Network Management SLA

Viewing 2 reply threads
  • Author
    Posts
    • #352
      aswancer
      Participant

      Network Management SLA

    • #366
      erooney
      Participant

      2.1.1:
      – Should the clause “Refrain from bypassing or circumventing security measures” use language from RFC 2119 (https://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2119.txt) that this is absolute?

      2.1.2:
      – Should the clause “Refrain from using any non-UNM IT supported network equipment (switch, routers, hubs, wireless access points);” use language from RFC 2119 (https://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2119.txt) that this is absolute?

      2.2.2:
      – How is 99.9% uptime calculated and what goes into the uptime calculation? The 2 day time frame to repair broken equipment could possibly trigger an SLA violation of 99.9% uptime depending on how uptime is calculated. Is there an uptime calculation per department, zone, something else?
      – How are degradations in service handled in the uptime calculation? Is there a certain threshold at which the network is deemed to be “down” due to a degradation in service?

      3.2:
      – “Include UNM IT in the planning and design phase of … new construction.” Should “Policy 5310: Information Technology for Facilities” be referenced here? https://policy.unm.edu/university-policies/5000/5310.html

      Other:
      – Should there be a separate section in the SLA for departments that have access to Tier 2 support?

      • This reply was modified 8 years, 1 month ago by erooney. Reason: Included note about Tier 2 support
      • #396
        dstaylor
        Participant

        2.1.1:
        – Should the clause “Refrain from bypassing or circumventing security measures” use language from RFC 2119 (https://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2119.txt) that this is absolute?

        We will certainly ask our Agreements Committee to consider the wording.  Will leave this to the Agreements Committee to decide on preferred wording, and the wording was carefully agreed upon given the “educational” freedom at the University, and the delicate balance required for security and protecting the University.

        2.1.2:
        – Should the clause “Refrain from using any non-UNM IT supported network equipment (switch, routers, hubs, wireless access points);” use language from RFC 2119 (https://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2119.txt) that this is absolute?

        We will certainly ask our Agreements Committee to consider the wording.  Will leave this to the Agreements Committee to decide on preferred wording, and the wording was carefully agreed upon given the “educational” freedom at the University, and the delicate balance required for security and protecting the University.  Bear in mind there are still some departments on campus who have “network islands” separated by a firewall.

        2.2.2:
        – How is 99.9% uptime calculated and what goes into the uptime calculation? The 2 day time frame to repair broken equipment could possibly trigger an SLA violation of 99.9% uptime depending on how uptime is calculated. Is there an uptime calculation per department, zone, something else?

        Uptime calculations are performed by our networking monitoring software and is determined based on whether or not the monitoring tool can reach the device to poll it.

        The two day time frame is actually an incorrect carryover from a previous draft version and should say 1 day, we will correct it.  We do acknowledge that an extended repair window could cause a breach in the 99.9% SLA goal.  In all instances we strive to repair service outages as quickly as possible and in almost every case this is measured in hours and not days.

        We have dependency groups defined so that we can calculate uptime with granularity ranging from building, to zone, to entire campus.

        – How are degradations in service handled in the uptime calculation? Is there a certain threshold at which the network is deemed to be “down” due to a degradation in service?

        From an uptime calculation standpoint, if the device is up and reachable by the monitoring system then SLA calculation is not affected by degradation.  From a resolution standpoint, we recognize that a degradation can be just as impactful as a “down” device and prioritize and work the issue in the same manner.

        3.2:
        – “Include UNM IT in the planning and design phase of … new construction.” Should “Policy 5310: Information Technology for Facilities” be referenced here? https://policy.unm.edu/university-policies/5000/5310.html

        Great suggestion, thank you!

        Other:
        – Should there be a separate section in the SLA for departments that have access to Tier 2 support?

        I am assuming that you are referring to departmental IT when you mention Tier 2 support.  In those cases this SLA is between departmental IT and central IT.  Several sections of the document make reference to departmental IT doing initial troubleshooting efforts prior to escalating to IT Networking.

    • #392
      burlison
      Participant

      I agree that wording in sections 2.1.1. and 2.1.2 needs to be consistent with UAP Policy 2500 language that states:  

      Users shall not:

      – attempt to defeat or circumvent and security measures, controls, accounts, or record-keeping systems
      (UAP 2500 Section 3.1)

      –  physically or electrically attach any device to a University computer, communications devices, or wired or wireless network connection that negatively impacts the performance of any other University computing service 
      (UAP 2500 Section 3.3)

Viewing 2 reply threads
  • The topic ‘Network Management SLA’ is closed to new replies.