SSL Cert F5Renew SSL Cert F5Create Load Balancing Rule F5Create Port Redirection Rule F5Monitor Security Optical Taps GigamonOpen a Support Ticket GLUUProvision a Certificate InCommonRemove a Certificate InCommonRenew a Certificate InCommonCreate a Scope InfobloxCreate a DHCP Reservation InfobloxCreate DNS Alias Infoblox
Staff Skills
1 2 3 4 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 11 2 5 5 5 4 4 5 4 3 1 2 1 4 1 1 3 4 1 1 1 5 1 5 3 1 2 1 4 2 4 2 21 1 2 4 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 4 1 1 1 11 3 2 3 1 1 1 4 1 5 5 5 2 2 1 4 2 5 2 1 2 5 4 1 4 2 5 3 5 5 5 4 5
McA
fee
Mo
ve
Mic
roso
ft A
ctive
Dir
ecto
ry
ISIL
ON
Jun
iper
CLI
Jun
iper
SP
AC
E
Lase
rfich
e
McA
fee
EPO
Gig
amo
n
GLU
U
InC
om
mo
n
Info
blo
x
Dat
a C
ente
r C
ablin
g St
and
ard
s
Do
cAve
Emm
inen
twar
e
Equ
ipm
ent
Man
agem
ent
F5Cis
co N
exu
s C
LI
Cis
co D
CN
M
Co
mm
vau
lt
Co
mp
elle
nt
Cyb
erA
rk
Ava
ya M
od
ula
r M
essa
gin
g
Ava
ya S
essi
on
Man
ager
Cis
co A
SRs
Cis
co D
WD
M
Cis
co W
ISM
Alle
n-B
rad
ley
AP
C
Ava
ya C
om
mu
nic
atio
ns
Man
ageR
Virtual Badging• Tied to Cross-Training
Goals• Performance Management• “Gamification”
• Social Media Feeds• Learning Times /
Badge Stack• Project Kicked-off
Operations Team Members (orig)
Name Campus Day 0 Name Campus Day 0
Clasby, Aaron HSC 0.4 Knipfer, Josh Tulsa 0.1
Coldwell, Gray HSC 0.2 Wisby, David Tulsa 0.1
Duree, Christopher HSC 0.2 Walls, Steve Norman 0.4
Fairless, Daniel HSC 0.4 Gehrman, Bill Norman 0.2
Ledford, Yvonne HSC 0.1 Simpsen, Paul HSC 0.2
Little, Amanda HSC 0.4 Ma, Rosa Norman 0.6
Miller, Tony HSC 0.2 Keller, Cherry Norman 0.2
Alcock, Bruce Norman 0.4 Farha, Andrew Norman 0.2
Sabatino, Chris Norman 0.4 Cox, Jim Norman 0.4
Mumma, Randy Norman 0.2 Goforth, Mark HSC 0.2
Robertson, Elliot Norman 0.4 Johnson, Micheal Norman 0.4
Fox, BJ Tulsa 0.1 Qian, Gensheng Norman 0.2
6.6 FTE6.6 FTE
vOps Scheduling
Monetizing Services
• Key Differentiator of Shared Services• Difficult for IT as an industry• True costs within an university are
elusive• Consumption Model is a new approach• Transparency• Sustainable• Don’t make money; don’t lose money
3 New Datacenters
Data Center Space
Facility Cabinets Rack Units *Reserved Available
OKC 127 5,334 1,856 3,478
Norman 124 5,208 1,604 3,604
Tulsa - - - -
TOTAL 251 10,542 3,460 7,082
*Reserved cabinets and rack units are for the data center network
Data Center Co-Location Cost
Co-Location Rack Unit Cost Monthly %Building Construction Cost 11.15 60.27%
Rack/PDUs 0.97 5.24%
Mechanical Maintenance 1.16 6.27%
Safety & Monitoring 0.21 1.14%
Diesel 0.25 1.35%
Labor: Facility Management 2.35 12.70%
Admin Overhead 2.41 13.03%
Total without Utilities: $18.50
Utilities: Power and Chilled Water 10.50
Total with Utilities: $29.00
Data Center Connectivity
Facility 1 Gig Ports
1/10 Gig Ports
10 Gig Ports
Total Ports
OKC 1,378 768 608 2,754Norman 1,532 1,402 0 2,934
Tulsa - - - -TOTAL 2,910 2,170 608 5,688
*Projected after full build-out and includes ports used by IT
Data Center ConnectivityData Center Network Port Cost 1 Gig 1/10 Gig 10 Gig %
Data Center Network Hardware 5.15 8.78 8.73 19%Network Hardware Maintenance 1.86 1.86 1.93 5%Cross Campus Connection 1.80 1.80 1.80 4%Data Center Network Cabling 1.15 1.15 0.96 3%Labor: Data Center Network Management 6.99 6.83 7.08 17%Load Balancers, DNS/DHCP 0.93 0.93 0.95 2%IDS/IPS, Taps, Spans 2.52 2.52 2.61 6%Firewalls 0.78 0.78 0.92 2%Internet Bandwidth 1.74 1.74 1.54 4%Monitoring 0.56 0.56 0.56 1%Facility Charge 8.27 8.27 10.76 23%Admin Overhead 4.76 5.28 5.67 13%
Total without Utilities: $36.50 $40.50 $43.50
Utilities: Power and Chilled Water 4.50 4.50 4.50
Total with Utilities: $41.00 $45.00 $48.00
Enterprise Block (SAN) Storage
