Completion Report
Project Summary:
The stated objectives for this project were:
No. | Description | Objective Met? |
O1 | Deliver a report that enumerates and details the obsolete infrastructure | Y |
O2 | Publish a plan for decommissioning all obsolete servers, operating systems and applications | Y |
| O3 | Communicate the implications of decommissioning with business partners and other stakeholders | Y |
| O4 | Decommission identified servers and systems that can be taken out of service under this project | Y |
| O5 | Produce report with recommendations for any outstanding items | Y |
| O6 | Suggest procedures to keep inventory up to date | N |
In the project brief, the following deliverables were identified:
No. | Description | Delivered? |
D1.1 | A report that catalogues all obsolete items on our current infrastructure that should be taken out of service | Y |
D2.1 | Documentation that lists when and how each item identified under D1.1 can be decommissioned | Y |
D3.1 | A communications plan that involves all stakeholders and lets them know what is being taken out of service and the implications for them | Y |
D4.1 | The removal of particular obsolete servers and systems from our infrastructure | Y |
| D5.1 | A set of recommendations and plans that identify when any remaining infrastructure can be decommissioned | Y |
| D6.1 | Recommendations for amendments to project methodologies with regards to lifespans of future technologies and applications | N |
| D6.2 | A matrix of current hardware; supporting software technologies; operating systems; version numbers; indicative lifespans and exit times | N |
All of the objectives were met and deliverables produced apart from those under section 6. It had been envisioned under the original project sponsor that these would be actioned, but as the project progressed it became apparent that these elements were being addressed under other initiatives in the division (work on the CMDB in particular) and so these were not pursued.
A list of the decommissioned servers can be seen on this wiki page.
Analysis of Resource Usage:
Staff Usage Estimate: 253 days
Staff Usage Actual: 253 days
Staff Usage Variance: 0%
Other Resource Estimate: 0 days
Other Resource Actual: 0 days
Other Resource Variance: 0%
Explanation for variance:
Effort
There is no difference between the estimated effort and the actual effort used for the project. Some elements of the work estimated have ended up using more effort than anticipated, and some less. This has allowed a degree of flexibility across the lifetime of the project which has been very helpful. For example, the work on TSM required a greater number of days (particularly for colleagues in Development Technology) than estimated but effort on some migrations was lower and so this 'unused' effort balanced out the extra work needed for TSM. Similarly, work on Password Manager Pro was higher than expected but did not require extra effort from the programme budget.
Milestones
The only major milestone change was effected in late 2015 when the plans for the plethora of ColdFusion migrations were completed. These, in addition, to the date for the migration of HR-Payroll LIVE in June/July 2016, meant that the original dates of late 2015 for the decommissions being carried out under this project were not realistic and so they were amended to the end of June 2016. The milestones for switching off the various EOL servers were not flexible and so considerable effort has been made to ensure that all the necessary migrations have been completed, and the monitoring and reporting of these has been maintained.
Scope
There has only been one scope change during the lifetime of this project and that was an agreement that any migrations from the hosting service that had not been carried out by July 2015 could be carried out under INF105. This was to allow the project COM014 (which had overseen the development of the new hosting service) to close rather than run into a second year. Some migrations were difficult to schedule with academic partners, and so INF105 successfully picked up some of this work.
Key Learning Points:
Feedback from the project team has highlighted the following positive lessons from this project:
- An electronic version of all infrastructure items which need to be decommissioned has been essential
- Regular project team meetings to review the position
- Monthly high-level reports on the position for managers. These reports were also used to engage with projects delivering the actual decommissioning outside INF105. The report frequency has been increased towards the end of the project to weekly. This really helped to focus delivery.
Outstanding issues:
As at 28/07, not all of the servers have been completely decommissioned, with some work still being done on these. This is expected to be completed in early August, and the effort on these tasks will fall under the the decommissioning project that is scheduled for 16-17. This approach has the agreement of all stakeholders.
The outstanding migrations are:
Solaris servers: Fenton (HR-Payroll); Morton (Global Showcase); Awe (DRPS); Pure & Serengeti (related to withdrawal of DRUM firewall)
The outstanding decommissions/switch-offs are:
Windows servers: Buffy, Nixon, Ford, WMS1/2
RedHat Enterprise: Boombox