Windows 2000 Engineering
Infrastructure Services
Windows 2000 Sub-Projects
Table of Contents
Active Directory – AD Disaster Recovery........................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 1
Active Directory – AD Domain Strategy .......................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 2
Active Directory – AD OU Design ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 3
Active Directory – AD Security Model ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 4
Active Directory – AD Site Topology .............................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 5
Active Directory – Integrating AD with HR Systems ....................................................................................................................................................................................................... 6
Active Directory – Integrating Exchange 2000 with Windows 2000 ............................................................................................................................................................................... 7
Desktops – Automated Install ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 8
Desktops – Client Configuration....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 9
Desktops – IntelliMirror Documents and Settings .......................................................................................................................................................................................................... 10
Desktops – Norton AntiVirus 2000 (Corp. Ed. 7)........................................................................................................................................................................................................... 11
Desktops – PC Desktop Preparation ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 12
Desktops – SMS Software Re-Packaging ....................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 13
Exchange – Exchange 5.5 Hardware Consolidation ....................................................................................................................................................................................................... 14
Exchange – Fax Sr. 3.2 ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 15
General – Collapse Secondary Domains ......................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 16
General – Retire W2KAMER and DELLW2K Pilot Domains ....................................................................................................................................................................................... 17
General – Y2K (RC3 & RTM Staying Compliant) ......................................................................................................................................................................................................... 18
Infrastructure Applications – Clustering ......................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 19
Infrastructure Applications – DRAGNet ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 20
Infrastructure Applications – Emulators (OV4, Reflections, & CenterView) ................................................................................................................................................................ 21
Infrastructure Applications – GIP Tool Compatibility ................................................................................................................................................................................................... 22
Infrastructure Applications – Password Courier ............................................................................................................................................................................................................. 23
Infrastructure Applications – Virtual Private Networks ................................................................................................................................................................................................. 24
Networking – DHCP and DNS ....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 25
Networking – Upgrade Production Domain Controllers ................................................................................................................................................................................................. 26
Dell Confidential
i
3/9/2016
Windows 2000 Engineering
Infrastructure Services
Networking – WINS ....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 27
Servers – Data Migration Storage for Client Upgrades .................................................................................................................................................................................................. 28
Servers – Intranet ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 29
Servers – Legato Engineering ......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 30
Servers – Norton AntiVirus 2000 (Corp. Ed. 7) ............................................................................................................................................................................................................. 31
Servers – Proxy Server.................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 32
Servers – RADIUS.......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 33
Servers – SMS Reporting & Data Warehouse ................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 34
Servers – SMS Server Upgrades ..................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 35
Servers – Storage Solutions ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 36
Support – Engineering a Server Support Strategy .......................................................................................................................................................................................................... 37
Support – Enterprise Administrator (OU Compliant Version) ....................................................................................................................................................................................... 38
Support – March 31 Readiness ....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 39
Support – Ramp-Up of (SD)2 Support ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 40
Support – Ramp-Up of Server Support ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 41
Support – System Management with NetIQ ................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 42
Training – User Training ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 43
Dell Confidential
ii
3/9/2016
Windows 2000 Engineering
Infrastructure Services
Active Directory – AD Disaster Recovery
Project Manager: Fred Johnson
Associated Windows 2000 Project: Internal Adoption Project
Project Description:
Define, plan, test, and implement Windows 2000 Active Directory disaster recovery and disaster prevention including processes, procedures, and
best practices.
Objectives:
Assumptions / Dependencies:

Provide a comprehensive Windows 2000 Active Directory disaster recovery
and prevention plan.




Project Includes (Sub-Projects, Major Activities):



Project Does NOT Include:


Provide complete restore of Active Directory.
Identify tools/requirements necessary for AD disaster prevention such as
ADSUTIL for maintaining AD database health.
Identify tools/requirements necessary to perform incremental or partial
recovery of the AD
Challenges / Risks:


Personnel
Dell Confidential


Dependencies identified
Timeframe identified
Business Impact / Savings:
Minimize the risk of losing AD data.
Provide standard and controlled methods and tools for recovery of AD
information.
Resources:
Backup/recovery for any other systems or services.
Legato Windows 2000 Engineering
Progress to Date:
Covering and preparing for all possible disaster scenarios.
Adequate tools providing incremental or partial recovery of the AD do not yet
exist.
Approach:


Legato backup software will be used for AD tape backup/recovery.
Legato tape rotation will be used for standard archival of all AD components.
Coordination and planning must occur between the AD engineers, NOS Engineering,
Legato Engineering, and all related support groups.
Resources: Legato Engineering; AD Engineering, NOS Engineering
Q4/2000
2
Q1/2001
2
Q2/2001

Reduces or eliminates the costs associated with AD data loss.
Milestones:
Identify disaster recovery plan
Test plan in lab
Implement for AMERICAS (Feb 17th)
1
Q4/2000
Q1/2001
Q2/2001
X
X
X
3/9/2016
Windows 2000 Engineering
Infrastructure Services
Active Directory – AD Domain Strategy
Project Manager: David Lea / Eric Wood
Project Description:
Associated Windows 2000 Project: Internal Adoption Project
Develop overall strategy and design for the Windows2000 domain structure, as it applies to the Americas region, and integrates with the other regions (EMEA, APAC, JAPN).
Objectives:







Assumptions / Dependencies:
Scale the domains with efficiency and greater control
Simplify the domain model and reduce administration overhead
Define and build the DNS architecture
Validate the design in an isolated environment simulating the current
production architecture.
Define regional domain structure, site topology and OU’s for Americas.
Develop guideline for collapsing of Resource domains into OU’s.
Document requirements for creation of domains.
Project Includes (Sub-Projects, Major Activities):



DNS Namespace Design.
Design, test and document Active Directory Security Model
Develop a plan for collapse resource and secondary account domains.
Challenges / Risks:






Personnel
Dell Confidential
Project Does NOT Include:


Upgrading resource domains to Windows 2000 (collapse not upgrade).
Migrations from Netware



Top Level Domain structure designed, tested in isolated network (as dell.com) and
Piloted in production (as DellW2K). Also validated by Microsoft Program Mgrs.
Regional Domain (Americas) designed and upgraded in isolated lab to Windows
2000 child of dell.com and Piloted in production (as W2Kamer).
Discussions with outside groups (PG, mfg, NOSE) started to alleviate concerns.
Business Impact / Savings:
Define ideal domain structure for Dell with input from local and regional
engineering groups and Microsoft consultants.
Build framework in isolated lab and validate the design.
Host a complete design review between Dell and Microsoft teams
Create Top level domain (Dell.com) in Production.
Upgrade-in-place of Americas and begin collapsing secondary domains.
Resources:
No change in existing production infrastructure model.
No change in business objectives for which this strategy was designed to accomplish.
Progress to Date:
Recreating the production infrastructure on a small scale in an isolated
network for validation testing.
Designing the domain architecture based primarily on criteria subject to
change could cause domain migration/restructuring in the future.
Approach:



Q2/1999
3
Q3/1999
6
Q1/2000
6



“Upgrade In Place” approach will be much more efficient than building a new
Windows 2000 environment and migrating all users and computers to it.
Collapsing of resource domains will reduce asset costs (less hardware).
Coordinated management model will increase efficiency.
Milestones:
Define Dell.com Forest structure
Validate “Upgrade In Place” approach with
Dell.com root domain and regional account
domains
Pilot the strategy in production
Deploy strategy in AMERICAS
2
Q2/1999
Q3/1999
Q1/2000
X
X
X
X
3/9/2016
Windows 2000 Engineering
Infrastructure Services
Active Directory – AD OU Design
Project Manager: Eric Wood/David Lea
Associated Windows 2000 Project: AD Design & Implementation
Project Description:
Design, Test, Document and Deploy an OU model and management plan.
Objectives:
Assumptions / Dependencies:



Design an OU model that enables efficient and robust management and
administration of objects and policies in the Active Directory
Publish a recommendation on when an OU is appropriate and how the OU
model should be managed in the future.
Design an OU model that can change relatively abstracted from
reorganizations so that it is flexible and not subject to frequent changes.
Project Includes (Sub-Projects, Major Activities):




Investigating and documenting current resource management processes.
Designing, testing and documenting the OU model to facilitate and perhaps
improve on the existing management processes.
Deploying the OU Design
Document, communicate and build an OU change management process
Challenges / Risks:




Personnel
Dell Confidential
Project Does NOT Include:



Global OU Model (Requirements will differ per region)
Developing Group Policy Objects
Developing or modifying applications to be AD enabled.


Decided on a flat OU model until the HR systems and Remedy systems can be
integrated with the AD to automatically manage the location of objects in the OU’s.
Deployed the OU model in the production pilot
Business Impact / Savings:
Design flat OU structure, with minimum OU additions.
Coordinate with associated groups (PG, mfg, Online, etc) to address
management of OU concerns.
Coordinate with assoc. groups to include “Metabase” requirements.
Resources:


Appropriate involvement from Windows 2000 Engineering, GIP, NOS Engineering,
Desktop Engineering, Microsoft Consulting Services and IT Application Tools
Lab resources to validate the OU design
Need an understanding of how resources are managed in the businesses before an OU
model can be designed to incorporate or improve upon that management model.
Progress to Date:
Ensure administrative privileges over resources in secondary domains are
preserved through the collapse of those domains into OU’s.
Allow for future flexibility when integrating with HR db, etc.
Provide the flexibility to manage objects by classification or business segment
affiliation without increasing management overhead
Approach:



Q4/2000
2
Q1/2001
3
Q2/2001
3


Initial flat and simple design will add very little value
Managed OU model will provide for greater delegation, control of user settings and
application distribution.
Milestones:
Complete Flat OU design
Implement new structure (Pilot)
Implement new structure (Production)
Coordinate expanded OU design to
include HR db, etc.
3
Q4/2000
Q1/2001
Q2/2001
X
X
X
X
3/9/2016
Windows 2000 Engineering
Infrastructure Services
Active Directory – AD Security Model
Project Manager: Eric Wood
Associated Windows 2000 Project: AD Design & Implementation
Project Description:
Design, test, document and implement a security model for the Active Directory.
Objectives:


Assumptions / Dependencies:
Ensure existing security model is preserved at a minimum
Provide a security model which is more secure yet easier to manage.
Project Includes (Sub-Projects, Major Activities):




Documenting existing security policies.
Researching the needs of GIP and NOS Engineering for key security policy
requirements and inadequacies.
Evaluating how current administrative tools (EA) integrate with AD security
Researching Windows 2000 AD Security features, modeling several solutions
and testing, demonstrating each to determine the best solution for Dell.
Challenges / Risks:




Personnel
Dell Confidential
Project Does NOT Include:


Development of Group Policy Objects for workstations
PKI, Alternative or supplemental authentication mechanisms


The existing AMERICAS domain security settings have been documented.
Currently researching Windows 2000 AD security features, recommendations and
case studies.
Business Impact / Savings:
Identify and document existing security model
Research Windows 2000 AD Security and propose changes to the existing
security model.
Document and test the AD Security Model
Deploy the AD Security model
Resources:
Involvement from GIP, NOS Engineering and Microsoft Consulting Services
Lab resources to develop and test the security model
Progress to Date:
Improper design could render AD vulnerable to corruption, breach of security
policies or higher administrative costs.
It will be a challenge to get a clear understanding of the most appropriate
security model considering the time and other project distractions.
Approach:




