AARNet
Enterprise Architecture
EA Symposium
1-2 November 2006
2
AARNet - Background
•
•
•
•
3
1989 – Origin of the Internet in Australia
2000 – Started operating as a company - 38 Universities & CSIRO
2004 to 2006 - Build AARNet3 network – 35 staff, $30M turnover
2007+ Enable customers to meet their business objectives
Method for Review
After spending some time with David Bedwell (CSU), I took the following
approach:
1. Identify & Segment Stakeholders
People
4
2.
Model the Business Processes
3.
Analyse
a.
Stakeholders vs. Process
b.
Process vs. Systems
4.
Identify Priority Projects
5.
Develop Systems Architecture
Process
Technology
APL Stakeholder Segmentation
Customers
Directors of IT
IT Staff
Un-federated
Innovators
Researchers
Educators
Students
Suppliers
Shareholders
Strategic
Partners
Vice-Chancellors
& CEOs
APL
2. Roadmap for
Future
Connectivity
1. Building &
Operating Australia’s
Advanced R&E
Network
CEO
Chris Hancock
3. Developing
Applications &
Services
Carriers
4. Reaching Our
Communities
Finance &
Administration
Vendors
Don Robertson
Network Operations
Steve Maddocks
Network Design
Mark Prior
Project Management
Doug Farmer
Applications &
Services
James Sankar
Customer Account
Management
Rob Ewin
Middleware
Policy & Strategy
Alex Reid
Business
Development
Mary Fleming
Finance
Lee Ridge
Advisory
Committee
AAC Members
APL Board
Board Members
Government
DEST
DCITA
State
Jurisdictions
APL Process Model
Core Processes
1. Deliver Infrastructure & Services
Understand Cust
Rqts & APL
Strategy
Design & Build
Core
Infrastructure
Define &
Develop
Services
Provision
Services
2. Support Infrastructure & Services
ITIL Service Support Processes
Incident
Management
Change
Management
Problem
Management
Configuration
Management
Security
Management
3. Generate Income – Cover Costs
Develop
Pricing
Model
Business
Development
Customer
Billing
Enabling Processes
Business
Continuity
Management
Project
Management
Administrative
Support
HR Management
Procurement
…
ITIL Service Delivery Processes
Financial
Management
Capacity
Management
Service Level
Management
Availability
Management
IT Service
Continuity
Management
Security
Management
Governance Processes
Strategic Planning
Contract
Management
Risk Management
Compliance
…
I originally started too low-level…
Customer Billing Process
(“Service Provisioned” to “Invoice Sent”)
Map of existing process
A3 Service
Provisioned
Optical Service
Provisioned
Application
Provisioned
Customer
Relations
7
No procedure for
data validation or
exception alerts?
Summarise &
Format data.
Report on web
server
Activity Data
Collection
(A3)
Billing
Request
Billing
Request
Customers view
Activity Report
No procedure for
data validation or
exception alerts?
Summarise &
Format data.
Report on web
server.
Activity Data
Collection
(Apps)
Billing
Request
Report printed
from website and
manually entered
into excel
spreadsheet
Finance
Optical
Applications &
Infrastructure
Services
Group
Operations
Process Owner: Lee Ridge
S/sheet printed.
Manual entry to
Finance1
Rate activity data to
determine charges
(Quarterly)
Invoice data
entered
- Finance One
Copy of Invoice
should be
available for APL
staff to view
Generate
Customer Invoice
Invoice Sent to
Customer
Yes
Customer Issues
& Feedback
Invoice Errors?
Related Processes:
1. Service Provisioning
2. Accounts Receivable
No
Consolidate
Feedback
Feedback &
Requirements to
Process Owner
Doug Farmer
V1.0 19 July 2006
Process Recommendations
1. Service Development. Refine the process of defining and developing new services and
allocate overall responsibility for a “Product” life-cycle to an individual.
2. Service Support. The increasing number and diversity of services under support will
demand more formalised processes and thorough documentation. Selective adoption of
ITIL processes are recommended through to 2010. Key staff could attend introductory
ITIL training in 2007 to start the ball rolling.
