tbui

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 8 posts - 16 through 23 (of 23 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Department Web Hosting SLA #119
    tbui
    Keymaster

    @ jcapps:

    2.1.1 Is the local IT responsible for training of student run sites such as student organizations? The School of Law has 24 student organizations as well as 3 student run journals.

    If the student organizations go through their local departments to request this service, then yes. I will bring this back for consideration of setting up a separate hosting service for official groups that are not sponsored by departments.

    3.3 Is there are warning when customer is about to exceed default allocations?

    I believe this (notification as quota is getting close to limit) is a setting in cPanel. I will double check.

    in reply to: Department Web Hosting SLA #117
    tbui
    Keymaster

    @ ccovey01:

    2.1 need link to backup and restore costs

    I am not sure what “backup and restore costs” that is being referred to here is. Are you referring to the costs for UNM IT to assist with individual department’s backup and restore? If yes, then this is under Pricing and Billing – specifically under support coverage. If not, please elaborate.


    3.2 – In the case of student organizations, is their local department responsible for their training?

    If the student organizations go through their local departments to request this service, then yes. Reading jcapps’s feedback below this, I am thinking that a separate hosting service for official groups (non-department sponsored) is needed. I will bring this back for further discussion.


    3.2 bullet 9 – local department cannot be held financially responsible for any Web Hosting arrangement that a student organization initiated and maintains

    • thus need to make distinction between personal/affiliated Web Hosting and true department hosting

    Good feedback. See answer above. I will bring this back for review.

    3.3 suggest requirement for use of functional email address, or secondary FTE contact to ensure the site is not deleted if say the primary contact graduates or separates from UNM

    Amazing feedback. I will bring this back for consideration.

    • This reply was modified 8 years, 9 months ago by tbui.
    in reply to: Department Web Hosting SLA #116
    tbui
    Keymaster

    @ aballo:

    1 – “Department Admins” is not mentioned elsewhere in the document.

    Good catch. This refers to “Web Admins and Developers” under 2.1.1

    2.1.2 – Costs:

    This points to Service Catalog for “Department Web Hosting” – but costs are not mentioned?

    https://it.unm.edu/servicecatalog/asset_list.php?type=2&a_id=189 ?

    However, in 8 – Additional storage references “Virtual Infrastructure Services” where is this listed like this in the Service Catalog?  Is it the same as “Virtual Servers LoboCloud” ?

    Guilty as charged. We are also making updates to our services in our Service Catalog as we work on these SLAs. They will be updated.

    3.1 – Service Manager should ensure that this service is meeting the Customer’s needs.

    Yes.

    5.2 Service Request Response:

    * When requests fall outside of this range, what is the remedy for the Customer? Is it “contact the Service Owner” like in 4.3 (Escalation)

    * What visibility does the Customer have when there is a breach in the Acknowledgement timeline of a ticket?

    * “Campus Priorities” could be defined? What times of year specifically?

    – Could you provide examples of requests that fall outside of this range? Requests are different than incidents.

    – The only visibility mean that I am aware of today is to contact IT CSS. This is really good feedback, I will bring it back for review.

    – I will also bring this back for clarification.

    6.1 – Incident Reports:

    Where is the hourly rate and what items constitute associated expenses and materials defined in section 6 ?

    I believe this refers to different hourly rates based on the services consumed. I will bring this back for review and clarification.

    7 – Maintenance

    Maintenance windows should be defined in SLA. Maintenance performed outside of these agreed upon times should be communicated with the Customer in advance and if would cause significant negative impact , require their approval.

    Could you provide reasons for your proposal to have the maintenance windows defined in the SLA as opposed to via a link provided today?

    Agreed on the second part – that is how we operate today.

    9.1 – Availability Reporting

    Is this the Customer’s responsibility?  Why can’t sites be monitored by the Service Provider? Should this be part of the recommended enterprise services?

    Yes, it is currently the Customer’s responsibility. Sites can be monitored by the Service Provider, but we do not have that monitoring service available yet. In my opinion, this absolutely should be a part of the recommended enterprise services.

    9.2 – SLA Reviews

    Needs to state “Yearly” – with the Customer.

    Agreed. This will be included as part of the yearly service subscription renewal that Customer and UNM IT do.

    in reply to: Department Web Hosting SLA #115
    tbui
    Keymaster

    @ steely:

    Re: 2.1.1:
    Bullet 3: Does “Customer’s local IT support” refer to a UNM department’s own internal staff?
    Bullet 4: It seems to me that web hosting with UNM IT should include automatic nightly backups without a separate charge. The charge could come in at a restoration of a snapshot.

    Bullet 3: Yes. Example: a department’s admins that have access to use cPanel should consult with the department’s IT staff (can be primary admin or designated web developer, etc.) first before contacting IT as many problems are similar, repeated, and can be resolved much quicker locally. For departments without local IT staff, admins that have access to use cPanel should reach out to UNM IT directly.

    Bullet 4: In other words, you suggest that UNM IT should hold your data hostage, and then ask you for a fee to restore it? I like it. I will bring this idea back for review.

    Re: 3.2
    Bullet 2: Please provide a link to “Pricing  and Billing” in the SLA.

    I am not sure what you meant by this as “Pricing and Billing” is under section 8. And bullet 2 discusses analytics.

    Re: 8
    – Can web developers be notified of charges that will appear in the monthly bill detail in advance? (I understand that it is a department’s finance / admin personnel that can login to the IT Billing portal. Is that correct?)
    – Are all communications with UNM IT for questions / tech support to be billed at $75 / hour?