Q4/2000
3
Q1/2001
3
Q2/2001
0


Increased security (granular access control, increased event auditing)
Delegation and Inheritance will allow for simpler, distributed administration.
Milestones:
Document existing security policies
Propose AD security model
Test and Document security model
Deploy AD Security model
4
Q4/2000
Q1/2001
Q2/2001
X
X
X
X
3/9/2016
Windows 2000 Engineering
Infrastructure Services
Active Directory – AD Site Topology
Project Manager: Fred Johnson
Associated Windows 2000 Project: Internal Adoption Project
Project Description:
Design, test, and implement Windows 2000 Active Directory site topology for the Americas region. Provide processes, procedures, and
recommended best practices for the engineering and support organizations.
Objectives:
Assumptions / Dependencies:


Design and implement a Windows 2000 Active Directory site topology design
for the Americas region.
Establish standards governing topology modifications/additions, naming
conventions, replication schedules, link costs, transports, subnet definitions,
etc.
Project Includes (Sub-Projects, Major Activities):




Project Does NOT Include:
Progress to Date:
Challenge: Reliability of facilities information and the possibility that this
information might change between now and the roll out.
Risk: Low
Approach:



AMERICAS domain must be upgraded before site topology can be implemented.
Site topology must be implemented prior to upgrading DCs in remote IBU locations.
Cooperation required between AD Engineering, Network Engineering, and NOS
Engineering teams.
Resources: AD Engineering, Network Engineering, NOS Engineering
Collect network and facilities information for Americas region.
Design production site topology.
Establish standards for managing site topology.
Challenges / Risks:




Personnel
Dell Confidential
Dependencies identified
Timeframe identified
Network and facilities information has been collected for Americas region.
Business Impact / Savings:
Identify network and facilities configurations in advance of roll out.
Design Americas region site topology and implement it immediately after
AMERICAS domain upgrade is complete.
Resources:



Q4/2000
2
Q1/2001
1
Q2/2001

Provides administrative control for localization of Windows authentication traffic,
global catalog access, and various other Windows 2000 services.
Milestones:
Identify site topology design
Test design in lab
Implement sites as part of AMERICAS upgrade
Expand/modify site design as IBUs are upgraded
5
Q4/2000
Q1/2001
Q2/2001
X
X
X
X
3/9/2016
Windows 2000 Engineering
Infrastructure Services
Active Directory – Integrating AD with HR Systems
Project Manager: Eric Wood
Associated Windows 2000 Project: AD Design & Implementation
Project Description:
Integrate organizational and personnel data in the HR systems with related attributes on users in the Active Directory to ensure compatibility.
Objectives:





Assumptions / Dependencies:
Leverage HR Systems to facilitate organizational changes
Ensure User attributes are as accurate as HR data
Ensure that the integration is supportable, reliable and scalable.
Develop a process by which changes are proposed, tested, managed and
deployed for existing or customer attributes and configurations.
Do not jeopardize the integrity or availability of the HR Systems
Project Includes (Sub-Projects, Major Activities):



Defining the realm of HR authority in AD, deciding on a Data Dictionary,
Attributes and OU management
Implementing a data migration solution between HR systems and the AD
Document the change management process
Challenges / Risks:




Personnel - AD
Personnel – HR
Personnel – GIP
Tech Writer
Dell Confidential
Project Does NOT Include:



Rewriting HR applications (Data Layer Join Only)
Personalization (Self Administration)
Changes to support processes

Nothing to report
Business Impact / Savings:

Build team (HR, AD, GIP)
Define data to be replicated to the AD
Design, test, document and deploy replication solution
Design, document and enforce change management process.
Resources:

Appropriate allocation of resources and prioritization to design, develop, test,
document and deploy the AD-HR Integration solution
Lab resources (5 servers, 100 MB switched network)
Progress to Date:
Reaching consensus on how the HR Systems and AD will integrate
Identifying “authoritative sources” for each attribute and assigning appropriate
security.
Ensuring that HR Systems availability is not affected
Getting appropriate resources and prioritization from HRIT personnel
Approach:





Q4/2000
1
1
1
Q1/2001
1
1
1

Q2/2001
1
2
1
1
Management of users can be more granular since the users will be organized in OU’s
which mirror the management structure of the businesses.
This enables several time saving applications such as workflow applications and
personalization
Milestones:
Team assembled
Data Model defined
Data Migration Design Complete
Data Migration Testing Complete
Data Migration Solution Deployed
Change Management Process Locked
6
Q4/2000
Q1/2001
Q2/2001
X
X
X
X
X
X
3/9/2016
Windows 2000 Engineering
Infrastructure Services
Active Directory – Integrating Exchange 2000 with Windows 2000
Project Manager: Chris Barkley
Associated Windows 2000 Project: Internal Adoption Project
Project Description:
Design and test the migration and integration of Exchange 5.5 & Exchange 2000 in the AMERICAS Windows 2000 domain.
Objectives:
Assumptions / Dependencies:


Ensure availability and supportability of services for messaging and Windows
networking during and after the migration to Exchange 2000.
Determine administration model for users and messaging services in Windows
2000 using Exchange 2000
Project Includes (Sub-Projects, Major Activities):



Engineering support for Exchange mixed mode deployment
Engineering & support model for Active Directory Connector (ADC).
Administration model for Exchange 2000 & Exchange 5.5 objects in Active
Directory (AD).
Challenges / Risks:








Personnel
Dell Confidential
Project Does NOT Include:




Windows 2000 Engineering team designing or deploying Exchange architecture
Exchange 2000 server engineering
Exchange 2000 internal engineering (routing groups, admin groups etc)
Exchange 2000 architecture (other than user and object administration)


Exchange 5.5 on NT4 in a Windows 2000 domain has been upgraded to Windows
2000 server running Exchange 2000 in the lab.
Exchange 5.5 has been deployed in the W2KAMER domain
Business Impact / Savings:
Setup a lab environment analogous to production environment for validation
testing.
Setup a pilot environment using W2Kamer
Test worldwide deployment of the ADC and schema updates in Pilot
Deploy Schema updates in production Windows 2000 AD.
Test migration of Exchange 5.5 to Exchange 2000 in AMERICAS.
Validate site topology, GC distribution model, OU model and replication
topology in the Windows 2000 AMERICAS.
Resources:


Heavy reliance on cohesion between the Exchange and Windows 2000, NOS
Engineering, & User Administration teams.
Windows 2000 will not be in mixed mode for an appreciable amount of time.
Worldwide deployments will be modeled in the US, and then repeated in regions
Progress to Date:
The Windows 2000 Engineering team has very little knowledge or experience
with the Exchange product and Exchange architecture at Dell
An inadequate design could cause a severe impact to the availability of
Windows networking and messaging services.
Exchange 2000 will have a dramatic impact on how the AD looks and will be
used. It may be necessary to re-evaluate some current assumptions regarding
AD deployment worldwide.
Approach:


Q4/2000
##
Q1/2001
##
Q2/2001
##



Integration of Exchange 2000 with Windows 2000 AD will allow for one replication
topology.
Integration will consolidate administrative tools and processes that were used to
manage user accounts and Exchange mailboxes separately in the past.
Network utilization should decrease (increasing available bandwidth) since there will
only be one replication topology and AD replication is so much more efficient on the
network.
Milestones:
Exchange 5.5 running in W2KAMER
ADC Replication Topology deployed
Administration model formalized
Site & replication topology / GC model
Exchange 2000 deployed
7
Q4/2000
Q1/2001
Q2/2001
X
X
X
X
X
3/9/2016
Windows 2000 Engineering
Infrastructure Services
Desktops – Automated Install
Project Manager: Robert Aschermann
Associated Windows 2000 Project: Internal Adoption Project
Project Description:
Develop an automated install process to deliver Windows 2000 Professional to desktop and notebook computers.
Objectives:





Assumptions / Dependencies:
Deploy a standardized desktop image across the Austin campus
Programmatically reduce the number of dialog boxes, and keystrokes
Reduce the number of reboots required to migrate a system to Windows 2000
Design and develop cost effective solutions
Design and develop a fast migration process
Project Includes (Sub-Projects, Major Activities):








Project Does NOT Include:
Progress to Date:
Project is CRITICAL to successful Win2000 client deployment
Shortage of Windows 2000 systems integration and development resources in
Desktop Engineering and support groups
Application not certified for Windows 2000
Deployment logistics and timeframes must meet business segment needs
Approach:

SAN solution in place for user data migration
PC hardware meets W2K and Dell minimum hardware standards
PC BIOS is configured to support Windows 2000
There will be multiple skill levels of users and technicians initiating the process
Dependent upon PC Desktop Preparation sub-project
Development of a plan for user data migration
Dependent on Win2000 Client Configuration sub-project
Challenges / Risks:






Personnel
Dell Confidential
Install image for IAP created and under evaluation as a corporate standard
Process mapping has begun on creating a start to finish automated install
Utilities and tools are being identified/developed to facilitate an automated process
Business Impact / Savings:
Work backwards from standard image and standard h/w configuration to
develop process capable of delivering Win2000 to the desktop with minimum
user/tech interaction
Search for 3rd party ISVs with solutions to data migration, etc.
Coordinate with business segments for logistics and planning considerations
Develop change log and tracking capabilities to monitor effectiveness of
images.
Resources:



Q4/2000
4
Q1/2001
8
Q2/2001
6




An automated install will reduce deployment costs
An automated install will increase desktop configuration consistency
An automated install will allow some internal groups to convert their systems without
the use of dedicated technicians
An automated install will prepare Dell for future OS migrations as well as post
migration support tasks such as rebuilding systems
Milestones:
Lock desktop image configuration
Identify tools and utilities
Integrate tools and utilities
Develop tracking capabilities
Develop deployment logistics
Lock automated images and processes
8
Q4/2000
Q1/2001
Q2/2001
X
X
X
X
X
X
3/9/2016
Windows 2000 Engineering
Infrastructure Services
Desktops – Client Configuration
Project Manager: Robert Aschermann
Associated Windows 2000 Project: Internal Adoption Project
Project Description:
Define standard client configuration requirements for Windows 2000 Professional including group policies and other desktop technologies that
support a managed environment.
Objectives:
Assumptions / Dependencies:




Provide a manageable, secure, and standard W2K desktop environment
Ensure ease of future OS upgrades
Engage application development teams to develop standards
Work to be completed with business segment involvement.
Project Includes (Sub-Projects, Major Activities):




Project Does NOT Include:
Progress to Date:
Project is CRITICAL to successful Win2K client implementation
Currently have few standards, so we start from scratch
Apps must be written to support any standards
There is no benefit from WKS upgrade w/o a standard configuration
Approach:






Create a standard desktop configuration deliverable with an automated install process
Requires a stabilized AD OU design
SAN architecture in place for user documents/settings and profile storage
Definition of enterprise-wide Group Policy Objects
Profiling users, teams, and apps for security, privilege, and app dependencies
Building standard images and custom configurations based on profiles
Developing desktop security standards.
Challenges / Risks:







Personnel
Dell Confidential
Image branding and tracking facilities defined.
Business Impact / Savings:
Engage app teams and gather requirements
Profile user base based on apps, departments, security needs
Build consensus between engineering and app teams on configurations
Design OU and GPO to support agreed upon configurations
Build images and automated install to deliver configurations
Brand and track images to ensure they are being used.
Resources:

Q4/2000
2
Q1/2001
4
Q2/2001
2




Well-developed standard configurations improve manageability and recoverability of
workstation environment
Reduced risk/cost to deploy future OS upgrades
Allows us to protect user data and settings.
Provide app teams with a common configuration for developing apps reduces app
development complexity.
Milestones:
Requirements from app teams
Approved configurations
Update login scripts
Define GPOs and user profiles
Standard desktop configs in place
9
Q4/2000
Q1/2001
Q2/2001
X
X
X
X
X
3/9/2016
Windows 2000 Engineering
Infrastructure Services
Desktops – IntelliMirror Documents and Settings
Project Manager: Robert Aschermann
Associated Windows 2000 Project: Internal Adoption Project
Project Description:
Enable recoverability and security of user data through the implementation of IntelliMirror technologies.
Objectives:



