[ The opinions expressed by authors on Linux Today are their
own. They speak only for themselves and not for Linux Today.
]
By Tom Adelstein, CIO
of Bynari Systems Group
Over the last two months, our principal consultants allowed me
to manage two large wide area network migrations from Novell and
Microsoft to Linux. Using guerilla migration tactics, we put
together a strike force and helped two thinly clad Technology
Departments go where no techies had gone before.
Background
One of the early lessons the market taught the people in our
call center involved levels of support. We operate a
pay-per-incident help desk in the US. Many of us expected a very
low ratio of level 1 support to multi-incident level 2 and 3 calls.
We found the ratio reversed with Linux. Desktop users tend to need
less help than corporate users. Corporate users of Linux deploy web
services, messaging environments, firewalls, file, print and
application services. The demand we see focuses in the corporate
arena. People calling for Level 1 support, often ask us to provide
consulting engagements. Through the help of Linux consultants
spread around the country, we’ve provided more consulting services
than we originally planned.
One of the major areas in which our clients want support
involves project management. Within the project management service
area, we see demand for networking and migrations. In listening to
our associates in Europe, Fred Mobach and Malcolm Macsween, they
reported similar phenomena. In the cases discussed below, our
clients surprised us with the amount of preparation they did before
we arrived. We also discovered some interesting serendipity about
Linux in the enterprise.
Approaching Network Migrations
When someone asks us to manage a project we deploy a set of
tools we refer to as “delivery management”. Our methodology
parallels many consulting firms because several of our staff came
from similar environments. For example, we send business analysts
to a client site to interview a cross section of the user community
and the Technology staff. From these interviews we develop a wide
array of delivery management initiatives. With a business case in
hand, we then develop a proposal and provide a written offer to the
client.
In the early stages of our firm’s development, smaller business
clients asked for our help. In most of these cases, migrating a
handful of computers didn’t require extensive delivery management
and written documentation. As the size and scope of our projects
grew, we began working with more experienced technology staffs on
the client’s premises. We noticed a significant distinction between
small ISPs, law firms, manufacturers and large organizations with
vast numbers of users. Take an HMO for example, the resources
required for several hundred workstations with differing
requirements mean deployment strategies must also differ. Such a
client has numerous operating units such as case management,
membership services, provider status, triage (emergency services),
accounting, home care and so on. One can not service such clients
without significant planning and tactical execution.
We’ve learned a great deal about Linux by working with larger
clients. Much of this surprised us. You will find an account of
what we discovered on the last large migration we encountered.
The Enterprise Syndrome
As we began the two migrations I supervised, my analysis of the
customer’s expectations included:
- Ease of administration
- Multi-platform operations
- Lower costs of operations
- Reduced support costs
- Enhanced application abilities
Frankly, the clients’ expectations surprised me. I expected
something else from these Technology Departments . I discovered
that the clients had done their homework. In every case, the Linux
initiative resulted from seeing another network in their industry
operating Linux.
One example stands out. The Technology Department at a large
University in the Northwest ran Linux as their enterprise platform.
A graduate from that school’s computer science program invited his
new bosses over to see the University running Linux. While asking
numerous questions of the system administrators of the school, the
client had a peak experience. They discovered Linux in a big
way.
Ease of Administration with Linux
One of the two projects involved Novell Netware. I thought that
one requirement would be to include Linux in a Netware environment.
I expected this from past experience. I did not expect the client
to ask for a total migration off of Netware and on to Linux.
I migrated from Novell about the time they demanded all CNE’s
take the version 4.0 exam to maintain their certifications. So, I
had some exposure to “directory services” but I was pretty rusty on
the deployment of NDS. While interviewing the head of network
operations on one of the Novell projects, he said directory
services added to his sleep deprivation. After migrating from
Novell 3.12, he said that his world went from simple to
chaotic.
The head of network operations mentioned his passion for
extracting anything Novell from his environment. I tested him to
make sure he wasn’t throwing the baby out with the bath water.
Then, I discovered how deep seated his displeasure ran. In a few
words, he convinced me he wanted to push directory services, client
32 (or Internetworking) and Groupwise out of a plane at 30,000 feet
without a parachute.
He had visited three former Novell colleagues with networks
running Linux. He attested to hands on experience using TCP/IP with
Linux, Samba and netatalk. He convinced me that he wanted the “ease
of administering” Linux. I think I had to pinch myself when I heard
him speak.
Multi-platform Operations
In both client environments, the one with Novell as well as the
Microsoft enterprise, we found Macintosh, Windows 95/98 and one or
more UNIX systems on the backbone. People use the term
“heterogeneous” to describe such environments. The various
platforms use the same ethernet hubs, routers and connections. They
co-exist on the same local area network. That doesn’t mean that
they make friends and play well together.
For example, the NT enterprise model conflicted with the
Appletalk zones and peering. The UNIX systems ran specialized
client-server applications which demanded emulation on the Windows
and Macintosh clients. Configuration of these services and their
maintenance demanded specialized expertise. The specialists in
Netware didn’t necessarily have Windows’ expertise and vice versa.
The platforms didn’t operate well with each other and neither did
the staff.