    – I do not know if it is possible to leverage cPanel’s view to let you see your charges. I will look into this.

    – Yes, all communications with UNM IT for questions/tech support are billed at $75/hour. In fact, you will receive a bill tomorrow for the 2 hours I am spending writing my replies here… On a more serious note, communication with UNM IT for questions/tech support are not billed (to my knowledge). This provision refers to where “professional service” work is done. Example of professional services: web development (code writing), web support (making sure your WordPress is updated for you), etc.

    in reply to: Department Web Hosting SLA #114
    tbui
    Keymaster

    @steely

    Re: 2.1.2,  Bullet 4: I thought up to 1 GB of storage was available free of charge? 256 MB is significantly less. It would be very easy for even a minimal website to exceed this and incur a monthly charge for its department.

    Sshhh, you’re not supposed to tell everyone about this sweet deal that was only offered to you!

    On a more serious note, before the introduction of cPanel, departments were only allocated 50 MB initially on website request/creation with the option of requesting additional storage up to 1 GB for $0 cost. This was done this way because we wanted to avoid circumstances in which departments that only used 20-50 MB ending up with a whole 1 GB of much wasted storage – which can be provisioned elsewhere where the extra storage was needed.

    With the implementation of cPanel, the project team lobbied and was given the permission to raise the initial 50 MB storage allocation to 256 MB. The final cost model is not finalized yet (soon), but when it is, it will be available on our website and announced at the various IT/IA group meetings.

    in reply to: Department Web Hosting SLA #113
    tbui
    Keymaster

    @gfaustin

    A list of the Content Management Systems that would be hosted within cpanel would help. Maybe not in the SLA but could be added in the Web-hosting service catalog.

    [IN PROGRESS] If by “Content Management Systems” you mean apps such as WordPress, Drupal, etc., then absolutely. We will add a list of Softaculous-enabled web apps on the siterequest.unm.edu.

    • This reply was modified 8 years, 9 months ago by tbui.
    in reply to: Department Web Hosting SLA #112
    tbui
    Keymaster

    @gfaustin

    In reference to item 2.1.1, one of the bullet points references training. Now that cpanel is going into production soon, it would be beneficial to have an orientation session for all interested. I know not everyone goes to the information architects meeting but I know there are lot of website designer at UNM. So an orientation will create awareness and also some hands on practice on how use it.

    [IN PROGRESS] Lovely idea! I will work with Cameron Goble and my folks to see if we can make it happen before or soon after go-live.

    • This reply was modified 8 years, 9 months ago by tbui.
    in reply to: Department Web Hosting SLA #111
    tbui
    Keymaster

    @ erooney:

    2.1:
    HTTPS should be a standard by which ALL UNM content is served. The service should include HTTPS by default.

    [DONE, v2.0] Agreed. This will be added to 2.1. I believe that the current cPanel architecture has this already.

    2.1.1 bullet 2:
    Ensuring that the hosted web sites are secure and updated is a shared responsibility with end users responsible for things like secure code and keeping WordPress installations up-to-date and web infrastructure security a responsibility of the hosting provider.

    [DONE, v2.0] Agreed. My proposed new language: “Ensure that hosted websites’ code, content, and installed web apps (such as WordPress) are secure and updated (compromised websites because of code, content, and/or installed web apps will be shut down at UNM IT’s discretion);”

    2.2.2: The calculation for availability is vague. There should be specifics on the exact calculation used when determining availability.

    Are network outages or degradation, as an example, part of the service and accounted for in the calculation? Are those outages part of the web service or excluded from the calculation.

    Example:
    YEARLY UPTIME CALCULATION = [(hours service up) / ((365.25*24) – (hours down for scheduled updates and maintenance[1]) – (hours down for emergency security updates[2]))] * 100

    [1] Schedule updates and maintenance are posted at least 7 days prior to the update or occur during UNM IT’s scheduled maintenance windows described here:http://it.unm.edu/availability/index.html

    [2] Patches and updates that are flagged as “critical” or higher by the vendor may be installed outside of the scheduled maintenance windows.

    I think you should join our Agreements (SLAs, Standards) Review Team at IT. I will bring this back to IT Agreements for review.

    3.2 bullet 8: This provision risks deleting code or work product that a department may have on cPanel servers if their backup was performed prior to the cPanel snapshot reversion. A customer could be performing backups at reasonable intervals and still be harmed by this provision of the SLA. Will UNM IT notify users when a snapshot reversion will take place allowing users to make backups?

    Agreed, but as a complete restore from a snapshot is only done as a last measure to restore service, I am not certain if informing Users of the restore would help Users to do backups if the service is unavailable.

    3.3 bullet 5: A department could store or host sensitive info on a non-UNM IT hosted service through a UNM IT hosted web site that would violate the spirit of this item.

    I think that we are missing a bigger opportunity here where we could leverage enterprise web infrastructure, services and data (including existing institutional data assets) to allow departments to more securely collect and store sensitive information that may exist elsewhere on campus (Banner, ODS, etc.). It seems like a UNM enterprise service web service should strive to provide this environment where the end-goal is less duplication, better security, and a better understanding by the enterprise about where we are housing and storing, potentially, sensitive data.

    Agreed. This is in planning – to make a more secure and restricted environment in which websites/web applications that touch sensitive data (such as Banner) can be hosted. This is a popular request, and IT will make reasonable efforts to accommodate this request.

    • This reply was modified 8 years, 9 months ago by tbui.
Viewing 8 posts - 16 through 23 (of 23 total)