Assumptions / Dependencies:





Provide protection of user data and settings
Increase system uptime by protecting system state
Provide offline data synchronization for notebook users
Project Includes (Sub-Projects, Major Activities):




Helping to define SAN requirements
Designing the W2K client configuration to support IntelliMirror
Development of Group Policy Object (GPO)
Network bandwidth must be evaluated before implementing IntelliMirror
Challenges / Risks:




Approach:
Personnel
Dell Confidential
Project Does NOT Include:


Enabling automated recovery of client machines
Win2000 clients must be in place; IntelliMirror is just an enabling architecture.
Progress to Date:
User data requirements may exceed home share space
Unknown impact on Network (especially bandwidth, file servers)
Requires major resource commitment from DME and NOS Engineering
SAN solution implementation timeframe
Resources:
SAN solution is in place
A DFS solution is in place
HomeShare quotas are in place
Roaming user profiles are defined and in place
An active directory OU structure must be in place

Research of IntelliMirror capabilities
Business Impact / Savings:



Q4/2000
1
Q1/2001
2
Q2/2001
2
User uptime will be increased through protection of user data and user settings
User uptime will be increased through system state recoverability
File synchronization will allow notebook users to access certain network files w/o
being connected to network
Milestones:
Roaming user settings defined
Roaming user setting implemented
Roaming user documents implemented
10
Q4/2000
Q1/2001
Q2/2001
X
X
X
3/9/2016
Windows 2000 Engineering
Infrastructure Services
Desktops – Norton AntiVirus 2000 (Corp. Ed. 7)
Project Manager: Leslie Ford
Associated Windows 2000 Project: Internal Adoption Project
Project Description:
Review, test, and deliver an anti-virus solution for Win2000 desktops, pilot and productionalization.
Objectives:
Assumptions / Dependencies:








Test client NAV functionality
Set security configuration for Win2000 client systems
Document and deliver the NAV configurations to Desktop Engineering
Determine use of NAV2000 versus Corp.Ed.7 for productionalization

Project Includes (Sub-Projects, Major Activities):






Project Does NOT Include:
Coordinating a Win2000 desktop for GIP NAV testing
Coordinating NAV for Exchange functional configurations with the Messaging Team
Testing NAV functionality on standard Win2000 desktop
Develop and document secure NAV configuration
Deliver documented secure NAV configuration
Test Win2000 desktop, with NAV2000 configured, to use current LiveUpdate architecture
Challenges / Risks:










Personnel
Dell Confidential

Y2K or Win2000 certification for NAV for Exchange
Testing or implementing NAV for Exchange on Win2000 desktops
Distribution of NAV in 2000 domains


Determined that we will use NAV2000 for Win2000 pilot
Y2K test scripts have been outlined
Business Impact / Savings:
Y2K certify NAV2000 by 11/9/99
Deliver NAV for exchange 1.9 settings to Messaging team by11/5/99
Configure, test and document NAV2000 client configuration on 11/15/99 and 11/16/99
Deliver NAV2000 client configuration to Desktop Engineering with documentation on
11/17/99
Test Win2000 desktop, with NAV 2000 configured & current LiveUpdate architecture
Begin looking at Corp.Ed.7 on 1/3/00
Determine if going with NAV2000 or Corp.Ed.7 for bulk Win2000 rollout by 2/14/00
Corp.Ed.7 full productionalization dependent on 2/14/00 decision
Test LiveUpdate on Win2000 boxes in Q1 FY01
Upgrade LiveUpdate boxes to Win2000 in Q2 FY01
Resources


Progress to Date:
Ensure NAV is on data share, file and print, and exchange servers prior to production
Limited functionality of NAV2000 – functionality is not intuitive
Don’t have a final release for Corp.Ed.7
Exchange team does not test NAV2000
Approach:




Y2K certification for NAV2000
Timely involvement with Exchange build prior to production
Timely involvement of Symantec with the Dell exchange team
Timely support from Symantec for troubleshooting
Win2000 desktop available for testing
Q4/2000
Q1/2001
Q2/2001
1
1
3

Protect data on Win2000 desktops
Milestones:
1. Y2K certify NAV2000 for client
2. Deliver NAV2000 desktop configuration
3. Determine NAV product for full deployment
4. Corp.Ed.7 full productionalization
5. Upgrade LiveUpdate boxes to Win2000
11
Q4/2000
X
X
Q1/2001
Q2/2001
X
X
X
3/9/2016
Windows 2000 Engineering
Infrastructure Services
Desktops – PC Desktop Preparation
Project Manager: Robert Aschermann
Associated Windows 2000 Project: Internal Adoption Project
Project Description:
Perform any necessary upgrades to desktop PCs to ensure that PCs meet minimum Windows 2000 standards including BIOS versions, supported
hardware, and memory.
Objectives:
Assumptions / Dependencies:




Upgrade BIOS to a version compatible with Windows 2000
Configure ACPI BIOS to be compatible with Windows 2000
Upgrade all hardware to W2K supported hardware and Dell min. requirements
Replace desktop PCs that can’t be upgraded
Project Includes (Sub-Projects, Major Activities):


Developing SMS reporting capabilities
Developing streamlined hardware procurement processes
Challenges / Risks:



Personnel
Dell Confidential
Project Does NOT Include:


Beginning to map processes and engage other teams for planning
Business Impact / Savings:
Engage SMS team to develop SMS reporting capabilities
Engage Onsite teams to develop logistics for upgrades
Engage Hardware Refresh team to prepare for PC replacements
Resources:
SMS client installed on all PCs and reporting hardware data
SMS reporting available
Onsite and/or install technicians available to perform upgrades
Sufficient hardware and procurement procedures available for large scale upgrades
Progress to Date:
Developing SMS reporting architecture is a large undertaking
Logistics and coordination of technicians will be a challenge
Currently, assumptions amount of work to be done is not based on hard data
Approach:







Q4/2000
4
Q1/2001
25
Q2/2001
10



Further saturation of SMS client
SMS reporting capabilities
Prepared for Windows 2000 conversion
Milestones:
Project plan approved
SMS reporting architecture approved
SMS reports available
Procurement processes in place
Upgrades complete
12
Q4/2000
Q1/2001
Q2/2001
X
X
X
X
X
3/9/2016
Windows 2000 Engineering
Infrastructure Services
Desktops – SMS Software Re-Packaging
Project Manager: Robert Aschermann
Associated Windows 2000 Project: Internal Adoption Project
Project Description:
Build any new software distribution packages needed for Windows 2000 and test/verify all software distribution packages are compatible with
Windows 2000/SMS.
Objectives:
Assumptions / Dependencies:




Verify install manager (version 8.0 should do MSI files)
Verify compatibility of all software distribution packages with W2K
Design specification for DellSoft pull control
Forms, communications, processes for application teams
Project Includes (Sub-Projects, Major Activities):





Compatibility testing/verification of all software distribution packages on Dell
Soft Standard through Select categories with Windows 2000
Validating install manager 8.0 for MSI files
Building a pull control for DellSoft web site
Develop a process for requesting SMS package creation
Develop a process for creating collections (security)
Challenges / Risks:




Personnel
Dell Confidential
Project Does NOT Include:





Site Server upgrades
Distribution server upgrades
Upgrade of SMS clients
Upgrade of non GDE owned servers
Upgrading Distribution servers to DFS


Microsoft has stated that SMS 2.0 SP2 is required to provide optimal support for
Windows 2000. A beta version of SP2 will be available by late January.
DellSoft Web Control in Alpha testing
Business Impact / Savings:
Test/Verify compatibility of all application/package builds on Windows 2000
in lab environment.
Perform limited distribution to pilot groups
Complete full distribution to production environment
Resources:
Systems Management Server 2.0 SP2 installed on all site servers
SQL Server 7.0 SP1 installed on all site servers
AMERICAS domain is upgraded to Windows 2000
US-DELL domain is merged into Windows 2000 domain
Distribution servers running DFS
Progress to Date:
Custom DellSoft application builds – undocumented and unknown
dependencies
Possible incompatibilities between W2K and NT4, may need separate
packages
Approach:






Q1/2001
2.0
Q2/2001
3.0
Q3/2001
1.0

Verification of compatibility before production installation of Windows 2000 will
insure that support costs are minimized
Milestones:
Test SMS client on Win2k
Test all application/package builds
Resolve all issues
Install in production
13
Q1/2001
Q2/2001
X
X
X
X
3/9/2016
Windows 2000 Engineering
Infrastructure Services
Exchange – Exchange 5.5 Hardware Consolidation
Project Manager: Chris Barkley
Associated Windows 2000 Project: Internal Adoption Project
Project Description:
Ensure that the existing Exchange 5.5 infrastructure continues to operate once the AMERICAS domain has been upgraded to Windows 2000.
Objectives:


Assumptions / Dependencies:
Ensure Exchange 5.5 infrastructure operates in a Windows 2000 Domain
Identify benefits and drawbacks of running Exchange 5.5 on Windows 2000
Project Includes (Sub-Projects, Major Activities):





Test Exchange 5.5 on an NT4 server in a Windows 2000 domain in the lab.
Test Exchange 5.5 functionality on a Windows 2000 server in the lab
Deploy Exchange 5.5 on an NT 4 server in the Windows 2000 Pilot domain
Prepare an Exchange 5.5 server on NT4 in the lab for the AMERICAS domain
upgrade testing.
Document Exchange 5.5 compatibility on Windows 2000 servers and in a
Windows 2000 domain.
Challenges / Risks:

Project Does NOT Include:



Engineering the Active Directory Connector replication topology
Upgrading production Exchange servers to Exchange 2000
Upgrading existing Exchange servers to Windows 2000



Exchange 5.5 has been tested on a Windows 2000 server (no issues)
Exchange 5.5 has been tested in the Windows 2000 pilot domain (no issues)
Exchange 5.5 has been tested in a the Windows 2000 pilot domain on an NT 4.0
server.
Business Impact / Savings:
Upgrade Exchange 5.5 server to Windows 2000 in lab and test functionality
Install Exchange 5.5 server into production pilot Windows 2000 domain
Resources:
Exchange engineer must determine and document that Exchange 5.5 operates
correctly once the AMERICAS domain is upgraded to Windows 2000 in the isolated
lab.
Progress to Date:
The Windows 2000 Engineering team has very little experience or knowledge
of the Exchange product or production architecture.
Approach:



Q4/2000
Q1/2001
Q2/2001


No business impact is expected for Exchange 5.5 once AMERICAS is upgraded
Administrative tasks are easier if Exchange 5.5 runs on Windows 2000 servers
Milestones:
Exchange 5.5 in W2KAMER pilot
Personnel
Dell Confidential
2
2
Q4/2000
Q1/2001
Q2/2001
X
1
14
3/9/2016
Windows 2000 Engineering
Infrastructure Services
Exchange – Fax Sr. 3.2
Project Manager: Lisa Larson
Associated Windows 2000 Project: Internal Adoption Project
Project Description:
Upgrade current version of Fax Sr. Enterprise server, 3.0.2, to Windows 2000 compatible version, Fax Sr. 3.2.
Objectives:
Assumptions / Dependencies:


Continue to provide electronic fax services integrated with Windows 2000
Active Directory and Exchange 5.5
Provide electronic fax services integrated with Exchange 2000 and compatible
with the Windows 2000 infrastructure
Project Includes (Sub-Projects, Major Activities):





