THE DECISION:BUILD NEW vs. THE

CLOUD CS04 Case Study

Data Center World 2011Jerry Bishop, CIO SunGard Higher Education

Chippewa Valley Technical College

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License

Synopsys Phase 1: Renovation & Move Phase 2: Future Requirements Phase 3: Evaluating Cloud Phase 4: The Decision Phase 5: Strategy for Future State Wrap-up

Outline

Renovations displacing current data center Move to colocation site for ~18mo. to

assess

Requirement: New Level 7+ to Level 8 Build-out: $980,000 to $1,200,000 Operating costs: $55,500 / yr Breakeven point: 35 Years

85% Virtualized with all on SAN Consolidated infrastructure Applications moving to Cloud

Synopsys

PHASE 1RENOVATION & MOVE

Built 1970 1450 sq ft Raised floor 15 Racks 2 CRACs 1 UPS No Generator SPOF’s

Original Level 6 Data Center

Displaces the existing computer room

LIBRARY RENOVATION

New Learning Space

Rapid needs assessment◦ Surveyed anticipated future college needs◦ Reviewed likely government and private providers

Issued RFP for 18 months contract w/ options

Selected local colo provider Built new MDF on campus

Relocated over New Year’s weekend Total time: 5 months

Colocation

PHASE 2FUTURE REQUIREMENTS

Hired a Data Center Design-Build Firm Requirements Analysis

◦ Existing Level 6 capabilities and uses

◦ Projected future requirements

◦ Determine Reliability Level (Level 7+ to 8)

Developed Design-Build Specs◦ Design Power, Cooling, Fire Suppression, Security

◦ Develop Budget Estimates Construction Costs: $980,000 to $1,200,000 Annual Operating Costs: $55,500 / yr

Design-Build Analysis

525 ft2

ComputerRoom

Space Projections

SVR

SVR

SVRSVR

SVRSVR

NTW

NTW

NTW

NTW

PDU

PDU

CRAC

CRAC

100 ft2 Setup Area

240 ft2 Utility Area

Space Projections

PHASE 3EVALUATING CLOUD

“The NIST Definition of Cloud Computing”

On-demand self-service provisioning Broad network access Resource pooling Rapid elasticity, sometime automatically Measured service

Cloud Computing Characteristics

Software as a Service (SaaS)◦ Provider app’s running on cloud infrastructure

◦ Consumer may control application configuration

◦ Can include Integration as a Service solutions

Platform as a Service (PaaS)◦ Consumer controls apps but not the O/S

Infrastructure as a Service (IaaS)◦ Consumer controls O/S, apps, storage, network

but not underlying infrastructure

Cloud Service Models (NIST)

History & comfort with sourcing non-core services including IT

Colocation operational & political success Ending IT managed services in 2011 Strong interest in replacing ERP system General and IT budget constraints

◦ Data center not strategic Campus space at premium IT staffing a challenge for critical skills

Institutional Assessment

Already Delivering Apps to other schools

Community or Government Cloud Options State of Wisconsin Data Center

◦ Distance, limited services, budget uncertainty Regional Government Data Center

◦ CINC Community Area Network 19 member organizations Expanding to 275 miles of fiber Building 1350 sq mi WiMax

◦ UW Eau Claire Shared Data Center Similar requirements but no capital

Hybrid Cloud Assessment

Servers virtualized at 85%◦ Solaris 80% at 4:1 ratio

◦ Windows 85% at 6:1 ratio enterprise wide Main ESX clusters at 15:1 in data center

Storage 98% SAN (50TB) Remote site back-ups Citrix for desktop & remote access - 85 apps FY12 refreshing ESX, SAN, & Back-up Private fiber >10Gbps to 7 of 10 locations

Infrastructure Assessment

More likely than not all future applications would run as a service not on premise?

381 Applications in portfolio◦ Down from 521◦ 185 are instructional apps used in courses

Web site redesign eliminates ~25 more apps

Early success with ASP and SaaS Enterprise apps remain the main barrier

◦ Banner ERP system◦ BlackBoard CMS/LMS

Applications Assessment

Function On-Site CloudContact MgtEnrollmentRegistrationAssessmentsFinancial AidBackground Checks

Student Services

Function On-Site CloudTraditional DeliveryDistance & OnlineLecture CaptureProfessional Dev.Curriculum Dev.Business & IndustryCourse Scheduling

Academic Functions

OO

Function On-Site CloudCollege ResearchMarketingStrategic PlanningAdvancement OfficeGrants Admin

Administrative Functions

O

Function On-Site CloudFacilitiesHuman ResourcesFinanceAR/APPayrollBudgetingeCommerce

Operations Functions

Function On-Site CloudE-mail EmployeeE-mail StudentHelp DeskCollaborationPublic WebIntranetCommunications

IT Service Functions

Function On-Site CloudStudent Services ERPAcademic LMSAdministrative ERPOperations ERPIT Services

Applications Portfolio Summary

PHASE 3THE DECISION

Do NOT Build New Data Center◦ Not Strategic to College’s Mission

◦ 35yr Breakeven Too Long

◦ Other Capital and Space Needs are Priorities

Do NOT Build Shared Data Center w/ UWEC Extend Colocation for 12 months Execute Strategy

◦ Simplification, Consolidation & Preserving Options

The Decision

PHASE 3STRATEGY for FUTURE STATE

Consolidated (Converged) Infrastructure◦ CISCO UCS – Reducing footprint by 50%◦ Hybrid Cloud – Private, Public maybe Community◦ IaaS for Refresh Options on Storage and Back-Ups

Applications Strategy◦ ERP & LMS – SaaS or hosted options

Evaluate point solutions over big ERP suites◦ SaaS or Hosted preferred for anything new

◦ Integration as a Service for on-premise to cloud Desktop Strategy - MS BPOS or Google Apps

◦ Citrix from the cloud

Strategy – Simplify & Options

WRAP-UPThank-You & QuestionsThe Higher Ed CIO

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License