3. Organisational separation of Service Development and Service Support.
Organisational separation will promote a more rigorous handover process, from
Development to Support and put support in the hands of staff with the appropriate
aptitude and skills.
4. Customer quotation and contracts. A defined work-flow for approval of any offers that
are put to customers needs to be put in place.
5. Security Management. With AARNet increasingly offering services beyond Internet
connections, there is a duty of care to safeguard the confidentiality and integrity of
customer data. The development of security policy and basic operational procedures are
recommended, in alignment with the ITIL framework.
8
ire
me
nts
ev
&S
3.
e
De
lop
tra
sig
teg
Se
n&
y
rvi
c
Bu
es
4.
i
l
dC
Pro
ore
vis
ion
Inf
ras
Se
5.
tru
r
vic
Inc
ctu
e
ide
s
re
nt
Ma
6.
na
Ch
ge
me
an
ge
nt
Ma
7.
na
Pro
ge
me
ble
nt
m
Ma
8.
n
ag
Co
em
nfi
en
gu
t
rat
ion
9.
Se
Ma
cu
na
rity
ge
me
Ma
nt
10
na
.D
ge
ev
me
elo
nt
pP
11
ric
.B
ing
us
Mo
ine
de
ss
l
D
12
e
ve
.C
lop
us
tom
me
nt
er
Bil
lin
g
&D
ne
Re
qu
2.
De
fi
tom
er
se
s
Cu
s
1.
oc
es
Process Value
to Stakeholders
1 = Low Value
2 = Moderate Value
3 = High Value
Pr
Analyse
Process Value to
Stakeholders
2
1
3
3
2
3
2
1
3
3
2
3
2
1
1
1
1
1
2
3
2
2
1
2
1
3
2
2
2
2
2
3
1
1
1
1
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
3
2
2
2
2
1
3
1
2
1
1
2
2
2
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
1
1
2
14
14
7
12
12
9
8
7
12
10
8
10
2
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
2
3
2
2
3
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
2
3
3
2
3
3
3
1
1
1
1
1
2
3
3
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
3
3
3
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
1
1
3
1
1
3
2
2
3
2
3
2
2
2
2
1
1
3
2
1
3
2
2
2
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
3
2
2
1
1
1
30
33
31
24
22
21
21
19
27
28
29
21
8.3 10.0 8.9
10.0 10.0 2.2
5.0
3.9
3.3
3.3
2.2
6.7
7.2
7.8
3.3
7.8
7.8
4.4
3.3
2.2
7.8
5.6
3.3
5.6
Stakeholders
Customers
IT Directors
IT Staff
Researchers
Educators
Students
Un-federated Innovators
Sub-Total: Value to Customers
Shareholders
VCs and CEOs
APL Board
Board Members
APL Advisory Committee
AAC Members
Government
DEST
DCITA
State Jurisdictions
Suppliers
Strategic Partners
Carriers
Vendors
TOTALS
Total value rating out of 10
Customer value rating out of 10
V0.1 Doug Farmer 25Sep2006
es
Cu
se
Str stom
s
a
2. tegy er R
De
eq
ui r
fin
em
e&
en
De
3.
ts
De
ve
&
l op
sig
n&
Se
r
4.
B
v
ice
uild
Pro
s
vis
Co
ion
re
I nf
5.
S
erv
ras
Inc
ice
tru
ide
ctu
s
nt
Ma
re
6.
na
Ch
ge
an
me
ge
nt
Ma
7.
na
Pro
ge
ble
me
m
nt
Ma
8.
Co
na
ge
nf i
gu
me
r at
nt
9.
ion
Se
Ma
cu
rity
na
ge
Ma
10
me
.D
na
nt
ge
ev
me
el o
nt
pP
11
ric
.B
ing
us
i ne
Mo
ss
de
12
De
l
.C
ve
us
lop
tom
m
er
en
Bil
t
lin
g
Analyse
0 = Gap
1 = Inadequate Process Support
2 = Adequate Process Support
3 = Strategic Process Support
Co
re
Pr
oc
1.
Core Processes v's
Systems
Systems
Process
vs.