Testing Fax Sr 3.x with Windows 2000 AD and Exchange 5.5
Testing and piloting Fax Sr 3.2 gateway service for Exchange 2000
Testing and piloting send and receive capabilities with digital modems
Test compatibility of product with digital modem boards
Testing and piloting new client software add-in products associated with the
Fax Sr 3.2 release
Challenges / Risks:



Personnel
Dell Confidential
Project Does NOT Include:



Exchange 2000 deployment
Development or support of the API available within Fax Sr 3.2
Development or support of workflow applications that use Fax Sr capabilities

Envisioning
Business Impact / Savings:



Test Windows 2000 compatibility
Test digital modem board compatibility
Test Exchange 2000 compatibility
Pilot 3.2 Fax Sr server on one production server
Deploy 3.2 to all remaining Fax Sr production servers
Resources:
This project is dependent on the schedule timeline for the Exchange 2000 deployment
Regional messaging support teams will deploy Fax Sr 3.2 on all production servers
after pilot has been completed
Progress to Date:
Support resources available to deploy product to production servers
No beta release available to begin testing
Firm product release date given the aggressive Windows 2000 rollout
schedule
Approach:







Q4/2000
1
Q1/2001
1
Q2/2001
Better API for application development
Mandatory upgrade required for Windows 2000 compatibility
No impact to electronic fax service
Milestones:
W2K AD and Exchange 5.5 gateway
Windows 2000 compatibility
Digital modem board compatibility
Exchange 2000/Fax Sr gateway
Pilot
Deploy
15
Q4/2000
Q1/2001
Q2/2001
X
X
X
X
X
X
3/9/2016
Windows 2000 Engineering
Infrastructure Services
General – Collapse Secondary Domains
Project Manager: Fred Johnson & Andy Walker
Associated Windows 2000 Project: Internal Adoption Project
Project Description:
Collapse or decommission the NT 4.0 resource domains within the Americas region after the AMERICAS domain has been upgraded to Windows
2000.
Objectives:
Assumptions / Dependencies:


Reduce number of servers supporting the Windows environment.
Collapse or decommission the NT 4.0 resource domains within the Americas
region.
Project Includes (Sub-Projects, Major Activities):


Test and pilot of W2K native migration tools.
Collapsing of Americas resource domains.
Challenges / Risks:


Personnel
Dell Confidential
Project Does NOT Include:




Dell On-Line
Manufacturing
DCSS or Geotel
US-POCLAB

Meeting of teams has been held and a plan has been documented.
Business Impact / Savings:

TBD
Resources:


Remote resource domains will be collapsed in parallel w/ AMERICAS BDC
upgrades
Coordinate visits to remote locations with AMERICAS DC upgrades
Two (2) Austin staff members will visit each remote site (CA, MX, BR, Nashville)
Progress to Date:
Communication to users and support staff around schedule and effort.
Tight schedule.
Approach:


Q4/2000
1
Q1/2001
2
Q2/2001
The benefit to collapsing the resource domains is the elimination of additional
domain controller servers and the administration that goes along with them. This will
save Dell both time and money.
Milestones:
Complete test of W2K migration tools
Complete test of RD collapse in lab
Collapse production resource domains
16
Q4/2000
Q1/2001
Q2/2001
X
X
X
3/9/2016
Windows 2000 Engineering
Infrastructure Services
General – Retire W2KAMER and DELLW2K Pilot Domains
Project Manager: Fred Johnson
Associated Windows 2000 Project: Internal Adoption Project
Project Description:
Define, plan, and retire the Windows 2000 Supported User Pilot domain infrastructure.
Objectives:

Assumptions / Dependencies:
Shutdown / eliminate the Windows 2000 supported user pilot domains.



Project Includes (Sub-Projects, Major Activities):





Relocate SUP computers and users from W2KAMER to AMERICAS
Disable automated cloning processes on DCs
Remove SUP DCs from Legato backup rotation
Remove trusts between W2KAMER and production domains
Using DCPROMO, demote all DCs to servers and remove domains
Challenges / Risks:

Personnel
Dell Confidential




Collapsing resource domains
Client upgrades
Dependencies identified
Timeframe identified
Business Impact / Savings:



Minimize user impact.
Resources:
Project Does NOT Include:
Progress to Date:
Performing the transition with minimal impact to users
Approach:

AMERICAS domain must be upgraded before relocating SUP computers and users
Legato backup server will be transitioned to AMERICAS domain prior to retiring the
pilot domains
Resources: NOS Engineering, SD2, CARS
Q4/2000
1
Q1/2001
1
Q2/2001
No immediate cost to the business.
Fewer systems and environments to support.
Hardware to be redeployed in production roll out.
Milestones:
Identify plan to retire pilot domains
Test plan in lab
Move computers and users to AMERICAS
Retire SUP domains (March – April 2000)
17
Q4/2000
Q1/2001
Q2/2001
X
X
X
X
3/9/2016
Windows 2000 Engineering
Infrastructure Services
General – Y2K (RC3 & RTM Staying Compliant)
Project Manager: Andy Walker
Objectives:



Associated Windows 2000 Project: Internal Adoption Project
Assumptions / Dependencies:



Certify Windows 2000 to be Y2K compliant
Certify each RC release
Certify RTM code
Project Includes (Sub-Projects, Major Activities):

Documenting and filing reports with the millennium office
Challenges / Risks:

Personnel
Dell Confidential





The purchase of new software
The purchase of new hardware
Regional deployment
Fundamental changes in how we do business today
Windows 2000 RC2 has been certified, testing and contingency plans have been
filed and approved by the millennium office
Business Impact / Savings:
Follow the standard template provided by the Millennium Office to test
software
Resources:
Project Does NOT Include:
Progress to Date:
Windows 2000 will not be Y2K compliant
Approach:

Baseline testing will be done with Windows 2000 RC2
Each subsequent release candidate will be tested
RTM code will be tested after Dell receives code
Q4/2000
1
Q1/2001
Q2/2001

Windows 2000 is the next generation operating system from Microsoft. By ensuring
Windows 2000 to be not susceptible to the Y2K issue we can move forward with a
more reliable and stable network.
Milestones:
Win2000 RC2 test
Win2000 RC3 test
RTM code test
18
Q4/2000
Q1/2001
Q2/2001
X
X
X
3/9/2016
Windows 2000 Engineering
Infrastructure Services
Infrastructure Applications – Clustering
Project Manager: Matt Brooks - CDSE
Associated Windows 2000 Project: Full Deployment
Project Description:
The purpose of this project is to explore high availability features and to define configuration standards for clustering Windows 2000 Advanced
Server.
Objectives:




Assumptions / Dependencies:
Develop a standard build document for clustering with Advanced Server.
Conduct performance and reliability analysis of Windows 2000 clusters.
Full regression testing with OFS, OPS and MS SQL cluster releases.
Identify potential problems and risks.
Project Includes (Sub-Projects, Major Activities):





MSCS
Network Load Balancing (NLB)
Oracle Fail Safe
Oracle Parallel Server
MS SQL Cluster Manager



Personnel
Dell Confidential
Fully configured Windows 2000 AS image created for the PE63x0 class machine
using build 2914 (post RC3 release).
Preliminary two-node cluster built and configured for testing.
Business Impact / Savings:
Create a configured image for accelerated crash and burn testing.
Build a two-node environment using the Windows 2000 AS image.
Compare functionality and fail-over performance against MSCS 1.0.
Install and test a Windows 2000 compatible version of OFS.
Install and test MS SQL in both active/active and active/passive
configurations.
Resources:
Windows 2000 Data Center (included on a separate project due to delayed
availability).
Windows 2000 Direct SAN (contingent on the release of Windows 2000 Data
Center).
Progress to Date:
No risk to production due to isolated testing in a development environment.
Approach:





Compatible hardware for testing will continue to be available.
Compatible releases of Oracle and MS SQL will soon be available for testing.
Final release of Windows 2000 AS will soon be available.
Project Does NOT Include:

Challenges / Risks:




Q4/2000
1
Q1/2001
1
Q2/2001
1


Significantly reduced downtime due to system related failures.
Higher performance and throughput for business critical databases and applications.
Milestones:
Windows 2000 AS PE63x0 image
2-node cluster built and configured
19
Q4/2000
Q1/2001
Q2/2001
X
X
3/9/2016
Windows 2000 Engineering
Infrastructure Services
Infrastructure Applications – DRAGNet
Project Manager: Andy Walker
Associated Windows 2000 Project: Internal Adoption Project
Project Description:
Certify DRAGNet to run on Windows 2000 RC2. The majority of this work will be handled by Desktop Engineering with Pat Pitre as point.
Objectives:

Assumptions / Dependencies:


Provide remote access to users running Windows 2000
Project Includes (Sub-Projects, Major Activities):


Test UUNet patch utilizing components of DRAGNet
Test functionality of the upgraded DRAGNet application under Windows
2000
Challenges / Risks:


Personnel
Dell Confidential






The purchase of new software
The purchase of new hardware
Regional deployment
Fundamental changes in how we do business today
MCI is aware of the problem and is working to provide Dell a version of the software
that is Windows 2000 certified
UUNet has provided a work around but testing and refinement are required
Business Impact / Savings:
Test different hardware configurations with DRAGNet and simulated
“remote” calls
Resources:
Project Does NOT Include:
Progress to Date:
DRAGNet is not currently compatible with Windows 2000
MCI owns DRAGNet
Approach:

MCI will provide a working version of DRAGNet for Win2K
No client upgrades can take place if the targeted segment is reliant on DRAGNet
connectivity.
Q4/2000
2
Q1/2001
2
Q2/2001
2

DRAGNet is the tool that allows remote users find the most appropriate phone
number to dial to connect to Dell net. This tool reduces costs by having remote users
dial a local number rather than using existing 1-800 numbers.
Milestones:
Start Testing UUNet patch
Receive beta software for
DRAGNet
Start test new DRAGNet client
Rollout to production new DRAGNet
client
20
Q4/2000
Q1/2001
Q2/2001
X
X
X
X
X
3/9/2016
Windows 2000 Engineering
Infrastructure Services
Infrastructure Applications – Emulators (OV4, Reflections, & CenterView)
Project Manager: David Lea
Associated Windows 2000 Project: Internal Adoption Project
Project Description:
Verify the compatibility of the client side emulators OV4, Reflections, and CenterView with Windows2000.
Objectives:


Assumptions / Dependencies:
Test and verify functionality of all three emulators on a Windows2000 client.
Verify that there are no cross-domain authorization issues.
Project Includes (Sub-Projects, Major Activities):

Test the client capabilities of the three emulators.
Challenges / Risks:

Personnel
Dell Confidential
Project Does NOT Include:




Server-side compatibility (Unix/VAX/etc)
Meeting held to discuss testing ramifications with VAX member(s).
George Franklin has submitted WCA for a second workstation.
Contacted Steve Beacham regarding OV4 testing; need to meet/plan.
Business Impact / Savings:
Test OV4 emulator for Windows 2000 compatibility.
Test Reflections emulator for Windows 2000 compatibility.
Test Lucent CenterView emulator for Windows 2000 compatibility.
Resources:
George Franklin will acquire a secondary workstation for testing.
George Franklin will join the Windows 2000 Supported User Pilot.
Progress to Date:
Acquisition of a second workstation for testing.
Approach:





Q4/2000
1
Q1/2001
0
Q2/2001
0

Verification of these standard apps will ensure no loss of productivity when the
Windows2000 full deployment begins in 2000.
Milestones:
Testing of OV4 emulator
Testing of Reflections emulator
Testing of CenterView emulator
21
Q4/2000
Q1/2001
Q2/2001
X
X
X
3/9/2016
Windows 2000 Engineering
Infrastructure Services
Infrastructure Applications – GIP Tool Compatibility
Project Manager: Leslie Ford
Project Description:
Associated Windows 2000 Project: Internal Adoption Project
Ensure compatibility of security tools running on Win2000 servers, running against Win2000 systems, and pulling data from Win2000 servers. These include Proxy, Exchange,
DHCP, Intrusion Detection, System Security scanner, and GIP SQL data-warehouse and web page.
Objectives:






Assumptions / Dependencies:
Ensure compatibility with DC, Proxy, ISS, and Exchange on Win2000.
Test GIP-Mart, ISS, and CA running on Win2000.
Ensure IDS engines and database run on Win2000
Ensure security scanner runs on and against Win2000 servers and clients
Ensure Certificate Authority runs on Win2000 server and signs Win2000/Office 2K objects
Upgrade GIP-Mart, ISS, and CA to Win2000.
Project Includes (Sub-Projects, Major Activities):






Setting up GIP-Mart to gather information from new sources other from
those currently existing
Win2000 certifying SQL, evt.dump or 3 rd party tools
Win2000 certifying any data sources

None
Business Impact / Savings:

Determine compatibility of 3rd party tools
Test existing pull scripts against Win2000 sources to see what’s broken.
Test ISS tools and CA on Win2000 systems and against Win2000 systems
Test GIP-Mart, CA, and ISS running on Win2000
Upgrade boxes
Resources:

Progress to Date:
ISS, CA, PKI, evt.dump, and SQL compatibility – these are third party applications
ISS Engine compatibility is not likely with current version
Stability of Proxy loads.
Productionalization of GIP-Mart prior to Y2K
Approach:





GIP-Mart ready for productionalization.
Third party tools & data-pull scripts Win2000compatible.
Proxy loads stabilize in NT4 or improve with Win2000.
Upgrade to Win2000 will not reduce stability of GIP-Mart.
Code changes will not negatively affect GIP-Mart, CA, or ISS.
Minimal changes required for DC, Proxy, Exchange, NAV, CA & ISS.
DC, Proxy, DHCP, NAV Win2000 systems must be available.
Receive patches for Certificate Authority and ISS system scanner and IDS
Project Does NOT Include:
Test pulling logs from Win2000 DC, Proxy, NAV & Exchange once pilot systems are built.
Test pull and reporting code on Win2000 system.
Confirm SQL, ISS, and evt.dump, CA, and PKI Win2000 compatibility.
Upgrade system resources if necessary and GIP-Mart to Win2000.
Challenges / Risks:












Q4/2000
Q1/2001
Q2/2001
Does not impact business
Milestones:
Q4/00 Q1/01 Q2/01 Q3/01 Q4/01
GIP-Mart, ISS, & CA on Win2000 Server
Personnel
1
1
2
1.
2.
3.
4.
Confirm 3rd party tools are Win2000 compatible
Build Win2000 test GIP-Mart and ISS boxes
Test GIP-Mart, CA, and ISS on Win2000 boxes
Upgrade production GIP-Mart, CA, and ISS boxes
X
X
X
X
Functionality with Win2000 sources
1.
2.
3.
4.
Dell Confidential
Test GIP-Mart data pulls
Test ISS scans and IDS against Win2000
Test CA on Win2000 code and objects
Document and confirm compatibility
22
X
X
X
X
3/9/2016
Windows 2000 Engineering
Infrastructure Services
Infrastructure Applications – Password Courier
Project Manager: David Shawver
Associated Windows 2000 Project: Internal Adoption Project
Project Description:
Automate the network password reset process and allow individual users to reset their own passwords via an IP connection.
Objectives:
Assumptions / Dependencies:




Design a Password Reset Solution for the Dell Americas Domain that will
allow users to reset their NetWare 4.x and NT domain account passwords.
Bring 1 servers on-line with Password Courier
Push the Courier Direct desktop to all Americas Domain Users
4. Create training, documentation & processes for all changes to the
production environment.
Project Includes (Sub-Projects, Major Activities):





The Remedy database architecture will be modified to accommodate the
Password Courier administrative tables and schemas.
Several additional web pages will be created to support the product
Courier authentication data into Remedy will require maintenance owners &
procedures
The design of the Password Courier architecture, including staff and hardware
costs
Purchase of approximately 10,000 additional licenses to support Dell's growth
since the product was originally purchased
Challenges / Risks:



Approach:
Dell Confidential
1. Deliverables
will be dependent on the availability of cross-functional resources.
2. One corporate NDS tree
3. GIP Authentication data requirements can be populated and maintained in the
Remedy database
Project Does NOT Include:


Full production deployment for any domains outside of Americas
2. Any non-network or application password resets
Progress to Date:
Ensuring that the product met all of Dell’s internal security requirements
Re-design of the Remedy database architecture to allow the user
authentication
Maintenance of the Password Courier Authentication Database
Resources:
Personnel




The Password Courier web-based product is fully functional and in production
Business Impact / Savings:

Q4/2000
Q1/2001
Q2/2001
Users now have the option of resetting their network password via an intranet
browser in addition to using the helpdesk at 8-4040.
Milestones:
N/A - project complete Q3 FY00
23
Q4/2000
Q1/2001
Q2/2001
3/9/2016
Windows 2000 Engineering
Infrastructure Services
Infrastructure Applications – Virtual Private Networks
Project Manager: Andy Walker
Objectives:

Associated Windows 2000 Project: Internal Adoption Project
Assumptions / Dependencies:
Evaluate and test Windows 2000 client and host software for VPN
connectivity.
Project Includes (Sub-Projects, Major Activities):



New technology to act as VPN backbone
Maintaining backwards compatibility for legacy clients
Upgrading existing servers to Win2K
Challenges / Risks:


Personnel
Dell Confidential
Project Does NOT Include:




The purchase of new software
The purchase of new hardware
Regional deployment
Fundamental changes in how we do business today


MCI is aware of the problem and is working to provide Dell a version of the software
that is Windows 2000 certified
UUNet has provided a work around but testing and refinement are required
Business Impact / Savings:
Setup server in the lab and do isolated tests.
Setup server with production build to start load testing
Open small pilot to test functionality between Win2K, Win 9X and NT
Resources:
MCI will provide a working version of DRAGNet for Win2K
No client upgrades can take place if the targeted segment is reliant on DRAGNet
connectivity.
Progress to Date:
Current VPN solution in place does not support Windows 2000 clients.
Running concurrent VPN connection software versions on the same server to
provide backwards compatibility and incur no additional HW costs
Approach:





Q4/2000
2
Q1/2001
2
Q2/2001
2

DRAGNet is the tool that allows remote users find the most appropriate phone
number to dial to connect to Dell net. This tool reduces costs by having remote users
dial a local number rather than using existing 1-800 numbers.
Milestones:
Initial Evaluation
Setup Lab environment
Pilot of server software running
concurrently with existing software
Supported Production Rollout
24
Q4/2000
Q1/2001
Q2/2001
X
X
X
X
X
3/9/2016
Windows 2000 Engineering
Infrastructure Services
Networking – DHCP and DNS
Project Manager: Fred Johnson
Associated Windows 2000 Project: Internal Adoption Project
Project Description:
DHCP and DNS are critical factors when migrating to Windows 2000. The architecture and deployment schedule will go hand in hand with the
AMERICAS domain upgrades. Upgrading DHCP is not a dependency for the sub-project; however, Windows 2000 DDNS is a dependency for
completing the AMERICAS domain controller upgrades.
Objectives:



Assumptions / Dependencies:
Test and pilot W2K DHCP and DNS in the pilot environment.
Test and pilot W2K DHCP client Class IDs.
Deploy W2K DHCP and DNS in the production environment.






Project Includes (Sub-Projects, Major Activities):




Project Does NOT Include:


DHCP
DNS for Windows 2000 domain
Challenges / Risks:
WINS upgrade.
DNS for us.dell.com domain
Progress to Date:


Tight deployment schedule.
Testing has yet to be completed. Unforeseen issues.
Approach:




Sergio Covone and Jeff Chumbley to complete architecture before deployment.
Adequate Windows 2000 DNS services must exist in production to support domain
controller upgrades
Adequate Windows 2000 DHCP and DNS services must exist in production to
support client upgrades.
Resources: Network Engineering
Windows 2000 DHCP will be on a separate server from W2K DNS
W2K DHCP will still service DNS for the us.dell.com domain.
Piloting DNS in the pilot environment.
Architectural discussions are in progress. Buy in has occurred by all teams.
Business Impact / Savings:
Hardware inventory the DHCP/DNS servers
Test the upgrade/migration plan
Confirm that us.dell.com DNS domain is not affected
Implement the upgrade.
Resources:
Personnel
Dell Confidential
Q4/2000
2
Q1/2001
2
Q2/2001


W2K DHCP and DNS services are required for Windows 2000 deployment.
Remote sites will run DHCP and DNS on DCs so there are fewer servers.
Milestones:
Test and pilot W2K DHCP and DNS
Test DHCP upgraded/migration
W2K DNS installed with DC install
Austin DHCP upgraded
Remote site DHCP upgrade
25
Q4/2000
Q1/2001
Q2/2001
X
X
X
X
X
3/9/2016
Windows 2000 Engineering
Infrastructure Services
Networking – Upgrade Production Domain Controllers
Project Manager: Fred Johnson
Associated Windows 2000 Project: Internal Adoption Project
Project Description:
Upgrade the AMERICAS domain controllers to Windows 2000 throughout the Americas region.
Objectives:



Assumptions / Dependencies:
Upgrade AMERICAS PDC/BDCs to Windows 2000 in Austin
Upgrade AMERICAS BDCs in remote offices
Switch to native-mode
Project Includes (Sub-Projects, Major Activities):



Y2K certification of Windows 2000 RTM
Hardware refresh of current DCs, where necessary
Enterprise Administrator (Highlander) design and implementation
Challenges / Risks:


Personnel
Dell Confidential
Project Does NOT Include:






Resource domain collapse
DHCP / DNS
WINS
Pilot of proof of concept has been accomplished in the W2KAMER domain
Isolated lab testing has been completed but more is required.
Some detailed planning and documentation has been completed
Business Impact / Savings:
Minimize risk to business.
Upgrade AMERICAS in-place to minimize user impact. Upgrade should be
seamless to all users.
Resources:
MS-DDNS must be in place to support the Win2000 upgrades
AD Security model and OU model are designed and implemented during upgrade
Hardware purchases will be received and ready for use
NOS Engineering resources will be available
Some travel will be required
Progress to Date:
Tight deployment schedule.
Upgrade touches AMERICAS production DCs.
Approach:







Q4/2000
2
Q1/2001
3
Q2/2001



Greatly improved abilities to administer Windows environment with AD integrated
security, fewer domains, granular control, centralized admin, etc..
Provides central directory service for authentication, applications, etc..
Excellent Sales and Marketing benefits of running Windows 2000 internally.
Milestones:
Complete detailed deployment plan
Test AMERICAS upgrade in lab
Upgrade AMERICAS in production
Switch to native-mode in production
26
Q4/2000
Q1/2001
Q2/2001
X
X
X
X
3/9/2016
Windows 2000 Engineering
Infrastructure Services
Networking – WINS
Project Manager: Fred Johnson
Associated Windows 2000 Project: Internal Adoption Project
Project Description:
Define a strategy to maintain the current WINS environment in support of down-level clients and servers. Work to reduce the dependencies on
WINS in Dell’s global production environment and eventually eliminate WINS from Dell’s computing environment once there are no longer
down-level clients.
Objectives:



