1 / 16

Dave Reese CTO

Dave Reese CTO. 5th Quilt Fiber Workshop October 13, 2006. “SLAs are not worth the paper they are written on.”. -- David Farmer, University of Minnesota. Discussion Topics. Asked to present on: Actual SLA’s Sparing Measuring Contract Language Penalties Impact to design

alda
Download Presentation

Dave Reese CTO

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Dave ReeseCTO 5th Quilt Fiber Workshop October 13, 2006

  2. “SLAs are not worth the paper they are written on.” -- David Farmer, University of Minnesota

  3. Discussion Topics • Asked to present on: • Actual SLA’s • Sparing • Measuring • Contract Language • Penalties • Impact to design • With that out of the way…

  4. CA State Budget Language The California State Budget for 06-07, signed into law on June 30, 2006 provides: SEC. 24.55. (a) For the purposes of this section, “educational institutions” means the University of California (UC), upon the approval of its Board of Regents, the California State University (CSU), the California Community Colleges (CCC), and the State Department of Education (SDE), or their designees, as part of their participation on the Board of the Corporation for Education Network Initiatives in California (CENIC). (b) To expend General Fund, student fee revenue, or any other monies for the California Research and education Network (CalREN) state educational institutions shall do all of the following: (3)Approve an agreement that designates specific levels of service to be provided by CalREN to all public education segments.

  5. Why all the fuss over SLA? • Confusion over CENIC == Carrier • We probably contributed to this as, well, we do ‘look’ more like a carrier every day! • Our services aren’t any less reliable • They’re better, but very hard to prove • And we look bad by fighting against an SLA (We must be hiding something?) • Something magical about potential to getting money back!

  6. Components of Carrier SLA’s • Outages are counted only when: • unplanned (i.e., maintenance work is not included) • caused by circumstances within the control of the provider • they exceed a minimum time period

  7. Compensation for outages • Commercial providers credit customers based on length of outage and the monthly cost of affected service • Credits are applied to subsequent invoice • Credits may be limited to a maximum dollar figure • Commercial carriers are for-profit corporations and SLA compensation is built into cost of service

  8. What should a RON do? • Service Level = $$$$ • Services are (typically) funded directly by our ‘members’ • Thus ‘member’ is actually in control of service level by willingness to pay for: • Number of spares, redundancy, access circuit bandwidth, upgrades to capacity… • Level of maintenance (NBD, 7x24x365) • Staffing levels • Etc.

  9. CENIC SLA Development • In progress (but very slow) • 99.99% of campus technical contacts think this is waste of time • Enforce SLAs of our providers (and exclude their failures to perform from our SLA) • Limiting scope of SLA to the backbone • Access ‘circuits’ covered by provider SLA • We found it too difficult to write language that excluded site-caused problems (saturated circuit, site based power problems, viruses/worms, forcing us to accept a design we disagree with, etc.)

  10. CENIC SLA Development • Measurement implies public reporting • Most providers don’t actually do this, but for some reason we are being held to higher standard (“prove it”) • Cost of SLA • We are asking the group that is working on the draft language to estimate the cost of implementation • Communicating expectation that SLA cost needs to be funded, not just ‘included’

  11. CENIC SLA Development • Penalties • Our proposal is that failure to meet SLA is a Board discussion item • For compensation we’ll need to increase their charges accordingly (Will they then want a rebate of any fees not returned to them?)

  12. Proposed SLA Components • NOC and trouble ticket system • Maximum backbone router outage duration and frequency (per month) • Maximum latency and packet loss from central measurement point to backbone routers (smokeping) • Scheduled maintenance excluded • Enforce vendor SLAs • Seek resolution with Board if dissatisfied

  13. K12 SLA Term Requirements • Service Overview • Term • Responsibilities • Service Details • Exceptions • Sampling and Reporting • Penalties • Dispute Resolution and Escalation • Change Requests

  14. K12 Expectation for SLA • Key quality indicators: • Availability, Speech/video quality, Response time, Round-trip delay, Delay, Latency, Jitter, Packet loss, Locking, Transaction rate, Goodput (carried), Throughput (offered), Idle time, Authorization, Confidentiality, Integrity, Non-repudiation, Disk space, Help desk, Training, Interoperability, Pickup time, Time to close, Hold time, Connect time, Graceful degradation, Revocation

  15. One size doesn’t fit all • Cannot come to full agreement with all segments (K12) on SLA • Possible solution: Two SLAs • Lightweight (low $) for all members • Extensive (high $) for K12

  16. Questions?

More Related