ARCHITECTURE & INFRASTRUCTURE COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA FRIDAY, January 10, :00-10:30 AM FAC 228D

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "ARCHITECTURE & INFRASTRUCTURE COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA FRIDAY, January 10, :00-10:30 AM FAC 228D"

Angelina Stewart
5 years ago
Views:

1 ARCHITECTURE & INFRASTRUCTURE COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA FRIDAY, January 10, :00-10:30 AM FAC 228D I. 9:00 9:30 Wireless Access Point Upgrade Endorsement (William Green) II. 9:30 10:00 System Management Task Force Update (Cam Beasley) III. 10:00 10:30 Office 365/AEMS Changes Update (Pei Chen)

2 Wireless Access Point Upgrade (Endorse) Summary Roughly one quarter of the university s Wireless Access Points (WAPs) are expected to reach End of Operations (EoO) by CY2015, and must be upgraded. To maintain wireless operations, Units must purchase upgrades through ITS by June 2014 (this fiscal year). ITS will manage deployments summer through fall of [est. $1M] Approach EoO WAPs not replaced will cease operations at a point determined by ITS, in order to preserve operations of the shared wireless infrastructure. (Expected in spring of 2015) To maintain current wireless coverage levels, Units must replace all EoO WAPs unless ITS determines that the WAPs coverage is no longer needed. (NetOpsMan 5.2.2) Given the campus- wide time- delimited scope, this project must operate independently of most other Unit IT projects (coordination will occur with construction/renovation projects and campus- wide initiative such as VoIP). ITS has negotiated deep trade- in discounts from the current vendor for in service EoO WAPs. The discounts may also be applied for trade- in of in service non- EoO WAPs, so Units can avoid future obsolescence or increase wireless performance. All participating purchases will be placed by June 2014 (this fiscal year). ITS will provide each building the costs to upgrade EoO WAPs, and a due date for account numbers to be part of this project. Multi- unit buildings will determine internally how to divide costs of the WAPs, and provide ITS account numbers. Should Units not agree to allocations, ITS will adjudicate the allocations between the Units. (NetOpsMan ) The deployment labor to upgrade EoO and non- EoO WAPs for the general case will be funded as a Common Good by ITS. Additional Unit funding may be required for costs outside the general case (e.g. construction needed, materials abatement, special mounting or equipment). Deployment installation and project management will likely be contracted given current project timelines and ITS workload. IT Architecture and Infrastructure Committee 1

3 Background 1. State of the industry for large enterprise Wi- Fi systems is for individual WAPs to be operated by controllers, which coordinates user device experience, policy and radio functions across many WAPs. As support for a particular model of WAP drops from the software run on the controller, the WAP ceases to operate (End of Operations). New software must be run on controllers to patch security vulnerabilities, fix bugs and enable new hardware (standards are evolving, requiring new hardware). 2. Networking estimates it will be required to move the university s controllers to new software in the spring of 2015 (code stability, vendor release scheduling, or major security issues could force a move to new code earlier than this date). To avoid loss of service, 1,496 older WAPs must be replaced (roughly 25% of campus WAPs, mostly 1242s). 3. The EoO WAPs will have been in operation for 6 to 10 years [table 1], in most cases far exceeding lifecycle expectations provided for planning/budgeting (NetOpsMan 5.6.3). The older WAPs are failing at high rates and are two standards and 4 radio generations behind in terms of service to end devices (newer models significantly outperform the EoO models). Originally EoO was expected fall of 2014, but Networking was able to obtain support from the vendor for an additional software revision. 4. Notices of this impending change were sent to campus via the official it- updates list (11/2012); IT governance notified during AIC- Wireless Costs (5/2013) and AIC/OIT Network Report Card (8/2013, 10/2013, and dynamically); and in the Campus Network Report (7/2013). 5. Approximately 6,200 WAPs, 21 controllers, 4 enterprise- class routers, and two carrier- class NAT devices comprise the campus wireless system. ITS estimates the system must grow to support 3,000 more WAPs to meet coverage/density goals. The system now carries over half the Internet traffic for campus, and has become a critical IT resource to university operations. 6. Networking has remained with one wireless vendor, and plans to continue to do so for this round of upgrades. Switching vendors of centralized controller architectures is operationally challenging and incurs high costs. o Complete replacement of just the wireless components on campus is estimated at $7M (total infrastructure over $10M to date). o Operating two vendors would require additional costs in different controllers, lab/test equipment, additional staff and training ($600K- 900K startup and $300K recurring costs in addition to the estimated $1M for this project). It also introduces interoperability and support problems, since each vendor s approach to critically important RF management is proprietary no open standards for wireless management. Extra labor would be required in this project, for example, to consolidate WAPs by vendor and building to avoid the more extreme service issues (clients do not roam between vendor products, for example). o Only one other vendor has sufficient market segment/share to be considered as a replacement due to the university s scale- - default costs/features are comparable given discounts being leveraged with current vendor. Technically, the two vendors one- up each other from one generation to the next. The current vendor has 53% market share; the other has 10.5% (more in the education market). Networking believes the other vendor may have somewhat better controller software, but the current vendor has significantly better WAP hardware [chart 2, 3]. While better controller software from the other vendor could ease ITS operations, the clients benefit more from the better WAP hardware and units can deploy fewer WAPs with IT Architecture and Infrastructure Committee 2

the current vendor. Both vendors discontinue WAP support based on typical vendor lifecycle considerations. Table 1, WAP Lifecycle Access%Points 0% 0% 0% 24% 50% 12% 14% 0%?

4 the current vendor. Both vendors discontinue WAP support based on typical vendor lifecycle considerations. Table 1, WAP Lifecycle Access%Points 0% 0% 0% 24% 50% 12% 14% 0%? Lucent 2000 Lucent 340/ ,years 340/ Cisco,tradein 340/ / / / / / ,years 1220/ Cisco,tradein 1220/ / / / / / / ,years Cisco,tradein ,years Cisco,tradein Chart 2, Vendor Landscape IT Architecture and Infrastructure Committee 3

5 Chart 3, Latest WAP performance IT Architecture and Infrastructure Committee 4

STRATEGIC IT ACCOUNTABILITY BOARD (SITAB) MEETING NOTES WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 8, 2010

STRATEGIC IT ACCOUNTABILITY BOARD (SITAB) MEETING NOTES WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 8, 2010 Attendees: Tony Ambler, Jay Boisseau, Pat Clubb, Andrew Dillon, Brad Englert, Greg Fenves, Rod Hart, Steve Leslie, David