Upload
cameron-carroll
View
221
Download
3
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
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