SIP in the Enterprise

SIP - how many positive and negative things do you read these days on this topic?  A great deal - right?

Multi-location businesses know the process of connecting multiple offices to facilitate effective site-to-site communications can be complicated, expensive and time-consuming. Enterprise SIP is a new solution designed for multi-location businesses that enables you to serve your distributed offices with voice and data services through one or a handful of centralized PBXs – eliminating the need for PRIs or business lines at each location.  Can your MPLS network help drive enterprise wide communications and efficiency?

Do you feel we have reached another tipping point in the telecommunications industry? Do you agree that SIP trunking is the fastest growing service in our space right now and we all have an opportunity to capitalize on this trend, but we must be smart about our approach?  Do you have SIP enabled devices on premise already?

SIP Trunking’s growth presents a new revenue opportunity, but only if the trunk offers services above and beyond PSTN quality voice. If a service provider simply provides VoIP connectivity, they will see their revenues erode. SIP Trunking offers service providers a tremendous opportunity to deliver valuable services to enterprises by providing new communication services in demand by the enterprise market. Enterprises are becoming more educated on SIP Trunking. Practically every large enterprise has read a case study that demonstrates how an enterprise can reduce their trunks by 30% - 40%, which is obviously a negative revenue proposition for the service provider. So service providers must develop a comprehensive managed service offering to enhance and complement their SIP Trunking service. So you need an internal driver on this project, not just leave it up to a service provider.

There are several market trends, which are driving adoption of SIP Trunking by enterprises. Over the next 5-years:

• Enterprise workforces will become increasingly mobile

• Video calling will be widely adopted

• High-definition voice will be the new standard for voice communications

• PBXs will migrate to unified communications

• Enterprises are demanding comprehensive business continuity capabilities

We can easily talk about how SIP Trunking is enabling new revenue opportunities for service providers of each of these trends, but in this post we will focus specifically on the prospects with Unified Communications.

ABI Research recently issued a report “Vertical Market Opportunities in Unified Communications,” which predicts that the unified communications solutions market will reach nearly $4.2 billion in 2014 – a sharp increase from 2008 when the market reached around $302 million.  Should you make an investment in the same old technology of a PBX or is now the time to move to Unified Communications?

We all know that Unified Communications (UC) is the integration of varied communication options, like voice, video, email, instant messaging and conferencing, presence on a single IP platform. The primary benefit of UC is the ability to speed the rate of communications, keeping everyone more closely connected and improves collaboration among employees.

Another capability of UC is the greater control it provides a user over their communications options. With a single Web-based account, individual users can decide when, where and how they can be reached -- and users can define these parameters without the need for IT support. In addition, it gives greater flexibility to move between facilities, or home office.

SIP Trunking enables the delivery of Unified Communication capabilities now, from the “cloud, offering service providers an immediate, new revenue opportunity versus shifting that revenue opportunity to the PBX manufactures. With a “cloud-model”, enterprises no longer need to purchase additional equipment to have a full-featured UC solution. But is security a concern in this option?

I propose to you that as your aging communication systems need replacement, now is the time to look at next generation telecommunications.  Integrate that MPLS network to deliver voice, video, data, and leverage your teams to enable SIP in the enterprise. 
Take a holistic approach to looking at your Unified delivery of Communications.
 
Stay positive and engaged!

Scott Arnett
scott.arnett@charter.net

Mailbag

I have gotten several emails, and what I thought I would do is collect them for a few weeks and then do a mailbag posting to answer some of the questions received.  Many good questions received - so keep sending them. 

Q.  What do you think of the Wisconsin smoke free law?
A.  I am trying to keep this blog technical in nature, how it pertains to information technology.  But I do appreciate the question.  I believe as Americans we all have the liberty to make choices.  Business owners should be able to make choices, and as a customer/consumer - we can make choices.  If I want a smoke free environment to eat my dinner, then I will make a choice as to what establishment I will spend my money at.  Today it is smoking, tomorrow it will be soda, food - where does it stop?  Is this really the government's place to dictate?  I think it crosses a sacred line and opens the door for future controls that take away our liberty. 

Q. What is your opinion on the Arizona Immigration Law?
A.  I am trying to keep this blog technical in nature, how it pertains to information technology. But I do appreciate the question.  I will continue to do business in Arizona and I believe we need tighter controls at our borders.  I don't support any boycotts.

Q. What is your opinion on IT offshoring - particular North Korea?
A.  Do we not have the talent in America to provide this service or knowledge?  That is right, it is cheaper - right?  Do we, as consumers really want our data offshore?  Do these countries have the same privacy, protection and copyright laws?  Is our sensitive data really secure offshore? 