Tier 3 Per Gig Cost Initial % *2.5X %Storage Hardware and Software 0.032 24.85% 0.017 25.45%Vendor Maintenance and Support 0.017 12.78% 0.013 19.28%Network Port Charge: Storage 0.006 4.72% 0.002 3.65%Facility Charge 0.002 1.18% 0.001 1.94%Monitoring 0.013 10.06% 0.005 7.66%Labor: Storage Management 0.043 33.36% 0.020 28.99%Admin Overhead 0.017 13.04% 0.009 13.04%
Total without Utilities: $0.130 $0.068
Utilities: Power and Chilled Water 0.03 0.03
Total with Utilities: $0.16 $0.098
*2.5X price projection based on initial purchase of 429TB growing to 1,072TB
Enterprise BackupPer Gig Cost *Avg Cost %
CommVault Enterprise Software 0.09 31%Compellent Disk Arrays 0.06 20%Servers 0.01 5%Network Port Charge: Enterprise Backup 0.01 2%Facility Charge 0.01 2%Monitoring 0.01 2%Labor: Backup and Restore 0.07 25%Admin Overhead 0.04 13%
Total without Utilities: $0.30
Utilities: Power and Chilled Water 0.01
Total with Utilities: $0.31
*Average Cost Blended over 5 Years with 2X Compellent Growth
Retention Price/Gig15 Days $0.25
30 Days $0.35
45 Days $0.45
60 Days $0.55
Virtual Server HostingPer Hosted VM Base VM* Upgrade** %
Server and Blade Network Hardware 3.73 2.79 6.72%Hardware Warranty Extension (48 mos) 0.38 0.28 0.68%VMWare Licensing 1.94 1.45 3.50%VMWare Software Support 2.33 1.75 4.20%Virus Scan Solution 0.44 0.33 0.79%Network Port Charge: VMWare Cluster 0.45 0.34 0.81%Facility Hosting Charge 0.23 0.17 0.42%Bandwidth 3.91 2.93 7.05%Monitoring 3.78 2.84 6.83%Labor: VMWare Cluster Administration 27.59 49.77%Storage Bundle 50 Gigs 3.43 6.19%Admin Overhead 7.23 1.93 13.04%
Total without Utilities: $55.44 $14.82
Utilities: Power and Chilled Water 1.84 0.08 Total with Utilities:
$57.38 $15.00
*1,350 Base Capacity OR **1,800 Upgrade Capacity
Virtual Server PricingConfiguration
Shared Max. Resource Use Price
vGig vCPU vNIC Monthly 3 YR Total 4 YR TotalVM (1vGig/1vCPU/1vNIC) Shared Max 1 1 1 55 1,980 2,640
VM (2vGig/1vCPU/1vNIC) Shared Max 2 1 1 70 2,520 3,360
VM (3vGig/2vCPU/2vNIC) Shared Max 3 2 2 85 3,060 4,080
VM (4vGig/2vCPU/2vNIC) Shared Max 4 2 2 100 3,600 4,800
VM (5vGig/2vCPU/2vNIC) Shared Max 5 2 2 115 4,140 5,520
VM (6vGig/3vCPU/3vNIC) Shared Max 6 3 2 130 4,680 6,240
VM (7vGig/3vCPU/3vNIC) Shared Max 7 3 3 145 5,220 6,960
VM (8vGig/4vCPU/3vNIC) Shared Max 8 4 3 160 5,760 7,680
VM (9vGig/4vCPU/3vNIC) Shared Max 9 4 3 175 6,300 8,400
VM (10vGig/5vCPU/3vNIC) Shared Max 10 5 3 190 6,840 9,120
VM (11vGig/5vCPU/3vNIC) Shared Max 11 5 3 205 7,380 9,840
VM (12vGig/6vCPU/4vNIC) Shared Max 12 6 4 220 7,920 10,560
VM (13vGig/6vCPU/4vNIC) Shared Max 13 6 4 235 8,460 11,280
VM (14vGig/7vCPU/4vNIC) Shared Max 14 7 4 250 9,000 12,000
VM (15vGig/7vCPU/4vNIC) Shared Max 15 7 4 265 9,540 12,720
VM (16vGig/8vCPU/4vNIC) Shared Max 16 8 4 280 10,080 13,440
Custom Shared or Reserved Resources Contact us
S2 5 Yr Value ProjectionInvestment $29MOriginal Purpose Value $43MUpfront Cost Efficiencies $15MIT Staff Return $15MExcess Capacity Return $10M
Total Return:$68M2.3 : 1
Department Value TBDUniversity Value TBD
Institutional Sharing
High Demand Near-record EnrollmentsHigh Expectation of Services
Limited Capacity Funding, Facilities, Infrastructure, Services
Mandates Graduate more students at lowest possible cost
Models & Tools
Service Frameworks, Purchasing Contracts, Committees, Collaboration, Cloud, Outsourcing
Possible COIT Sharing Model• Continue to Build Shared Key Contracts• Develop Framework for Sharing Services• Web Catalog
– Service Description– Pricing– Contact– OSRHE Hosts? – Capture Savings for Von
• Each Institution Contributes & Consumes as Desired– “Big” and “Little” services, resources, expertise
• Some services will require common IdM• Cross-Jurisdictional Sharing Common in Public Sector but
NOT in Higher Education
QuestionsDiscussionThank you!
[email protected]@HORTONHEARSYOU