Page 493 - Handbook of Modern Telecommunications

4-24 CRC Handbook of Modern Telecommunications, Second Edition

4.2.6.4.4 What role will standards play in a vendor’s strategy?
No broad-based standards have been established yet for an RTI management schema, although several
efforts are underway:
• The Data Center Markup Language (DCML) organization announced that it has formed a ven-
dor group charged with developing a utility computing model. Unfortunately, many enter-
prises and major RTI vendors remain absent from this group, including HP, IBM, Microsoft,
and Sun.
• Other standards bodies, such as the Organization for the Advancement of Structured Information
Standards (OASIS) and the Open Grid Services Architecture (OGSA), have efforts under way that
touch on RTI technologies and, thus, may overlap with the efforts of the DCML consortium.
• Some vendors are developing their own internal standards. For example, IBM’s Common Event
Format is meant to improve automation capabilities.
With so many overlapping, and in several cases uncoordinated, efforts occurring throughout vari-
ous vendors and groups, the likelihood of attaining a common standard for RTI interoperability is
remote. In response, vendors will likely seek to protect their proprietary interests first. Ask your vendor
what standards it intends to follow; however, don’t rely too heavily on standards to ensure integration
between vendor RTI offerings.
4.2.6.4.5 How will application vendors support the usage-based pricing model?
One of the tenets behind the RTI is the notion of building virtualized infrastructures that can rap-
idly reallocate resources to higher-priority business needs. Such efficiency is good news for companies.
However, one of the ugly truths within the IT industry is that vendors make a large profit on inefficiency;
for example, when an enterprise buys more hardware capacity or bandwidth than is strictly needed, or
purchases more end-user licenses than necessary. If the RTI enables enterprises to gain improved con-
trol over their IT assets, it will likely have a serious impact on vendors’ revenue. Thus, many independent
software vendors are reluctant to support the RTI model—at least in the form that it is presented by large
hardware vendors such as HP, IBM, and Sun. Some vendors, such as Oracle and SAP, are looking into
somewhat competitive RTI offerings in which their own software dominates. Although they may offer
competitive RTI-based technology, they are not offering usage-based pricing because of the potential
impact on their key revenue streams.

4.2.6.4.6 Is RTI “one size fits all,” or will it vary by IT organizational maturity?
After you have deployed an RTI architecture, don’t assume that the technology will do most of the hard
work for you. Your company’s ability to effectively use RTI products and services will depend largely on
the process maturity level achieved by your IT organization. You will still have to overcome the typi-
cal hurdles centering on process development, interorganizational communication, and technological
readiness. Your vendor can help by recommending best practices for implementing and maintaining its
technology and services. Such directions should take into account the varying levels of enterprise pre-
paredness. In general, the best way to implement an RTI is over time, in stages. Without strong change
management and planning, most RTI implementations will likely fail.
4.2.6.4.7 How will RTI affect IT operations?
Implementing an RTI will not end the IT organization’s responsibility for supervising operations.
The self-tuning systems promised by an RTI likely will increase the demand for skilled operations
personnel who are fluent in the new language of autonomics. Rather than managing events, IT staff
will focus more on providing services. The increasing emphasis on services will make collaboration
across the IT organization more critical. Ask your vendor to recommend best practices in operations
and maintenance.