IDG News Service — Think of North Korea, and repression, starvation and military provocation are probably the first things that come to mind. But beyond the geopolitical posturing, North Korea has also been quietly building up its IT industry.

Universities have been graduating computer engineers and scientists for several years, and companies have recently sprung up to pair the local talent with foreign needs, making the country perhaps the world's most unusual place for IT outsourcing.

With a few exceptions, such as in India, outsourcing companies in developing nations tend to be small, with fewer than 100 employees, said Paul Tija, a Rotterdam-based consultant on offshoring and outsourcing. But North Korea already has several outsourcers with more then 1,000 employees.

"The government is putting an emphasis on building the IT industry," he said. "The availability of staff is quite large."

At present, the country's outsourcers appear to be targeting several niche areas, including computer animation, data input and software design for mobile phones. U.S. government restrictions prevent American companies from working with North Korean companies, but most other nations don't have such restrictions.

So given this country's unstable government, communist environment, cyber threats and bad behavior - why would we want to have our IT development, or offshore staff in this country?  We have to stop managing by spreadsheet and take a good look at what we are doing with our data, skills, and employees.  Ask yourself, is this decision good for the company?  Employee? Customer?  If you can't say yes to all 3 - stop and take a look at it again. 
 
Keep postive and engaged!
 
Scott Arnett
scott.arnett@charter.net

Hey - what about end user training!

Don't you think the lack of end user training makes IT look bad at the company?  It amazes me how some companies don’t see the value of proper end-user training. They’re willing to pay thousands of dollars for a new product that is supposed to improve productivity but aren’t willing to do the one thing that will help with that product’s adoption in the enterprise. A good end-user training strategy will make new software deployments more cost-effective.  You get the full value of the new product by using it to the fullest - right?

And I understand how frustrating it is for IT when they’re work is not used simply because end-users don’t know how to use it.  In addition the help desk is now flooded with help or panic calls. 

If your CIO agrees with you about the need for a formal training program, he should create a business case for it. Be sure to include as many numbers as you can to make your case, stressing the bottom-line benefits. Without them, the concept of training can seem kind of soft to those who don’t get it, and a significant expense.  The end user training should be included in the project plan and in order for a end user to get their login credentials, they need to complete their training. I would also recommend you record the training session(s) - both audio and video for future use.  You will have new hires coming in the future and they should receive the same training.  Never a good idea to have co-workers the only form of new hire training - they will learn bad habits, shortcuts and maybe even the wrong way. 

I find the trend, more so when budgets are tight, that training is one of the first things to go away.  You will hear comments like - read a book, they are smart folks they can figure it out, IT can teach them and other offensive comments.  What do you really get in that approach is just trying to get by, rework, frustration or even lack of adoption of the new product in the enterprise.  When budgets are tight, you need to increase productivity, efficiency and morale - to get those 3 components, requires appropriate training. 

I propose to you that all new applications, software or hardware comes with training.  Believe it or not, even IT professionals need training.  Having your staff with the right knowledge and tools to do the job is a key to success and a good ROI.  If you can't afford the training - can you really afford the new product or application?  Don't take shortcuts that will have a long term impact. 

Stay engaged and stay positive!

Scott Arnett
scott.arnett@charter.net

Bring your PC to work - a good idea?

Great discussions these days around allowing employees bring their personal devices to work, and use them on the enterprise network.  It brings with it some great questions, like data ownership, repair or replace expectations, virus control, an so forth.  So is this really a good idea?  What benefits the organization from allowing this?

If you recall, there was a time, not so long ago, when a major challenge for IT departments was making sure that users didn't take corporate software home in violation of license agreements. That gave way to the challenge of making sure that employees didn't bring software from home into work and install it on their desktop PCs. Better yet, install it on multiple machines.

Today, users' technical sophistication is such that they often have better technology at home than they have in the office. That situation has led some businesses to allow users to bring their personal laptops to work. Some have gone beyond that concept by letting users buy their own PCs for work, with some corporate subsidy. This also means you have many models, versions, and yes, the MAC shows up.  Right?

One advantage of what is often referred to as BYOPC, or bring your own PC , is that it frees IT from carrying the capital expense of a lot of resources. It also neutralizes the problem of trying to make one size fit all in a way that's appealing to users. Users appreciate being given a choice, and there's plenty of choice in the marketplace to assure that every user can find the machine that best fits his needs.  But are consumer based devices ok for the corporate enterprise?  What are the user expectations around device support now?

