Finding the Balance: Centralized and Distributed IT Models Case Study: Princeton University IMAP and Exchange Mail Services Dan Oberst CSG 01.08.04.

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

UBC Wide Microsoft Campus Agreement March Products covered under MS Campus Agreement  Windows OS Upgrade –Note: still requires OEM version of OS.

Advertisements

Lotus Notes - the University of Nebraska Experience Greg Gray University of Nebraska Central Administration Computing Services Network.

Collaboration and Unified Dennis Schmidt, Director, OIS.

Moving Your Computer Lab(s) to the Cloud Rick O’Toole & Dave Hicking University of Connecticut Libraries.

Kansas Gov Cloud update. Thank You! Recently we have all been through 2 studies. One performed by EMC and the other by IBM Both vendors commented on the.

Build vs. Buy vs. Open Source CSG Fall 2003 Meeting Jon Giltner University of Colorado at Boulder.

A tour of new discovery introducing XpertCapture Your ultimate data capturing solution.

Tom Lewis, Director Academic & Collaborative Applications UW Information Technology The Saga of UW’s Office365 Implementation.

Software Asset Management (SAM) ITS Offsite Workshop 2002 November 8, 2002.

Technology Steering Group January 31, 2007 Academic Affairs Technology Steering Group February 13, 2008.

Server Upgrade From UW to Cyrus. What is an IMAP Server? Provides access to your mail messages stored on the mail server Requires authentication.

Infrastructure Mark Rosenberg UCCSC. UCCSC – August 9, 2005 What is LBNL? A Department of Energy National Laboratory, operated by the University.

Bear Access Fall 2006 Dan Bartholomew Lee Brink April 19, 2006.

Technology Steering Group January 31, 2007 Academic Affairs Technology Steering Group February 13, 2008.

Introduction <Header Title> Last saved: YYYY-MM-DD

Chapter 2 Client Server Architecture

Jeff McKinney Exchange to Mirapoint Migration January 11, 2006 Securing Exchange to Mirapoint Jeff McKinney University of Maryland Dept of Electrical.

Exchange deployment at CERN and new ideas for SPAM fighting Michel Christaller, Emmanuel Ormancey, Alberto Pace.

-I CS-3505 Wb_ -I.ppt. 4 The most useful feature of the internet 4 Lots of different programs, but most of them can talk to each.

Belnet Antispam Pro A practical example Belnet – Aris Adamantiadis BNC – 24 November 2011.

University of Tennessee at Chattanooga IT Master Plan Helpdesk: (423)

University of Washington Infrastructure IEEAF – RENU Network Design Workshop Seattle - 30 Nov 2007 Lori Stevens, Director, Distributed Systems Brad.

Brian Arkills Software Engineer, LDAP geek, AD bum, Senior Heckler, and Associate Troublemaking Officer State of Windows Services at the UW.

CommVault Data Management & Exchange Dogfood Presentation by: Georgia Huggins Exchange Server Support | MS IT.

IT:Network:Applications Fall  Running one “machine” inside another “machine”  OS in Virtual machines sees ◦ CPU(s) ◦ Memory ◦ Disk ◦ USB ◦ etc.

1 IT Governance 2006 Strategy/Business Case Presentation Department of Human Services.

IT Update Faculty Senate September 1, 2004 University of Houston Information Technology.

Sun One IMAP & Microsoft Exchange Coexistence Dan Oberst Princeton University CSG 9/21/04.

Brown University Exchange 2003 Molly Baird Manager, Windows-Novell Services.

Using Mail Mac OS X. Opening Mail First of all, click on this icon in the dock (or in your Applications folder) to bring up Mail.

Natick Public Schools Technology Update September 11, 2006 Dennis Roche, CISA Director of Technology.

Outsoursing in Banks. Traditional Reasons for Outsourcing.

Site License Advisory Team February 28, 2014 meeting.

Module 6: Manage and Configure Messaging. Configuring Internet Mail Using Small Business Server (SBS) 2008 Console Configuring Protection Configuring.

SharePoint Online August 25th, 2010 Rick Wise, MCTS RJB Technical Consulting

By: Amber Shepard   Microsoft Outlook is an client and personal information manager (PIM) that's available as part of Microsoft's Office suite.

+ -SIG Information Systems & Computing University of Pennsylvania June 27, /13.

EiNetwork Forum: How Did It All Happen August 12, /1/20151.

Integrated Human Resources Information Systems: Presentation to COIT December 4, 2006 Philip A. Ginsburg, Human Resources Director Charles Thompson, Interim.

-SIG Information Systems & Computing University of Pennsylvania December 16, /13.

9/16/1998CSG - Chicago E- 1 Collaboration Services Group (CSG) Systems And Networking Computing & Information.

Implementation Review1 Deriving Architecture Requirements March 14, 2003.

