Email, Calendaring and

Storage Initiatives

ISCJanuary 25th , 2007

CCS Integrated Plan 2006-2010CCS Integrated Plan 2006-2010

• “A redesign and deployment of the central email service utilizing well supported, standards based solution. The objective is to roll-out a solution with significant decrease in operational support effort and an increase in service availability, functionality and customer satisfaction.”

CCS Integrated Plan 2006-2010CCS Integrated Plan 2006-2010

• “Undertake an evaluation of the ability of the University’s Calendaring environment to meet the following requirements: expand coverage to graduate and undergraduate student access, enable resource management, and integration with the portal and services within the portal, such as WebCT. The objective is to decrease complexity for the end-user and open more opportunities for collaboration.”

RequirementsRequirements

• CCS has been gathering requirements over the last couple of years

• Spring 2006 – MyPortico Stakeholders – Calendaring

• Early 2006 – ITSIG planning day – email and calendaring

• ITSAC – 2005/06 • Continuous

– Gathering feedback on existing services

EmailEmail

• Email– 7,000 faculty/staff emails– 28,000 student emails– 1,000,000 messages a day– Relative to other schools uptake by students

is very good

Email IssuesEmail Issues

• Storage• Spam• Performance (webmail)• New devices• Institutional vs Individual needs• Integration• Archive/management• Cost of maintaining infrastructure

THESE REQUIREMENTS ARE NOT UNIQUE TO GUELPH

CalendaringCalendaring

• Calendaring– Oracle (Corporate Time)– 1000+ accounts – faculty/staff and some

student roles

Calendaring IssuesCalendaring Issues

• Integration– Multiple calendars– Collaborative suites

• Resource Management

• Individual vs Institutional needs

• Students

Changing LandscapeChanging Landscape

• Google Apps for Education

• Microsoft Live EDU

• ASP - Application Service Provider

• Appliance Solutions (Mirapoint)

First StepsFirst Steps

• Engaging a consultant to guide us through process– Develop requirements– Engage Community– Develop RFP– Select a solution

OutcomesOutcomes

• Beginning fall 2007

• Two solutions?

• Project progress will be posted on CCS website

CCS Integrated Plan 2006-2010CCS Integrated Plan 2006-2010

• “Investigate and implement the creation of a centrally managed institutional storage resource that is cost effective for all parties and provides capacity as needed. This is analogous to a bottomless cup of coffee. The objective is to create centralized storage as a common commodity that can be searched and accessed from any application”

CCS Integrated Plan 2006-2010CCS Integrated Plan 2006-2010

• “Investigate and implement an enhanced institutional backup system that is closely linked to the storage strategy. This is designed to ensure against the accidental loss of information and may include off-site storage of certain information.”

RequirementsRequirements

• CCS has been gathering requirements over the last couple of years

• 2004 – External Architecture Assessment• Early 2006

– ITSIG planning day

• Continuous– Gathering feedback on existing services

StorageStorage

• 12 TB NAS – email and CFS

• 4 TB SAN – Administrative Apps

• 10 TB SAN – Library and CCS

• Xx TB direct attached storage

BackupBackup

• CCS backs up about 200 systems

• Onsite and Offsite Tape Library’s

• Piloting leading edge technologies around data duplication

IssuesIssues

• Capacity• Performance• Emerging needs• Ever increasing demands in existing services• Need for enhanced Offsite Storage

– Business Continuity and Disaster Recovery

First StepFirst Step

• Engaging a consultant to guide us through process– Develop requirements– Engage Community– Develop RFP– Select a solution

OutcomesOutcomes

• Highly efficient and redundant Institutional storage – cost effective, reliable, scalable

• Tight integration with research programs• Commoditization• Agile storage space• “Bottomless Cup of Coffee”