Naturally, a lot of IT departments are going to think BYOPC sounds like an expensive proposition that leads to a proliferation of varied devices to support. But any corporate purchase programs should include guidelines, as well as recommended vendors and systems, that aim to avoid unruly proliferation while still giving users an ample number of choices. As long as IT manages the standard software loads and enforces security policy, the cost of allowing far more diversity in machines, and even platforms, becomes relatively minor over time. And by setting a cap on expenditures and reimbursements, IT can keep costs under control. A good rule of thumb is to allow for a new device every 12 to 18 months, depending on how the asset depreciates.  Then again, in this scenario you are putting corporate software on employee owned device.

A well-organized BYOPC program can help IT make users happy, no small thing for a department in constant danger of reorganization and outsourcing . Properly done, it can be an easy way to make friends and win internal support. BYOPC programs generally subsidize laptops, with the policy being that users can also make personal use of the machine (which only makes sense, since we all know that users already commingle their business and personal information on their devices). If a lot of your users are now restricted to desktop machines, the change could provide a boost in productivity, since laptop users are more likely to work beyond business hours.

So how does this really benefit the organization, and maintain IT controls?  Do the users really care what the laptop is?  Do I, as an employee want to spend my own money on buying a computer to do my job?  What about those employees who can't buy their own computer, are they now at a disadvantage?  Does BYOC change the playing field at work for employee equality?  If I leave the company, am I going to delete that software and data on my device?  Allow the company IT department to wipe my device? 

I propose to you that BYOC type programs are a benefit to the few and not the many.  Not every employee is going to want to participate or have the means to particpate.  I also think it is mistake to load corporate software and allow corporate data on personal own devices.  I recommend a virtual desktop environment utilizing a Citrix XenDesktop type solution and employee owned devices access this solution to have applications presented to them.  Data, software and access remains in this virtual environment and not allowed on the local employee owned device.  Therefore, ownership of data, applications and the access all remains internal.  I would also force all the machines connecting to the enterpise network through a clean access checkpoint to ensure compliance with security controls. 

I am still old school I guess, where the employer provides the tools necessary for me to do my job. 

Scott Arnett
scott.arnett@charter.net

Internet - with an EPO button?

We have been hearing it in the news - the President can have a big red emergency power off (EPO) button on his desk to take down the internet.  This a good thing or a bad thing? 

The Protecting Cyberspace as a National Asset Act, which is being pushed hard by Senator Joe Lieberman, would hand absolute power to the federal government to close down networks, and block incoming Internet traffic from certain countries under a declared national emergency.  Protecting our cyber infrastructure, organizations  and even government networks. 

Why all the debate and fuss?  Why do we have folks up in arms that this could be an attempt or attack on free speech?  Really?  Isn't this a measure to shut down internet access in the event of a cyber attack?  How real is the cyberwar threat?  Have we not seen an increase in attacks coming out of China, Iran and other roque countries?  Why not shut down those that attack others and misuse the internet - how is that an attack on free speech? 

The other side of the coin is that as we move more of our companies, jobs and IT infrastructure oversees - as a company how do you handle internet shutdown and still have access to your systems now sitting in China, India and others?  DR plan take the EPO button into consideration? 

Consider this, as an organization you should have a zoned network design, no longer is a flat network acceptable.  You have a PCI zone, a engineering zone and others to segment users, traffic and provide additional security.  Should Homeland Security start classification of key business or infrastructure to protect from cyber attacks?  Take that classification and start building additional security practice around them?

I propose to you that cyber attacks will continue to increase, and threats to our infrastructure are real.  It will only be a matter of time before our vital systems are taken down or interrupted by a foreign agency.  Disruption of power, water, or distribution channels can have a significant impact on our daily lives.  Having the ability to shut down the internet to stop a cyber attack or war is essential to our National Security.  Having organizations stand up and start taking responsibility for their infrastructure security and be held accountable when they are not has to happen.  It is up to all IT professionals to bring security best practice into all we do, point out shortfalls and bring light to cyber opportunities or vulnerabilities.  Gone are the days when organizations hide under the blanket of security is to expensive - if you have internet access, you become secure.  In addition, time for AT&T, Verizon and other internet backbone providers to step up to the plate and get serious about this threat.  If an organization orders internet access - there has to be a mandate penetration test done, and remediation mandatory. 

It takes everyone to ensure our National Security - including IT. 

Happy 4th of July!

Scott Arnett
scott.arnett@charter.net

ITIL - Where do I start?

Through the course of the year,  I have colleagues ask about ITIL, what will it do for their organization and where to start.  ITIL is a very large under taking and should really be a multi year adventure.  Because it's impractical -- if not impossible -- to implement the IT Infrastructure Library (ITIL) in a wholesale manner across all IT processes, organizations must decide exactly where they want to begin.