During the course of one of the migrations, we experienced a
sample of the conflict within the organization’s personnel ranks.
One of the Macintosh specialists did not receive an invitation to
participate in the project. The head of the Technology Group said
that “he” too, didn’t play well with others. Over the seven day
migration, the Mac guy often burst through the doors with eyes
crazed peering into our monitors and asking if we had forgotten to
do something that had either little or no application to the tasks
involved.
Later, one of the team members told me the Mac guy refused to
touch Windows computers. This may sound strange, but the client’s
operations were unionized. I had not experienced this in technology
departments since I work in Texas. Under the staffing contract, he
didn’t have to work on Windows machines. The final kicker came when
another staff member told me Linux fell as an exception to their
current contract. That still befuddles me. I think the Union just
missed the possibility that anyone would use Linux.
Lower Costs of Operations
We heard a lot of nattering about how licensing created issues
with which some Technology Departments found difficulty in coping.
I expected our clients to complain about the high cost of licensing
from networking operation system manufacturers. They complained
less about the licensing costs than they did about the
inconvenience of managing the licenses. I heard comments such as
“he’s running Claris Pro, does he have a license?” Then I heard,
“She wants to run Excel, do we have another license to give
her?”
When the client with the Novell environment discussed the amount
of time spent on licensing issues for 2,000 users, I respected
their cost-benefit study. Over the years, I came to consider rights
management as just part of the job. It didn’t occur to me that this
would stir the Technology managers’ emotions toward the edge of
frustration. He called it “trying to herd cats”.
Reduced Support Costs
I must have bought into the “Linux is hard to administer”
chatter of those people opposing the “upstart” operating system.
Our clients had already isolated the ease of management issues when
they built their business cases. Their studies indicated reduction
in support costs should occur due to the “straight-forwardness and
consistency inherent in UNIX systems administration.” You read it
correctly. Yes, their studies indicated reduction in support costs
should occur due to the “straight-forwardness and consistency
inherent in UNIX systems administration.”
Several items stick in my mind from reading excerpts from one of
the business cases. The cost of training appeared less on a
per-person basis with Linux versus other network operating systems.
The Linux environments studied by the client and used in their
business case indicated substantial reductions in annual support
contracts. Response times by the proprietary vendors had degraded
since I had last negotiated a service contract with either Novell,
Apple or Microsoft, although Apple appeared to guarantee a faster
response time than I had remembered.
Our clients used the reduction in the cost of annual support
contracts and the “straight forwardness” slash “go it alone”
arguments in their business cases. The amounts for 2,000 users ran
into the tens of thousands of dollars range. One of the team
members commented that they could buy a lot of computer equipment
with the dollars saved.
Enhanced Application Abilities
Corporate users of Linux deploy web services, messaging
environments, firewalls, file, print and application services. On
both migrations we saw an emphasis made on the server side of
things. So, we provided our teams several administration tools,
including a product known as Cheops.
We found Cheops, an Open Source Network User Interface, at
http://www.marko.net/cheops/.
The developer designed Cheops to determine the OS for hosts on the
network, selecting appropriate icons for each different one. He
also describes his product as a network equivalent of a swiss-army
knife that unifies network utilities.
Cheops gives the administrator the equivalent of a file manager
for a network. It provides the system administrator and the user a
tool for locating, accessing, diagnosing, and managing network
resources, using point and click graphical navigation.
We demonstrated Cheops and helped configure other applications
for network administration accessible through a web browser such as
Linuxconf and SWAT. The system administrators and Technology
Department personnel had no idea Linux could provide such an array
of graphical network applications. I stepped back and watched as
one of my associates demonstrated the suite of tools assembled for
the client and felt a bit stunned by the impressive capabilities of
Linux.
Some Thoughts From the Field
Often, we enter into a project with mental pictures or
expectations of how the effort will emerge. On this trip we entered
with only a minor idea of the scope of the enterprise. We learned,
once again though, that we didn’t know what we didn’t know. I try
to approach most engagements this way, but often I find myself in
the unwitting habit of thinking I already know what the client
needs. I find a lot of personal benefit from being humbled in this
way.
Here’s another item to consider. We saw great benefits from
working as a team. Each of us brought something to the party that
dazzled the others. When the final environment materialized, we saw
a feature rich and state of the art operation center we couldn’t
have visualized before we started. The team work reminded me of the
“stone soup” story. I really got to live it.
Another aspect of the engagements opened another port in my
brain. I believe as people in industry begin to see the advantages
of Linux as a network operating environment, it will become the de
facto standard. If people could see what I saw, few could deny the
benefits of the platform in the enterprise.
After the final of the two projects, we gathered our materials
to head home, when one of the assistant network administrators
asked for one last favor. He wanted our help in fine tuning his new
Linux desktop — the one he wanted to use personally. We looked
around the NOC and saw he had installed Linux on most of the
desktops in the room. As I think back on the migrations, I believe
seeing those desktops lined against the wall had to be why I went
there in the first place.
Tom
Adelstein, CPA, is the CIO/CFO of Bynari, Inc. He’s the author of several
books and articles on business and technology and has management,
consulting and hands-on experience in the Information Technology
field.