Glasgow status A.Flavell For HEPSYSMAN July 2004.

Oregon Department of Transportation Daylight Saving Time Solution Path.

Voice Mail Options Unified Messaging Voice Mail Web Browser David Howard Les Cottrell August SCCS Managers’ Meeting.

Site License Advisory Team Mar. 30, 2012 meeting.

UAB Windows 2000 Active Directory Project NMI Workshop 8 April 2003 Dave Green UAB Electrical & Computer Engineering Dept.

Update on  Mail Gateways  Servers  Spam Tagging  Anti-Virus  IMAP  Web Mail  LISTSERV  POP.

Module 1 Introduction to Designing a Microsoft® Exchange Server 2010 Deployment.

Common Solutions Group May 13,  Faculty/Staff appropriate grade of service  Full Exchange environment ◦ Outlook ( , contacts, calendar, tasks)

Backup Exec System Recovery. 2 Outline Introduction Challenges Solution Implementation Results Recommendations Q & A.

MCSE Guide to Microsoft Exchange Server 2003 Administration Chapter One Introduction to Exchange Server 2003.

Gareth Smith RAL PPD HEP Sysman. April 2003 Security Changes at RAL.

UCB Messaging Initiative Brad Judy Information Technology Services.

Secure and Reliable Messaging for an Academic Setting Bert DeSimone Communications Director for Enterprise Information Technology Services.

Funding Solution Task Force Recommendation #26 Robin Sawh LAN Supervisor, University Hall

Exchange and Anti-Virus Teresa Downey SLAC.

CLIENT SERVER COMPUTING. We have 2 types of n/w architectures – client server and peer to peer. In P2P, each system has equal capabilities and responsibilities.

A leap ahead... Darren Kearney Don Miller Ilya Pinchuk.

Printing (Net-Print) Joanne Button August 23rd 2016.

New Developments in Central Directory Service and Account Provisioning Dan Menicucci Enterprise Architect - University of Pittsburgh.

Server Virtualization IT Steering Committee, March 11, 2009

CCS Services – CCS-ITEE-NI&S Advisory Subcommittee Spring 2018 Update

Decommissioning Lamar

SCOoffice Server 4.1 Administration

Decommissioning Lamar

CCS Services – DCSS Spring 2018 Update

Room Booking Implementation Faculty Building

IT Service Delivery And Support Week Three - OS

SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT LIFE CYCLE

Presentation transcript:

Finding the Balance: Centralized and Distributed IT Models Case Study: Princeton University IMAP and Exchange Mail Services Dan Oberst CSG

IMAP Mail Services  Situation circa 1996: IBM Mainframe Mail (PUCC/RIC ) Unix-based:  Terminal (ucb mail/pine/elm/mush)  POP Service (Eudora) Novell-based Pegasus Mail Departmental and Personal Mail Servers:  Unix - POP/ucb mail  NeXTs, Macs, etc.  Central support service for sendmail configs

IMAP  1997 Testing, IMAP/LDAP implementation  1998 July 14 th Production rollout IMAP-enabled the campus Huge data integration & implementation issues Lesson: Avoid Bastille Day!  Ultimate Success 1999 Pegasus, IBM Mail phased out End of sendmail config support Departments encouraged to use central service

Move to Central IMAP  Uphill struggle: as O 2 (prolonged outages not healthy) Software issues delayed server upgrade  Ultimate success: Features worth it (attachments, lookups) Ongoing communications efforts essential SPAM blacklist, disasters brought in holdouts  Dept. conversions STILL happening Electrical Engineering Molecular Biology - ?2004 CS – Never?

Central IMAP Success  “No longer interesting” to depts.  Software matures  Economies of scale: Servers  Redundant/failover  Lower support/user costs Software updates: Virus/SPAM filtering Staffing depth Vendor support

Central Exchange Service  There go my people. I must follow them, for I am their leader. -- M. Ghandi  In August 2001, 5 departments request that OIT run a centralized Exchange Server  Windows 2000 conversion was being planned  Combined W2K/AD/Exchange Project launched  OIT agreed to fund initial hardware  Funding model to recover staff costs “Value Added $7.50/mailbox/month  Ongoing hardware covered through migration

Exchange  HUGE success: OIT gained credibility Broader support for W2K/AD conversion  Few domains, separate forests (e.g. CS) Fees seen as reasonable  Users get integrated calendar features  Support costs are higher than IMAP Current usage ~700 mailboxes Hired Exchange admin (staff are happy) New services (e.g.  Issues – outages; MS Support costs

Exchange  WIN-WIN Departments didn’t want to roll their own OIT didn’t want to have to bail them out Funding model was viewed as equitable  Hard to justify with central IT dollars  Depts. covered marginal cost of service  Overall cost to university was less  Depts. perceive improved productivity Central IT viewed as supportive and flexible