Ideally, this starting point should be determined based on a careful assessment of practices and a convincing analysis of where the greatest business gains can be achieved quickly. A large percentage of IT organizations, however, have historically started with incident management. This decision has often been based on "gut feel" more than anything else. After all, incident management is what allows IT to quickly restore services to the business -- so by using ITIL to improve these processes, business should be able to reduce downtime, improve IT staff productivity and ensure end-user satisfaction.  In addition, most already communicate - "we have a tool already in house to help us with that..." 

But do CEOs really measure the value of IT based on how quickly it's able to solve problems? Will IT organizations be able to garner executive-level support for ITIL implementation based on time-to-fix and other incident management performance metrics? Does the CIO have a good handle on some key performance indicators?

Probably not. In fact, as IT performance is increasingly measured based on alignment with the business and the delivery of quantifiable business value, many IT organizations are focusing their initial ITIL efforts and investments on change management. I always recommend to my colleagues - start with Change Management.  If you don't have a good handle on changes occuring in your environment - you are out of control.

There are two fundamental reasons why change management is increasingly the initial focus of ITIL implementations: It can prevent problems before they occur, and it works.

I propose to you that Change is the root cause of many incidents/issues in the environment.  A significant percentage of the problems that threaten critical IT services have their origins in poorly executed changes. The consequences of these changes are often dire in terms of both service availability and regulatory compliance. So, instead of focusing on incident management -- which deals with the problem after it presents itself -- IT organizations need to be looking at change management to prevent problems before they occur.

In fact, if you don't improve the way you manage change, your IT department will be predisposed to constant firefighting. If incidents related to changes are not brought under control, IT service provisioning -- and consequently the business itself -- can spiral out of control. IT becomes locked in a deadly embrace where the number of incidents rises and each incident requires a firefight, leading to more and more incidents.

ITIL change management breaks that embrace by balancing flexibility (facilitating change) with stability (preventing changes from creating problems). Corrective measures reduce the number of incidents and IT can then drive innovation and improvements.  I also recommend a technology review board or committee to sign off on all significant changes. 
Once you get your change management established, a change review board weekly meeting, a change tracking system and meeting minutes are all key to this process, move to next step.  You can then tackle incident management, configuration management, release management and onto a CMDB.  I recommend you get one working very well and then move onto the next.  Don't overload your staff, keep this process positive and staff engaged. 

One last thing, don't forget your metrics and measurements.  Know that ITIL is making a difference, that IT performance has improved and that you are doing things right.  This will help drive a good working relationship with the business.

Good luck!

Cloud Hype - Stop the Craziness!

The hype vs. reality debate is nothing new to IT, from the first PC to today's iPad. But ignore the hype at your own peril. If there's an overhyped term today, it is cloud computing. Everyone is on the cloud computing discussion, but will it really deliver as promised?  Is this not just vendor driven for revenue? Check out this breathless prophecy:

"We can't even imagine today the potential of cloud computing as we look forward. But given the intersection of higher processing power, cheaper cost and the ubiquitous access to broadband networks that for the first time are able to deliver content in ways that we couldn't imagine before ... transformation that's going to fundamentally change the way we live our lives."

Wow! If you thought that this was spoken by Marc Benioff, guess again. It was Vivek Kundra, President Barak Obama's federal CIO, speaking on "The Economic Gains of Cloud Computing" April 7.

Kundra's viewpoint is not surprising in one sense, in that the government has also been an early adopter of technology. But it is surprising in contrast to the conventional wisdom of many CIOs in corporate America. There are CIO's discussing the new shift in IT being cloud computing, and how this without a doubt a game changer.  Is it?  Is it not just the latest magazine read and management direction because everyone is doing cloud and we don't want to get behind.  What value will it deliver to the business?  What competitive edge does it bring to the table? Remember the big outsource your IT craze and the big organizations that outsourced their entire IT department to offshore organizations?  How many of them are now bringing that all back in house - didn't work out so well.  We have to stop following the few, and listen to our business needs and deliver what is best for the business.  Cloud computing may not work for all organizations, and it doesn't have to.

I propose to you that we will see a hybrid approach to cloud computing.  There will be SaaS offerings that make sense to the business, and the application meets a business need.  There will be IaaS offerings that meet a business need around web services, burstable needs, DR, etc.  Don't be so quick to jump on the cloud computing band wagon and make significant mistakes.  Take the time to map out the business capabilities, needs and how you can help the business with IT enabling solutions.  Be the leader in your organization on cloud computing as the CIO.  Drive the discussions and ensure IT stays engaged, IT governance remains in tact, and that whatever services are aquired fit a need and not a stigma. 

Good Luck!