Systems
Accounting
Finance One
1
Website / Intranet
Standard website
Content Management System
2
Knowledge / Document Management
wiki (Confluence)
Contract Management System
Business Records Management
Asset / Configuration Management
2
2
2
0
Workflow / Process
JIRA
0
2
3
0
2
3
Business Performance Management
BPM / Reporting Tool
0
0
Customer Relationship Management
None
Network Activity Measurement
Nagios
2
2
Billing & Customer Reports
A3 - NRTG Traffic Graphs
A3 - Traffic Tables
VoIP - Billing & Traffic Tables
Email & Calendar
Exchange
email archiving
SPAM / AV filtering
Desktop Applications
System Gaps
Inadequate System Support
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
3
V0.1 Doug Farmer 25Sep2006
Prioritisation of System Projects
Priority of System Projects (Boston Grid)
Process Number
Pain
12
8
3
5
10
11
6
4
2
9
7
1
Gain
11
System Recommendations
1.
Initiate system projects in the following priority areas:
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
2.
Business Performance Management / Reporting
Asset / Configuration Management
Improve function of Finance One
Contract Management
Document Management (with workflow)
Website (intranet / external) content management system
Spread-out system projects and use pilots to mitigate risk and maximise
user adoption. A costed Project Proposal should be used as the first step in initiating
a project.
12
APL Systems - Conceptual
Customers &
External Users
Internal Users
User
Data
Sources
User
User
User
Authentication
(LDAP)
Documents &
Meta-Data
Document
Management
& Work Flow
Documents
nt,
onte
ard c orts,
o
b
h
Das ard Rep s
t
d
Stan oc repor
H
d
A
Data Store
Business
Performance
Management
www.aarnet.edu.au
Accounting
System
Content Management
System
User
User
User
User
Transfer of
Relevant Data
Doug Farmer
V0.1 16Oct2006
KPIs and Dashboard - Core
KPIs and Processes
KPI
Core Processes
1. Customer Requirements & Strategy
2. Define & Develop Services
3. Design & Build Core Infrastructure
4. Provision Services
5. Incident Management
Response Time
Restoration Time
6. Change Management
7. Problem Management
8. Configuration Management
9. Security Management
10. Develop Pricing Model
Traffic Growth (on-net)
Traffic Growth (off-net)
Traffic Mix
11. Business Development
12. Customer Billing
Time to issue invoice
Billing Data Verification
Revenue Forecast
14
Metric
95% of responses <60min
95% restoration in <4hr
Reporting Method
Notes
TBA
TBA
Derived from JIRA
Derived from JIRA
<5% Variance YTD
<5% Variance YTD
% of traffic on-net
BPM dashboard
BPM dashboard
BPM dashboard
Actual v's Forecast % growth
Actual v's Forecast % growth
<10 days
<5% Variance
<5% Variance per month
Manual
BPM dashboard
BPM dashboard
SNMP data v's Netflow data
Actual v's Forecast - billed revenue
KPIs and Dashboard - Enabling
KPIs and Processes
KPI
Enabling Processes
a. Business Continuity
b. Project Management
c. Admin Support
d. HR Management
e. Procurement
f. Financial Management
Income & Expenses
CAPEX
Cash Balance
Days Debtors & Creditors
Metric
<5% Variance YTD
<5% Variance YTD
$
days
Reporting Method
BPM dashboard
BPM dashboard
BPM dashboard
BPM dashboard
g. Capacity Management
International Network Utilisation % utilisation (TBA - between BPM dashboard
40 and 50%)
A3 Backbone Utilisation
h. Service Level Management
i. Availability Management
A3 core availability
15
j. IT Service Continuity Management
k. Security Management
l. Strategic Planning
m. Contract Management
n. Risk Management
o. Compliance
Notes
Actual v's Forecast
Actual v's Forecast
Using "95th percentile bandwidth"
Need to review - may vary by link,
to allow for redundancy.
<50%
BPM dashboard
Using "95th percentile bandwidth"
Need to review - may vary by link,
to allow for redundancy.
>99.95%
BPM dashboard
Derived from JIRA