Assumptions / Dependencies:
Leave current WINS infrastructure in place. Do not upgrade to Win2000.
Reduce WINS dependencies as clients and servers are upgraded to Win2000
Eventually remove WINS from Dell’s computing environment
Project Includes (Sub-Projects, Major Activities):





Personnel
Dell Confidential
Discussions held with Network Engineering and the decision was made to leave
existing WINS infrastructure in place.
Network Engineering will determine the need to upgrade or replace the existing
WINS servers.
Business Impact / Savings:
Minimize risk to business.
Transition away from WINS must be seamless to all users and applications.
Resources:
DHCP
DNS
Progress to Date:
WINS will remain in the computing environment for an extended period of
time, possibly several years.
Keeping the WINS infrastructure running and healthy.
Approach:




WINS will not go away as long as there are down-level clients and servers in the
global Dell computing environment.
It will be several years before WINS is removed from Dell’s computing environment.
Resources: NOS Engineering and Network Engineering
Project Does NOT Include:
Challenges / Risks:


Q4/2000
1
Q1/2001
1
Q2/2001


No immediate cost to the business.
Moving to a more stable and compliant name resolution infrastructure.
Milestones:
Identify plan to eliminate WINS
Test WINS elimination in lab
Begin WINS elimination with client roll out
27
Q4/2000
Q1/2001
Q2/2001
X
X
X
3/9/2016
Windows 2000 Engineering
Infrastructure Services
Servers – Data Migration Storage for Client Upgrades
Project Manager: Andrea Bond
Associated Windows 2000 Project: Internal Adoption Project
Project Description:
Determine how home share moves and account creation during onboarding process will be accomplished in W2K domain.
Objectives:
Assumptions / Dependencies:





Define process for moving accounts between domains.
Define process for moving accounts between servers.
Automate as much as possible of the processes.
Clearly defined, documented procedures are in place and followed.
Incorporate W2K into WOW.
Project Includes (Sub-Projects, Major Activities):

Creation of any new call types or work order modifications.
Challenges / Risks:




Personnel
Dell Confidential
Project Does NOT Include:

Development of automated tool.

Planning meetings being scheduled.
Business Impact / Savings:
Determine if automated process tool will work under W2K
Test and document procedures
Move CARS accounts to appropriate domain
Train CARS/CAC on new procedures
Modify WOW if necessary to include W2K domain.
Modify current NEP/onboarding procedures to include W2K domain specifics
Post processes and procedures to inside.dell (page undetermined)
Resources:
Domain environment does not change drastically.
Dedicated resources continue
Progress to Date:
Automated tool may not work for this purpose.
Maintaining current environment while incorporating new procedures.
Appropriate test environment that does not impact productivity
Time constraints for training of staff.
Approach:









Q4/2000
2
Q1/2001
1
Q2/2001
1



Server bandwidth maintained due to accounts residing on servers that are located
closer to BP.
Increased accuracy in automated process.
Increased reporting and control with automated process.
Milestones:
Verification of usability of automated
tool.
Procedures tested
Procedures documented and posted
Support personnel trained
Move/creation of accounts in W2K
domain begins
28
Q4/2000
Q1/2001
Q2/2001
Nov
Nov
Dec
Jan
Mar
3/9/2016
Windows 2000 Engineering
Infrastructure Services
Servers – Intranet
Project Manager: Sid Batson
Project Description:
Associated Windows 2000 Project: Full Deployment
Migrate inside.us.dell.com replication, search/index, and content servers from NT4 and IIS4 to Win2000 Advanced Server running IIS 5.0. Maintain production capabilities in
a mixed OS and IIS environment (NT4 & WIN2000, and IIS4 and IIS5). Maintain proactive monitoring of servers/processes. Engineering and implementation will be
coordinated with regions to ensure uninterrupted global access. Regional migration to W2K will be in coordination with regional counterparts within their respective timelines.
Objectives:





Assumptions / Dependencies:
Establish an inside.us.dell content server running on WIN2000 and IIS 5.0
Validate Site Server and CRS on WIN2000.
Validate index/search on WIN2000.
Validate Visual Safe Source on WIN2000
Maintain monitoring capabilities utilizing NetIQ.
Project Includes (Sub-Projects, Major Activities):



Establish a WIN2000-based IIS5.0 server
Validate CRS from NT4 Site Server to the WIN2000-based IIS server (allows
validation of a mixed environment
Validate Site Server on WIN2000
Challenges / Risks:



Personnel
Equipment
Consulting
Project Does NOT Include:



Q4/2000
1
$45K
$25K
Q1/2001
1
$45K
$25K
Q2/2001
1
$45K

Hardware for validating IIS5 has arrived, however, the disk controllers may have to
be replaced with single controller due to incompatibilities with W2K of stand build
controllers.
Consistency with emerging WIN2000 environment and to take advantage of
significant administrative and user management feature set of the WIN2000 OS.
Milestones:







Dell Confidential
Reengineering the basic architecture of the current environment
Establishing LOB oriented content servers
Business Impact / Savings:
Build an intranet lab environment comprised of NT4/WIn2000 systems.
Configure and enable IIS5 content server and search/index server.
Run Site Server CRS on NT4 against IIS5 to validate CRS to content server.
Validate Site Server on WIN2000; replicate content to IIS 5.0 content server.
Validate Visual Safe Source on WIN2000
Resources:

Assumes backward compatibility of IIS 5.0 to IIS 4.0
Assumes Site Server 3.0 and CRS will operate correctly on WIN2000 or a newer
released compatible version is available
Migration to WIN2000 will not impact IIS application servers. NETIQ monitoring is
available for WIN2000 based IIS, Site Server, and MTS, as appropriate.
Progress to Date:
Limited technical information available on IIS 5.0 on WIN2000
Limited technical information available on interfacing Site Server with
WIN2000 based IIS 5.0
Challenges involve utilizing IIS 5.0 without know technical information, and
migrating Site Server to WIN2000 for CRS
Approach:







1. IIS 4.0 configuration
2. IIS 5.0 configuration
3. Validate IIS 5.0 content server
4. Validation mixed environment
replication, search/index
5. Validate VSS
6. Production installation of IIS
5.0 content server
7. Complete migration to
WIN2000 for all intranet servers
29
Q4/2000
Q1/2001
X
X
X
Q2/2001
X
X
X
(Q3/FY01)->
3/9/2016
Windows 2000 Engineering
Infrastructure Services
Servers – Legato Engineering
Project Manager: Fred Johnson
Associated Windows 2000 Project: Internal Adoption Project
Project Description:
Plan, test, pilot, and deploy the release version of Legato for Windows 2000 in support of the Windows 2000 production deployment for the
AMERICAS domain controllers.
Objectives:

Assumptions / Dependencies:
Plan, test, pilot, and deploy the release version of Legato for Windows 2000 in
support of the W2K production deployment for the AMERICAS domain
controllers.
Project Includes (Sub-Projects, Major Activities):



Testing, piloting, and deploying Networker server and client software for
AMERICAS domain controllers.
Deploying backup systems: servers, tape drives, and software.
Y2K certification of the Legato release product.
Challenges / Risks:





Project Does NOT Include:




Approach:


Dell Confidential
Legato beta is currently working in the W2K pilot environment with a hack.
Planning documentation and initial meetings have been completed.
Business Impact / Savings:


Personnel
Exchange
File/Print
DataStore
Any other systems
Progress to Date:
Logistics of ramping the backup hardware with the production roll-out of
W2K.
Stable release product and timing release dates.
Resources:
Legato will have a released and working version of Networker for Win2000 before
Dec 14, 1999.
Dell licensing for Legato for Win2000, including technical support.
The current support group will assume responsibility for W2K backup support.
Q4/2000
1
Q1/2001
1
Q2/2001
Windows 2000 system data recovery in the event of a disk failure or other
catastrophic event.
Mandatory for maintaining a proper computer infrastructure.
Milestones:
Y2K certification
Test/pilot Legato release product.
Production hardware installed.
Deploy Legato release in production.
30
Q4/2000
Q1/2001
Q2/2001
X
X
X
X
3/9/2016
Windows 2000 Engineering
Infrastructure Services
Servers – Norton AntiVirus 2000 (Corp. Ed. 7)
Project Manager: Leslie Ford
Project Description:
Associated Windows 2000 Project: Internal Adoption Project
Review, test, and deliver an anti-virus solution for Win2000 servers, pilot and productionalization.
Objectives:




Assumptions / Dependencies:





Test server NAV functionality
Set security configuration for Win2000 server systems
Document and deliver the NAV configurations to NOS Engineering
Determine use of NAV2000 versus Corp.Ed.7 for productionalization

Project Includes (Sub-Projects, Major Activities):






Project Does NOT Include:
Coordinating a Win2000 server for GIP NAV testing
Coordinating NAV for Exchange functional configurations with the Messaging Team
Testing NAV functionality on standard Win2000 server
Develop and document secure NAV configuration
Deliver documented secure NAV configuration
Test Win2000 server, with NAV2000 configured, to use current LiveUpdate architecture
Challenges / Risks:




Y2K certification for NAV2000
Timely involvement with Exchange build prior to production
Timely involvement of Symantec with the Dell exchange team
When is Corp.Ed.7 bug free
Timely support from Symantec for troubleshooting
Win2000 server available for testing



Y2K or Win2000 certification for NAV for Exchange
Testing or implementing NAV for Exchange on Win2000 servers
Distribution of NAV in 2000 domains
Progress to Date:
Ensure NAV is on data share, file and print, and exchange servers prior to production
Limited functionality of NAV2000 – functionality is not intuitive
Don’t have a final release for Corp.Ed.7
Exchange team does not test NAV2000
Approach:


Determined that we will use NAV2000 for Win2000 pilot
Y2K test scripts have been outlined
Business Impact / Savings:
 Y2K certify NAV2000 by 11/9/9
 Protect data on Win2000 servers
 Deliver NAV for exchange 1.9 settings to Messaging team by11/5/99
 Configure, test and document NAV2000 server configuration on 11/15/99 and 11/16/99
 Deliver NAV2000 server configuration to Server team with documentation on 11/17/99
 Test Win2000 server, with NAV 2000 configured, with the current LiveUpdate architecture
 Begin looking at Corp.Ed.7 on 1/3/00
 Determine if going with NAV2000 or Corp.Ed.7 for bulk Win2000 rollout by 2/14/00
 Corp.Ed.7 full productionalization dependent on 2/14/00 decision
 Test LiveUpdate on Win2000 boxes in Q1 FY01
 Upgrade LiveUpdate boxes to Win2000 in Q2 FY01
Resources:
Q4/2000
Q1/2001
Q2/2001
Milestones:
Q4/2000
 Y2K certify NAV2000 for server
X
Personnel
1
1
3
 Deliver NAV2000 server configuration
X
 Determine NAV product for full deployment
 Corp.Ed.7 full productionalization

Upgrade LiveUpdate boxes to Win2000
Dell Confidential
31
Q1/2001
Q2/2001
X
X
X
3/9/2016
Windows 2000 Engineering
Infrastructure Services
Servers – Proxy Server
Project Manager: Andy Walker
Associated Windows 2000 Project: Internal Adoption Project
Project Description:
Address all proxy related issues as they affect the deployment of Windows 2000.
Objectives:


Assumptions / Dependencies:
Leave current proxy infrastructure in place.
Ensure that the proxy infrastructure is compatible with Windows 2000



Project Includes (Sub-Projects, Major Activities):

N/A
Challenges / Risks:

Project Does NOT Include:




Approach:
Personnel
Dell Confidential
Discussion with Dirk Maxwell and Tony Bolton confirming that there are no
dependencies with proxy.
Use of the proxy infrastructure within the W2KAMER pilot environment. There
have been no problems using the proxy servers.
Extensive piloting with over 150 users has been completed.
Four servers upgraded to Win2K
Business Impact / Savings:

Remove proxy server from DD and upgrade in place
Resources:
N/A
Progress to Date:
N/A


The proxy infrastructure has no dependencies with the Win2000 environment.
The proxy infrastructure will be upgraded to Win2000 at the discretion and the
schedule of the Internetworking team.
Resources: Internetworking
Q4/2000
1
Q1/2001
1
Q2/2001
No immediate cost.
Milestones:
Begin Upgrade to Win2K
Finish Upgrade to Win2K
32
Q4/2000
Q1/2001
Q2/2001
X
X
3/9/2016
Windows 2000 Engineering
Infrastructure Services
Servers – RADIUS
Project Manager: Andy Walker
Associated Windows 2000 Project: Internal Adoption Project
Project Description:
Provide a Windows 2000 Professional remote dial-up client configuration with RADIUS in support of the Windows 2000 deployment.
Objectives:




Assumptions / Dependencies:
Leave current RADIUS infrastructure in place.
Ensure that the RADIUS infrastructure is compatible with Windows 2000
Document the Windows 2000 client configuration and make it easily available
to Windows 2000 users
Ensure that support staff is prepared to support this configuration
Project Includes (Sub-Projects, Major Activities):

Evaluation of Windows 2000 radius component
Challenges / Risks:




Project Does NOT Include:


Approach:
Personnel
Dell Confidential
Use of the RADIUS infrastructure within the W2KAMER pilot environment. There
have been no problems using the Radius servers.
Configuration and documentation has been completed
Support staff is currently providing regular support for this configuration
Business Impact / Savings:

Test existing software package in lab
Test new Win2K radius package
Resources:
DRAGNet
Progress to Date:
Proxy to NT authentication




The RADIUS infrastructure has no dependencies with the Win2000 environment.
The RADIUS infrastructure will be upgraded to Win2000 at the discretion and the
schedule of the Internetworking team.
Resources: Internetworking
Q4/2000
2
Q1/2001
2
Q2/2001
No immediate cost.
Milestones:
Testing existing platform
Testing Win2K radius package
Go/No go on upgrade of existing
service
Install approved package
33
Jan 15
Jan 30
Feb 17
X
X
X
X
3/9/2016
Windows 2000 Engineering
Infrastructure Services
Servers – SMS Reporting & Data Warehouse
Project Manager: Robert Aschermann
Associated Windows 2000 Project: Internal Adoption Project
Project Description:
Develop a data warehouse to integrate data from Microsoft Systems Management Server, Remedy, Human Resources, and Financial databases.
Objectives:






Assumptions / Dependencies:
Provide a web-enabled interface to extract and report asset management data
Provide support for four reporting application now, and flexibility for future
applications. Current apps include: Manager’s Tools, On-Site Support
Reporting, Win2K Reporting, and Compliance Reporting
Provide scheduling capability for queries and reports
Users have access to view reports, but not to process queries
Reporting system should support ability to secure data by cost center.
Performance of SMS architecture should not be impacted.
Project Includes (Sub-Projects, Major Activities):


Development of data model to support and integrate multiple data sources
Development of web-enabled access to data, including both static reporting
capability and support for Brio reporting tools
Challenges / Risks:


Personnel
Dell Confidential
Project Does NOT Include:

Development and/or population of source data on inventory, human resources or
financial information

Preliminary design of data model has begun, and preliminary solution concept has
been documented
Business Impact / Savings:

Determine requirements
Develop solution specification
Develop / build solution
Test solution
Distribute solution to production
Resources:
SMS 2.0 is in production in Dell’s environment
SQL data modeling resources will be required to integrate diverse data sources
Support resources will be required in order to reduce the support load on the SMS
team once the system is in production
Progress to Date:
Customer requirements have not been well defined
Conflicting demand for available resources from other projects
Approach:








Q1/2001
2

Q2/2001
2
Q3/2001
1
Asset management reporting will support better fiscal management and is necessary
to support projects such as the hardware refresh program and software license
compliance management.
Availability of reporting improves planning for projects such as Windows 2000
Milestones:
Define requirements and scope
Define solution concept
Develop/build solution
Test solution
Distribute solution to production
Provide reporting consulting
34
Q1/2001
Q2/2001
Q3/2001
X
X
X
X
X
X
3/9/2016
Windows 2000 Engineering
Infrastructure Services
Servers – SMS Server Upgrades
Project Manager: Robert Aschermann
Associated Windows 2000 Project: Internal Adoption Project
Project Description:
Upgrade all Global Distribution Engineering servers to Windows 2000 Server
Objectives:
Assumptions / Dependencies:



All SMS site servers running Windows 2000 Server
All SMS distribution servers running Windows 2000 Server
All other Global Distribution Engineering servers on Windows 2000 Server
Project Includes (Sub-Projects, Major Activities):




Site Server upgrades
Distribution server upgrades
DellSoft server upgrades
Remaining GDE servers
Challenges / Risks:




Dell Confidential
Project Does NOT Include:



Upgrades to DellSoft website
Upgrade of SMS clients
Upgrade of non GDE owned servers




PE6350 site servers are ordered, delivery 01/12/00
SAN functionality tested in the POCLAB
SQL Server 7.0 SP1 tested in the POCLAB
All SQL Servers have been upgraded to SP1
Business Impact / Savings:
Install new site servers
Test all upgrades in the POCLAB
Upgrade SQL on site servers
Upgrade SMS to SP2
Upgrade site servers to Windows 2000
Upgrade distribution servers to Windows 2000
Upgrade other GDE servers to Windows 2000
Resources:
Q1/2001
3
Systems Management Server 2.0 SP2 installed on all site servers
SQL Server 7.0 SP1 installed on all site servers
New PE6350 site servers installed and functioning with the SAN
AMERICAS domain is upgraded to Windows 2000
US-DELL domain is merged into Windows 2000 domain
The SAN is functional on Windows 2000
Progress to Date:
No white paper discussion for upgrading SMS site servers to Windows 2000
Co-Existence of Windows 2000 site server and Windows NT 4.0 site servers
Keeping Software Distribution available to all locations
SMS site servers acting as SAN servers can’t be upgraded until June
Approach:
















Cost of site server upgrade decreased by participating in the SAN
SMS 2.0 leverages Windows 2000 advanced features
Improved client installation percentages with Windows 2000 corporate-wide
Milestones:
Q2/2001
3
Hardware upgrade
SQL Server service pack
SMS service pack
Site servers on Windows 2000
Distribution servers on Windows 2000
All servers on Windows 2000
35
Q1/2001
Q2/2001
X
X
X
X
X
X
3/9/2016
Windows 2000 Engineering
Infrastructure Services
Servers – Storage Solutions
Project Manager: Scott Jernigan
Associated Windows 2000 Project: Internal Adoption Project
Project Description
Implement standard SANs in major data centers to allow core systems (file/print, data share, Exchange, Windows 2000, desktop back-up,
unattended installs) to leverage fault-tolerant disks and storage systems.
Objectives
Assumptions/Dependencies





Implement standard SAN for major DCs for use by core servers
Increase reliability and performance of disk systems
Decrease backup and restore times
Lower total costs of data center servers
Provide increased disk space for centralized file storage





Network diversity and performance improvements are concurrent
Legato can be integrated into SAN solutions on fiber
Tape silos can be located in multiple data center locations around the campus
Home share move process implemented
Data center space is available
Project Includes (Sub-projects, Major Activities) Project Does NOT Include





Identification of requirements and target locations
Tools for management of large data storage
SAN design and test
SAN implementation
Migration of existing services (file and print, data share,
exchange) to SAN
Challenges/Risks






Initial scope
Initial hardware design
Initial Hardware Test for Exchange
Business Impact/Savings





Order Hardware and Test solutions
Conduct Pilot test
Implement solutions
Migrate existing systems
Resources
Heads
Q300
3
Q400
4
Q101
4
Q201
4
Capex
Opex
$.5M
$50K
$.5M
$50K
$1.5M
$50K
$1.0M
$50K
Dell Confidential
Desktop changes
Application server integration
X&P Reengineering
International roll-out
Progress to Date
New technology
Obtaining hardware
Changing user mindsets and philosophies
Approach








Lower cost per GB of storage
Higher availability of core systems
Decreased backup and restore times
Reduce number of supported servers
Able to leverage infrastructure for other systems needing disk storage
Deliverables/Milestones
BT3 Lab Constructed
BT1 Data Center Test complete
Management/Admin procedures
Order SAN Hardware
SAN Built in each Data Center
F/P Server migration to SAN
Unattended install
Education Campaign
User/Data migration
36
Q400
Q101
Q201
Q301
Q401
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
3/9/2016
Windows 2000 Engineering
Infrastructure Services
Support – Engineering a Server Support Strategy
Project Manager: Dwayne Quinn
Associated Windows 2000 Project: Internal Adoption Project
Project Description:
Determine permissions and groups responsible for key infrastructure support functions.
Objectives:





Assumptions / Dependencies:
Determine infrastructure functions.
Determine permissions required on member servers to complete functions.
Define which group owns each function.
Incorporate NET-IQ and monitoring services.
Incorporate NAV into solutions.
Project Includes (Sub-Projects, Major Activities):




Hardware replacement support due to failure.
O/S Support
Service support for all existing functions on the following servers: file/print,
database, Exchange, Domain Controllers, WINS, DNS, DHCP
Service support for all new functions for the above mentioned servers that are
introduced by the Win2000 project.
Challenges / Risks:






Personnel
Dell Confidential
Project Does NOT Include:




Determining support structure for SAN.
Determining new functionalities of W2K.
Domain administration user and server account creation, site replication, and schema
maintenance.
Creating new automated programs to replace existing ones that do not work in W2K.

