Some Ideas for Network ConsolidationGTRA ConferenceJune 24th, 2012Bedford Springs

2

Department A

Department B

Department C

Department D

• This has been GoC bandwidth procurement strategy for the last 20 years

• Only 2 - sometimes 3 providers can bid

• Almost all contracts national by department

• Telco assets more regionally based

Legacy Approach to Bandwidth Procurement

3

PWGSC

PWGSCData Ctr.

MPLSPeering

Limited Competition and Bargaining Power

4

• More players – but one shared multi-service IP network

• National Backbone provides a high speed redundant backbone that interconnects to all service provider networks

• Regional price reductions estimates between 30 – 40%

• More competition

• Better alignment with GC policy

• Less departmental procurement disruption

Enter – The Third Option

5

• Started in the National Capital Region

• 40-50% of the GoC populaiton

• Highest density

• Most data centres

• Quickest win opportunity

Organic Opportunity-Based Growth

Service Objective:To provide the most competitive shared WAN Service in the GC

Service Components: Acquire Fibre Equipment – NESSPeople – SM&D

Service Definition: Shared (virtualized) WAN in Ottawa Area

Schedule Milestones:Contract Award – September 2007PoC / Beta Phase (September 2007 – September 2008Service Announcement Date – October 2008In service: 44 Months

Background

Item / Description Legacy SMS

Current Total Number of Sites in NCR

22 22

Sites w/ 10Mb connections 15 0

Sites w/ 100Mb connections 7 15

Sites w/ 1000Mb connections 0 7

Monthly Costs $95K $65K

Sample Client Competitive Case

• Current Service Status (44/ mths. from Service Announcement Date)

• Monthly Run Rate: $1M• Service Availability: 99.999% - service has not been

interrupted since it was installed (one dark-fibre cut on a remote site over 2 years)

• Are 4 data centers are dependent on it: PenMod, PayMod etc..

• Average fulfillment period per site: 25 days• On average 10 – 100x more bandwidth for the same

cost as outsourced services in the NCA• Current number of sites connected: 130• Current number of clients: 20• Big clients missing: DND 60 sites, CRA 25+sites,

HRSDC 22 sites.• Limitations: NCA only

Service Metrics

Local Area Network – As Is

Dept. A

Dept. B

Dept. C

Dept. D

Dept. n

• Many multi-tenant buildings • Redundant LAN infrastructures• VRF – VLAN mapping• Shared LAN Infrastructure• Voice / Video and Data virtualization• Price per port LAN model• LAN Service Levels standards

National Shared MPLS Network

Internet

DCN-A1(Data)

DCN-A2(Internet)

DCN-A3(Storage)

Department A

WAN A

• Each Department has three Data Centre Networks:

• One connects to the departmental WAN• One connects to SCNet (Internet Access)• One is dedicated for Storage connectivity

Current State Architecture

SCNet

Internet

DCN(Data, Storage &

Internet)

Department A

WAN A

Step 1 in DC Consolidation

- Consolidate & virtualize the DC Network –

• Each DCN that is consolidated with Save $$• Annual Savings Estimates:

Consolidate DCNs within Each Department

SCNet

Internet

Department A

WAN A

• Firewalls• IDS/IPS• Load Balancers• SRA Services• WiLAN Termination• Encryption Services • Etc..

Consolidate DCNs – Auxiliary Services

SCNet

DCN(Data, Storage &

Internet)

Internet

DCN-A1(Data)

DCN-A2(Internet)

DCN-A3(Storage)

Department A

WAN A

DCN-B1(Data)

DCN-B2(Internet)

DCN-B3(Storage)

Department B

WAN B

DCN-C1(Data)

DCN-C2(Internet)

DCN-A3(Storage)

Department C

WAN C

DCN-D1(Data)

DCN-D2(Internet)

DCN-D3(Storage)

Department D

WAN D

Multi-tenant Data Centres

Current State Architecture

SCNetSCNet SCNet SCNet

Internet

Shared Consolidated Data Center Network

Multi-tenant Data Centres – To Be

GCNet

One Data Centre Network per Data Center/ All departments• Integrated Storage and Server Networks• Integrated Firewalls / Load Balancing• Virtualized / Logically separate / Security Zones & Domains

Intra Data Centre Network Architecture – To Be

Department A Department B Department C Department D Department E Department n

Mezo-plan 5ITSM

Micro-plans ITSM

Stream 1

Stream 2

Stream 3

1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5

Planning & Governance

Mezo Plan Level:• GC-Wide ITSM Plan• PMO Assigned

Stream Level:• A Series of Related Initiatives• Broken down into small Micro Initiatives (MIs)• Stream length 4-6 quarters• One MI per quarter per stream• PM per Stream• Quarterly governance/alignment review

Micro Initiative (MI) Level:• Agile initiative• Portfolio of initiatives that are small and transformational• Under $4M in value• Must be able to complete in 3 month rolling window• PMP refers to this as “Rollling Wave”• X-Function (plan/build/operate/user teams)• Opportunity-based

MACROPLAN

FeedbackLearningMetricsChange &Risk Mgmt.WBSEtc.

Mezo-plan 2Mezo-plan 1 Mezo-plan 3 Mezo-plan 4Facilities Mainframe Platform Storage

M A C R O P L A N• High level• 8 Year View

• Indicative Business Case• Highlights Focus Areas

Micro-plans Facilities Micro-plans - MF Micro-plans Platform Micro-plans Storage

Stream 1

Stream 2

Stream 3

1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5

Stream 1

Stream 2

Stream 3

1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5

Stream 1

Stream 2

Stream 3

1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5

Stream 1

Stream 2

Stream 3

1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5

Planning, Governance & Alignment

• TB Sub• Policy & Standards

• Start with a competitive analysis

• Build an assumptive business case

• Validate the business case and service model via production beta implementations

• When the assumptions have been validated to to larger volume deployment

Lessons Learned

One Network