File and print testing permissions have been determined.
Business Impact / Savings:

Gather all existing infrastructure functions
Gather all new infrastructure functions.
Get written buyoff on ownership of functions.
Develop procedures and determine rights.
Resources:
Support groups already exist.
Migration strategy of member servers and timeline for collapse of US-DELL domain
may facilitate server moves.
Progress to Date:
Nbr. of service delivery groups & re-orgs hinder determining who owns what.
Number of persons with same access and support rights make it difficult to
create a secure environment.
Maintaining current environment while incorporating new procedures.
Appropriate test environment that does not impact productivity.
Time constraints for training of staff.
SAN solution may impact support & drive different support implementations.
Approach:






Q4/2000
2
Q1/2001
2
Q2/2001
2
Staff training to support business.
Milestones:
1. Gathering of new and existing
functions complete.
Written buyoff from support groups
complete.
Support group turnover complete.
37
Q4/2000
Q1/2001
Q2/2001
TBD
3/9/2016
Windows 2000 Engineering
Infrastructure Services
Support – Enterprise Administrator (OU Compliant Version)
Project Manager: Dwayne Quinn
Associated Windows 2000 Project: Internal Adoption Project
Project Description:
Provide support teams rights and other security administration functions with either Win2000 native tools or Mission Critical’s Highlander (EA).
Objectives:
Assumptions / Dependencies:




Determine functionality of tools and what aspects will be implemented
Determine Security Administration tool
Ensure appropriate access for support and engineering teams, as well as
business partners
Work with NOSE and W2K engineering team to provide documentation
and training to users
Project Includes (Sub-Projects, Major Activities):






Evaluate native tools and Highlander product – evaluate functionality.
Determine tool used for supporting W2K domain
Grant access based on job functions of support and engineering teams
Provide training and documentation for users
Turn support of tool to appropriate department
Involve PAR process
Challenges / Risks:



Personnel
Dell Confidential
Project Does NOT Include:


Redesigning Privileged Access Request process
Defining support and engineering roles for privileges

None
Business Impact / Savings:





Evaluate native tool functionality
Evaluate Highlander functionality
Determine solution
Grant access
Document processes
Train users
Transfer or maintain Territory structure
Document and train on logging and reporting capabilities
Resources:
Engineering and support roles will be redefined
Granularity of privileges is available
Highlander tool will be released 11/29/99
Enforcing naming convention will be addressed.
Progress to Date:
Enforce naming convention
Training business partners on new tool if MCS solution not used
Maintaining Territory structure for new tool
Approach:












Q4/2000
1
Q1/2001
1
Q2/2001
2
Using native tools saves yearly maintenance costs for EA
MCS tool enforces naming conventions
Users already familiar with MCS tool
Advanced reporting and logging abilities with MCS
Combines several functions into one tool and provide ability for future integration with
MCS
Milestones:






Determine tool solution
Grant access
Document Processes and Reporting
Training
Productionalize solution
Turn over support/maintenance of tool
38
Q4/00 Q1/01 Q2/01 Q3/01 Q4/01
X
X
X
X
X
X
3/9/2016
Windows 2000 Engineering
Infrastructure Services
Support – March 31 Readiness
Project Manager: Dwayne Quinn
Associated Windows 2000 Project: IAP
Project Description:
Prepare for onboarding, account maintenance, and problem escalation/support procedures for Win2000 domain and end-user support. Groups
included are CARS, CAC (Call Center Support), and Second/Third Level Support.
Objectives:
Assumptions / Dependencies:





Define process for creating accounts in new domain
Define process for moving accounts between servers
Automate process to the extent possible
Create & update REMEDY call types and related support groups
Define and document procedures; ensure they are in place and are followed.
Project Includes (Sub-Projects, Major Activities):




Documenting processes and related procedures
Training support groups on new procedures
Creating and updating REMEDY call types
Create and update support groups for call types
Challenges / Risks:





Automated tool may not work for this purpose
Maintaining current environment while incorporating new procedures
Ensuring that test environment does not negatively affect productivity
Time constraints for training
Supporting different procedures for different OS’s
Approach:









Domain environment does not change drastically
Dedicated resources continue.
Project Does NOT Include:

Development of automated tool for moving/creating accounts, etc.
Progress to Date:

TBD
Business Impact / Savings:
Evaluate automated tool in Win2000 environment.
 Server bandwidth maintained due to accounts residing in servers within user’s
Testing and documenting procedures
vicinity.
Documentation
 Increased accuracy in automated process
Train CARS and CAC in new procedures
 Increased reporting and control with automated process
Moving CARS accounts to appropriate domain
Modify Work Orders on the Web (W.O.W.) if necessary to Win2000 domain
Modify current onboarding procedures to include Win2000, if necessary
Milestones:
Resources:
Q4/2000
Q1/2001
Q2/2001
Q4/2000 Q1/2001 Q2/2001
Verification of automated tool’s usability
(Jan 2000)
X
Personnel
2
1
1
Procedures tested (Feb 2000)
X
Procedures documented & posted (Feb 2000)
X
Support personnel trained (March 2000)
X
Kick-off Move/creation of accounts to
Win2000 (March 31, 2000)
X
Dell Confidential
39
3/9/2016
Windows 2000 Engineering
Infrastructure Services
Support – Ramp-Up of (SD)2 Support
Project Manager: Dwayne Quinn
Associated Windows 2000 Project: Internal Adoption Project
Project Description:
The goal of this project is to ensure that support processes are in place for SD2 group.
Objectives:
Assumptions / Dependencies:





Coordinate cross-functional communications between SD2 groups
Define and document support procedures for SD2
Coordinate formal Win2000 support training through Dell Learning
Train dedicated support resources in best practices and lessons learned to take
back to their respective areas
Train dedicated support resources to become primary contacts for Win2000
issues in their respective areas
Project Includes (Sub-Projects, Major Activities):




Documenting best practices and procedures
Training support personnel
Hand-off of information
Rreturn of support personnel to respective groups
Challenges / Risks:







Personnel
Dell Confidential
Project Does NOT Include:

Migration of end users to Win2000


SD2 groups have been working since September 1999 in support RD and SU pilots
SD2 has initiated staff training sessions
Business Impact / Savings:
There needs to consensus on practices and procedures for both the current and
new environments.
Testing
Documentation
Training
Resources:

Cost of training will be borne by SD2 cost centers.
Domain structure that is currently under discussion will not undergo radical change
Dedicated resources will continue throughout the project
Dependent upon final supportable release of Win2000 from Microsoft for testing and
documentation.
Support resources will document best practices and lessons learned
Progress to Date:
Maintaining current environment while incorporating new procedures
Ensuring that beta software does not negatively affect productivity
Time constraints for training
Supporting multiple O/S’s
Approach:





Q4/2000
Q1/2001
Q2/2001
3
3
0


Best practices will reduce support costs
Stable OS will reduce support costs
Milestones:
Testing of final release complete (Feb.
2000)
Procedures documented and posted
March 2000
Support personnel trained March 2000
Release of dedicated resources and
handoff April 2000
40
Q4/2000
Q1/2001
Q2/2001
X
X
X
X
3/9/2016
Windows 2000 Engineering
Infrastructure Services
Support – Ramp-Up of Server Support
Project Manager: Dwayne Quinn
Associated Windows 2000 Project: Internal Adoption Project
Project Description:
Ensure that support processes are in place for the server support groups. Groups included are (SD)2 and NOS Engineering.
Objectives:
Assumptions / Dependencies:






Coordinate cross-functional communication between SD2 and NOS
Highlight differences in domain structure between Win2000 NT4.0
Define and document support procedures for SD2 and NOS
Coordinate formal Win2000 support training through Dell Learning
Train dedicated support resources in best practices and lessons learned to take
back to their respective areas
Train dedicated support resources to become primary contacts for Win2000
issues in their respective areas
Project Includes (Sub-Projects, Major Activities):




Documenting best practices and procedures
Training support personnel
Hand-off of information
Rreturn of support personnel to respective groups
Challenges / Risks:







Personnel
Dell Confidential
Project Does NOT Include:


Design of domain structure
Migration of domain


SD2 and NOS have been working since September 1999 in support RD and SU pilots
SD2 has initiated staff training sessions
Business Impact / Savings:
There needs to consensus on practices and procedures for both the current and
new environments.
Testing
Documentation
Training
Resources:
Cost of training will be borne by SD2 and NOS cost centers.
Domain structure that is currently under discussion will not undergo radical change
Dedicated resources will continue throughout the project
Dependent upon completion of domain structure for testing and documentation.
Support resources will document best practices and lessons learned
Progress to Date:
Maintaining current environment while incorporating new procedures
Ensuring that test environment does not negatively affect productivity
Time constraints for training
Supporting mixed-mode environment
Approach:






Q4/2000
4
Q1/2001
4
Q2/2001
0


Best practices will reduce support costs
Reporting and control of changes in production environment will be improved
Milestones:
Domain testing complete (Jan.00)
Procedures documented and posted Q1
Support personnel trained Q1
Release of dedicated resources and
handoff Q2
41
Q4/2000
Q1/2001
Q2/2001
X
X
X
X
3/9/2016
Windows 2000 Engineering
Infrastructure Services
Support – System Management with NetIQ
Project Manager: Dwayne Quinn
Project Description:
Certify NetIQ to run on Windows 2000.
Objectives:


Associated Windows 2000 Project: Internal Adoption Project
Assumptions / Dependencies:
Provide monitoring of production servers in the Windows 2000 domain
Notify key individuals on the failure of a server or service in production in the
Windows 2000 domain
Project Includes (Sub-Projects, Major Activities):




Monitoring of member servers in the Windows 2000 domain
Monitoring of the DC in the Windows 20000 domain
Notification of key individuals in the event of hardware or software failure
Preliminary evaluation of the next release of next release of NetIQ’s software
version 3.4
Challenges / Risks:




Personnel
Dell Confidential
Project Does NOT Include:




The purchase of new software
The purchase of new hardware
Regional deployment
Fundamental changes in how we do business today

Have received approval for Dell to be a part of the Net IQ beta program for
their next software release.
Business Impact / Savings:
Test existing Net IQ software monitoring member servers in the Windows
2000 test lab
Test beta software of Net IQ to monitor the Active Directory in the Windows
2000 test lab
Resources:

Net IQ will provide same functionality in the Window 2000 environment as it does in
the NT 4.0 domain
Net IQ providing knowledge scripts to monitor the active directory on the Windows
2000 DCs
Progress to Date:
Working with Beta software for the active directory monitoring
Limited scope for pilot delivery
Numerous Net IQ repositories in the US
Approach:


Q4/2000
Q1/2001
Q2/2001
4
4
0

Net IQ will facilitate the migration to Windows 2000 by allowing us to monitor
servers and services running under windows 2000. Net IQ version 3.4 will
extend the functionality of Net IQ to include the monitoring of the active
directory.
Milestones:
Q4/2000 Q1/2001 Q2/2001
Start testing
X
Go/No-go for NetIQ on Win2000
X
Testing of NetIQ 3.4
X
Upgrade to NetIQ 3.4
X
42
3/9/2016
Windows 2000 Engineering
Infrastructure Services
Training – User Training
Project Manager: Celia Bastis
Associated Windows 2000 Project: Full Deployment
Project Description:
Understand the needs of various populations within Dell for various kinds of Windows 2000 training; design the training needed for each of those
levels of training; and convey that design to Dell Learning, so that they can develop the training and train Dell’s employees.
Objectives:



Assumptions / Dependencies:
Make general familiarization materials available to Dell via the web site.
Design level-appropriate Windows 2000 training materials for all Dell
employees.
Transfer the training material design to Dell Learning.
Project Includes (Sub-Projects, Major Activities):



Categorize potential Windows 2000 users at Dell to determine the levels of
their experience and training needs.
Plan and design the training materials that will be needed to deliver the levels
of training determined to be necessary in step 1.
Provide Dell Learning with enough information about the training design that
they can develop and perform Windows 2000 user training.
Challenges / Risks:


Personnel
Dell Confidential
Project Does NOT Include:


Developing the training materials or courseware.
Coordinating, scheduling, or performing end-user training.

The I/T Windows 2000 web site is operational, providing general familiarization on
Windows 2000 to any employee browsing the site.
Business Impact / Savings:
Perform a study to categorize the potential Windows 2000 users at Dell.
Determine the kinds training that each level of users will need.
Design the course materials for the various levels of training.
Transfer the training designs to Dell learning, possibly including performing
the training for their staff once.
Resources:
Dell Learning will:
* Assist in categorizing the potential Windows 2000 users in their organizations.
* Develop Windows 2000 courseware from our training designs.
* Train Dell employees in Windows 2000.
Progress to Date:
Ensuring that User Education staff is sufficiently trained on Windows 2000.
Engaging the resources of Dell Learning early in the project.
Approach:





Q4/2000
1
Q1/2001
1
Q2/2001
1

Ensuring that all users can use Windows 2000 with at least as much facility as they
now use their current operating systems will reduce the impact to the corporation of
adopting Windows 2000.
Milestones:
User categorization study completed
Training design completed
Dell Learning accepts responsibility for
the training development
43
Q4/2000
Q1/2001
Q2/2001
X
X
X
3/9/2016